The Folly of Hybrid Electric Vehicles

AOL, U. S. Government | 05/14/02 | HMV

[Hillary'sMoralVoid]

AOL Proclaims "HEVs are Hot"! Unfortunately, the treatment of the subject matter is so superficial that it ignores facts that AOL even provides links to. Here is a quote from a government publication: "Although a few production HEVs with advanced batteries have been introduced in the market, no current battery technology has demonstrated an economical, acceptable combination of power, energy efficiency, and life cycle for high-volume production vehicles."

The truth is, these are not economical, safe or environmentally sound vehicles. First, the economical aspect. If the quote in the previous paragraph doesn't convince you, the fact that the AOL FAQs on HEVs document that replacement batteries can cost between $3000 and $8000 ought to get your attention. These batteries are good for 80,000 to 100,000 miles, but their life varies based on the type of driving patterns and habits.

The AOL articles tout the high mileage that the hybrid vehicles get. What they don't tell you is that these are sub-compact cars. A fully gasoline-fueled version of the Toyota Prius, for example, could be expected to get comparable gas mileage with less weight and complexity than an HEV, and with more trunk space. The thousands of dollars you pay for a new battery effectively doubles the cost per mile. You do, however, get good GAS mileage with the HEV, just not good battery mileage!!!

In an increasingly graying population, comfort is winning out over fuel efficiency. With comfort goes size. The average size of vehicles is getting larger every year, and unless we can reverse the aging process, people will continue to want roomy, comfortable cars and SUVs.

This does not bode well for the HEVs, most of which are in the subcompact category. In collisions, larger vehicles almost always win, smaller vehicles invariably lose. No matter how many safety features are built into a subcompact car, you cannot compensate for the laws of physics. You simply are more prone to die or suffer serious injuries in today's HEVs.

Accidents pose another risk. Exploding batteries, containing hazardous components like mercury, lithium, and lead, pose serious cleanup challenges. Further, according to the U. S. Government, most new battery designs are not yet fully recycleable, meaning that discharged batteries will have to be stored and protected until a recycling strategy has matured. Its like nuclear waste dump II.

There are many other factors to consider, not the least of which is technical complexity. The biggest issue is the codependency of the two engines. The gasoline engine must provide the power generating capability that the electric motor needs, the electric motor must provide the torque that the gasoline engine lacks. If either system fails or is degraded, performance will suffer dramatically, and render the auto either inoperable or dangerously underpowered.

A final factor to consider is the simple mass in the form of a battery that is hauled around with little value added. As we've discussed previously, a gas-powered Toyota Prius could be expected to get comparable gas mileage as its HEV counterpart, particularily if the same level of research and development is utilized in the design. What we have created is vehicle that is nothing more than a battery-hauler, in which the battery only contributes to the cost and inefficiency of the vehicle.

AOL is pursuing its own agenda here, and it is not one that is either practical or smart.

[Inge_CAV]

"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh ... I get it now ... you have more vehicles than you need ... but not as many as you want!"

Always room for one more. : )

[mamelukesabre]

I think everyone is being a little too hard on these hybrid vehicles. Sure, it's a little impractical if you have to haul around 10 to 12 lead acid batteries, but it's still a pretty good concept.

Your vehicle already has a starter motor, an alternator, and a battery. WHY NOT combine those components into a system that can add a little power to the engine for short durations?

The big rigs on the highways have been doing something similar for years and it makes a lot of sense. Some of the 18 wheelers have sophisticated electronic systems on board that temporarily shut down certain devices to conserve power under high load conditions. For example, hills are a big deal for a fully loaded 18 wheeler. They tend to slow down and really suck the fuel when going up a steep hill.

Some 18 wheelers are able to automatically shut down the water pump, alternator, heating/air conditioning, and other accessories that cars don't have, untill the hill is crested, then everything powers back up....the alternator charges the battery back up, the water pump comes on, the accessories power back up....and as the truck coasts down the hill, everything "catches up" again to get ready for the next uphill climb.

If they wanted to improve on that concept and take it just one step further, they would add battery capacity and make the alternator double as an electric motor while going up hill.....Then TADA......you have just created a "HYBRID VEHICLE".

[2Trievers]

More mouths to feed ... more batteries to charge! My Interstate stock just jumped another 3 points! LOL &;-)

[mamelukesabre]

Those were the days....when a plain old sedan had enough power to pull a large boat, or a large camper, or a 4 axle trailer if you wanted to do so.

Now that you've got me thinking about it, It seems like my '71 Fury's motor had heads off of a '69 chrylser newport because 1969 was the last year they made "closed chambered" heads. In fact, I think my heads came off a 383, if I remember correctly. I had them shaved, ported and polished too....and then had the manifold ports "matched" to the heads. THat motor was a real screamer, but it ran hot. It kept baking the cork valve cover gaskets....I had to replace them about every other month.

[Willie Green]

Sorry Willie, the world is awash in oil.

Yeah, right.

That's why we become increasingly involved militarily to assure our supply. </sarcasm>

[Balding_Eagle]

No, it's because we've allowed the enviros too much influence.

