Posted on 08/23/2005 6:38:32 AM PDT by Cat loving Texan
City rallies around futuristic car Plug-in hybrids will help environment, economy and security, supporters say.
By Stephen Scheibal
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
It is something like a capitalist's dream: Citizens petitioning to buy a product, governments setting aside money to help them pay for it, business leaders talking about the economic benefits, environmentalists proclaiming the earth's gratitude for every purchase.
There was, perhaps, only one problem with the mass shopping spree that Austin officials imagined with great fanfare at City Hall on Monday: The product doesn't, per se, exist.
The invention is known as a plug-in hybrid vehicle. It is a car that runs largely off a battery, switching to gasoline as electricity runs low. DaimlerChrysler AG expects to deliver the first such vehicles to Austin and other cities next year.
The vehicles partially replace gas pumps with electrical sockets. Owners plug their cars into a wall outlet, recharging the battery with the energy that fuels their refrigerators and air conditioners. According to the city, 70 to 80 cents on a power bill would provide as much energy as a $2.50 gallon of gas.
Plug-in hybrids could go 35 miles or more without burning gasoline and potentially cut the nation's gasoline use by 70 percent, city officials said.
The city wants to promote both the supply and demand of plug-in hybrids. Mayor Will Wynn and other officials launched the campaign before more than 100 people Monday.
Wynn declared that Austin Energy, the city-owned electric utility, eventually plans to provide $1 million to help people and entities buy the vehicles. He also said Austin and other local governments will commit to adding plug-in hybrids to various auto fleets.
And area officials and community leaders contributed the first signatures to a petition encouraging automakers to produce more plug-in hybrids.
Wynn said the drive will only begin in Austin, saying he expects other cities to sign on as well. He said the technology promises to lessen the nation's dependence on foreign oil, cut down on gasoline bills and improve air quality.
"The benefits are across the board," Wynn said. "What we need are a lot of partners."
The announcement came 10 days before Central Texas gets its most direct lesson ever about the importance of clean-burning vehicles. Beginning Sept. 1, cars and trucks in Travis and Williamson counties will have to pass an emissions test to earn inspection stickers, a change the region has accepted as part of a federally approved plan to improve air quality.
Environmentalists such as Brandi Clark, co-chairwoman of the Austin Sustainable Business Council, said the plug-in hybrids initiative could be a watershed effort to clean up Central Texas' air and a boon to consumers plagued by high gas prices.
Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce Chairman Kirk Watson said the launch was a "historic moment," reinforcing Austin's position as a center of environmentally friendly technology while allowing taxpayers and rate-payers — not overseas oil interests — to benefit from the area's transportation spending.
U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, said the vehicles could help the nation avoid oil-driven entanglements overseas.
"It's a national security issue," Doggett said of the initiative. "The only way that we will get change is by things like we're doing this morning."
I don't agree with you. I'm all for reducing emissions into our already polluted air. PLUS if it is going to save me money I'm ALL for it. Do the math. Plugging in a car, reducing carbon emissions PLUS saving money, sounds like a good bargain. I LOVE bargains!
Plugging in a car is a inconvenience?? Not to me, and I'll bet a lot of other people feel the same way.
Does 80 cents extra per equal unit of a gallon of gas for your power bill sound fun to anyone? Not to mention I could see this leading to folks syphoning power off neighbors and city lines. The times demand innovative ideas; this ain't it.
Maybe you won't - but I would - if it doesn't come at a huge premium over a standard fuel efficient car and if the daily charge would cost less than around $2 to make it competitive with gas costs....
But if you don't have a garage where you can plug in (most people in apartments don't), a plug-in hybrid won't do you any good.....
The 100+mpg stats some of these people are getting is looking better and better all the time. Now lets just build some nuclear reactors to provide the juice for the cars.... :)
I don't follow your logic - the article claims that $.70-80 worth of electricity would provide the same as 1 gallon of gas, which costs around $2.50 now... so that's $1.70-1.80 in savings....
When the government sets mony aside to "help" people pay for something, this is not a capitalist's dream; it is a socialist's dream and a capitalist's nightmare.
If say 80% of our electricity were nuclear generated then it would make more sense to go in this direction. However if 80% of our electricity were generarated by nuclear plants then there would be a lot more oil and natural gas available for other purposes.
And furthermore, it will also turn the deserts in Arizona and New Mexico into lovely oasis, and it will turn the swamps of Louisiana and Florida into beautiful coastal plains. It will also cure the common cold and eliminate morning bad breath. I bet there are many other wonderful benefits of this new technology, it's just that the government hasn't spent enough money to get it to market yet.
Why must we IMPORT these cars?
We could build the Lunar Excursion Module in the 1960's, send it to the moon and drive it around - but we can't come up with a new idea in 2005?
It will also make you taller, slimmer, and have more hair!
Well, I've been known to make math errors before, but by my calculations, one gallon of gasoline roughly equals 128,000 BTUs, which converts to 37.5 KWh. Using the 70 to 80 cents from the article, electricity must cost about $.02 /KWh. That doesn't jive. Unless maybe they're factoring in the relative conversion efficiencies. An electric vehicle is probably closer to 80% whereas an IC powered car is closer to 25% Still, the reference is confusing.
As far as a net emissions benefit, I don't know. Have to look up the specfic emissions for electric generators vs. automobiles.
On the plus side