[John Jamieson]

Your vehicle already has a starter motor, an alternator, and a battery. WHY NOT .....

Because it costs 10 times what it saves?

[mamelukesabre]

yep, for now it is. maybe in about ten years they will have better batteries, 48 or 60 volt systems, and better motors.

[SAJ]

As to nuclear power, you'll get no quarrel from me. The more the better, because that frees up huge quantities of natural gas from being burned to generate electricity, and nat gas is an excellent and abundant fuel for motor vehicles. Storage for nat gas is sufficiently like that for gasoline that most existing 'gas' stations can be converted (or put into dual mode) cheaply enough. The question here is who starts off: the auto companies won't build NG-fueled cars until fuel stops are readily available, and the oil companies won't build/convert stations until there's a demand or the imminent development of demand for the product.

Now, back to trains. The problem here is political -- if Boston-NYC, say, gets the gov't to build a line, a line that will very likely support itself financially, that's fine, knock yourself out. The bad news comes in round two, when, say, someone yammers for a line between Chicago & St. Louis, or Indianapolis & Cleveland...neither of which can possibly be financially self-sustaining. Now multiply those cases by the number of pairs of cities and/or states who can muster enough clout to grab their favourite pork-barrel line.

What we'll get from this mess is Amtrak cubed, subsidy without end and rising each year. No remotely rational person (and train freaks aren't) can endorse such a result.

If you restrict the discussion to urban and urban-suburban so-called 'light rail', that's even more of an opium dream. We're doing that right now in STL. Initial cost estimate for (essentially) a 5-line system? $189 MM. Capital cost to date, for a 1 1/2 or 1 3/4 (depending how you count) system? $305 MM, and climbing. ESTIMATED cost to completion? Anywhere from $550 MM (wildly low) to $1.3 B, depending on whose figures you accept. Every time a rider steps onto MetroKlink, the taxpayer forks over 78 cents on top of a $1.25 ticket, a 38.43% subsidy, and this figure rises every year like clockwork. And STL, although it's a political swamp, is certainly no worse in this regard than a couple dozen cities I can easily name.

In the words of Samuel Goldwyn: 'Gentlemen, you can include me out.'

[Willie Green]

Every time a rider steps onto MetroKlink, the taxpayer forks over 78 cents on top of a $1.25 ticket, a 38.43% subsidy, and this figure rises every year like clockwork.

OTOH, even motorists benefit when others take mass-transit.
Every mass-transit rider is one less user of congested urban roadways.
Additionally, demand is reduced for limited urban parking.

[dasboot]

The interstate system is a national defense highway. For that purpose, it is superb.

As to bringing generalized prosperity, you make an arguement that many of the early framers of federal government rejected, and I'm with them.

I was driving on I 195 East today. That part of the highway sure does bring prosperity to Cape Cod, but bisects Fall River and New Bedford--two old mill towns that have been in an econimic funk since 1966. That's when the interstate rendered them "drive-by's". So, based upon this empirical observation, there's some doubt in my mind as the notion that these constructions admit of general prosperity. It may well be that the benefit is merely shifted; and the Cape Codders would tell you they're really sick of the traffic.

[supercat]

Toyota had a Tercel that got 53 in '88.

Mine was never that good. More like 45mpg or so. But that was with 1988 fuel which consisted almost entirely of gasoline. Nowadays fuel economy has to be measured using fuel which contains "anti-pollution" additives that increase cost per gallon while decreasing miles-per-gallon, all while doing nothing to reduce pollution-per-mile.

[Ole Okie]

I can't say only car, but the one I enjoyed the most was my '77 Datsun 280Z

One of my daughters had a white 280Z. She named it "Egg" for obvious reasons.

It had no air conditioning - in Oklahoma. But Egg lasted seemingly forever.

I've owned VW Jetta diesels, gasoline powered Rabbits, GTO's, and Audis. Had a VW Bug years ago.

But my favorite car is the one I drive today: a 1996 Lincoln Town Car. It gets 25 mpg on the road, and I don't care about the birds chirping. It's comfortable, roomy and quiet.

[cmsgop]

Thats a Good Point VW Diesel gets around 50 mpg. Great Car!

[advocate10]

When ever a discussion comes up on the "hybrid" cars, I wonder if anybody considers where the electricity to charge the battery comes from, and where the pollution that electric companies generate goes.

I often think of the Canyon Lands National Park and beautiful Lake Powell and what power generation has done there.

There is a huge gererating plant very near Page, AZ. It burns coal from the nearby Kaprowits Plateau. The smoke blows up the lake spoiling the gorgeous vistas, and on up N.E. to Canyon Lands. The whole area which used to be pristine, is now choked with coal smoke.

Where does the electricity go? To L.A. and Southern Kalifornia so Kalifornians can use their electric tooth brushes! It will become much worse if they need additional power to charge their batteries.

All the hybrid cars do is move the pollution somewhere else!

[John Jamieson]

Hybrid cars burn gasoline to make the electricity.

[MrNeutron1962]

High Speed rail is a crock. People love their cars and that's a fact. Sure, if oil ever gets to $400.00 a barrel it might make some sense, but thats not going to happen in our lifetime. High Speed rail like decella? Come over to my house,we can stand in my backyard and watch the much vaunted Aceila crawl by at 35 MPH, just like the deisels did before we spent 2.5 billion dollars electrifying New Haven to Boston. An I don't live near a station, so they are not slowing down for a station stop. The two biggest time savings on this electrified Boston to NYC route?
1. Not switching too and from Electric Locos in New Haven, About 20 Minutes saved there.
2. Dropping Station stops for express trains to 2 minutes or less.
3. Just about kicking all local freight off of the NEC during daylight hours.

Then, just imagine the hew and cry over the disruption that building this MagLev or other technology will cause. Forget it, the highways we have are all we are likely to get. Colision avoidance technology may help some, but most likely, people will just live with it. Look at NYC, it has massive amounts of public transportation, and 30 to 45 minutes waits at bridges and tunnels most days.

[Different-is-good]

- Note that the Prius was designed and optimized primarily for extremely low emissions, i.e. 90% less than a low emission vehicle. It was not optimized for gas mileage.
- Note that the cost of a Prius includes many items as standard that are options on other vehicles.
- Note that the 2001-2003 Prius is classed as a compact car (about the size of a Honda Civic), and the 2004 Prius is classed as a midsize car.
- Note that many vehicles cost as much or more than the Prius and no one expects that they somehow pay back the difference in cost over a cheap economy car.
- Note that a hybrid gas/electric vehicle can be optimized for power, efficiency, or the best compromise. Acura is planning on producing a hybrid super sports car that will have incredible power and acceleration.
- Note that the U.S. military is evaluating hybrid versions of the Humvee which have double the normal Humvee's range, more power, and faster acceleration. The U.S. military is considering converting many or all of its ground vehicles over time to hybrid versions.
- Note that it costs $600/gallon of gas for our military vehicles in Afghanistan and $150/gallon in Iraq.
- If hybrids were useless, do you think the military would be so interested?
- The 2001-2003 Prius uses a 274 volt system and a nickel metal hydride battery expected to last the life of the car, tested to 150,000 miles, and proven by a Candadian taxi over 200,000 miles. Current full battery cost is $5000, and it has been dropping steadily.
- The 2004 Prius uses a 500 volt system and an improved nickel metal hydride battery, a larger electric motor and gas engine, achieves higher gas mileage (55 mpg average), and has even lower emissions.
- These batteries do not use exotic, hazardous materials. These batteries have individual cells which can be replaced if needed.
- Toyota warranties the battery and the hybrid system itself for 100,000 miles.
- Toyota has made record profits for the last three years.
- Toyota sells more Prius than some of its other models.

[hondainsightful]

Hillary'sMoralVoid:
>replacement batteries can cost between $3000 and $8000 ought to get
>your attention. These batteries are good for 80,000 to 100,000 miles

Since the NiMH batteries will last the life of the vehicle (200,000 miles), the cost is irrelevant. They should never need replacement.





>What they don't tell you is that these are sub-compact cars. A fully
>gasoline-fueled version of the Toyota Prius, for example, could be
>expected to get comparable gas mileage with less weight and
>complexity than an HEV, and with more trunk space

99% True. Over in Europe they have tiny-engined cars that get 50 miles per gallon. They also take 20 seconds to go 0-60. No *American* would buy such a car. That's why the electric motor is added: To decrease acceleration time to a more acceptable 11 seconds, and yet still preserve the outstanding MPGs.



>This does not bode well for the HEVs, most of which are in the
>subcompact category.

Future HEVs will be available for large sedans, minivans, and SUVs.




>Accidents pose another risk. Exploding batteries, containing
>hazardous components like mercury, lithium, and lead

ALL cars have batteries in them. (Look under the hood!) The risk you describe applies to all cars. It is not a new problem, but one that has always existed.




>if system fails or is degraded, performance will suffer dramatically
>and render the auto either inoperable or dangerously underpowered.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. I own a Honda Insight. Even if the motor or battery completely died, the car would still operate as a pure gasoline car. Same applies to the Civic Hybrid.

And given that the Civic has 85hp engine, it is no more underpowered than say... a 90hp Jetta.





>A final factor to consider is the simple mass in the form of a
>battery that is hauled around with little value added.

150 pound battery/motor (the weight of 1 human adult) that provides improved acceleration. I see little mass and LOTS of value added.

.

I've rejected a lot of your claims, MAINLY because you didn't do the research yourself. Next time you post something, go LEARN about your subject FIRST. You'll make fewer mistakes and look a lot less hybrid-ignorant to your readers.

I'm all for freedom and liberty in the United States, but let's make sure to base our arguments on FACTS. Do the research first before you rail against the object.

HondaInsightful - 2001 Insight Hybrid owner ~90 lifetime mpg

[Long Cut]

Quality of life? Coming up behind a Prius or Echo, as I have done recently, on one of America's outstanding gearhead playgrounds (excuse me, Interstates) in THIS:

with the T-tops off and Toby Keith blaring, and letting about 350 ponies do my talking.

There is NO WAY I could ever see myself in one of those Radio Shack RC roller skates after driving my SS. It's a totally different world.

LS-1's FOREVER!!!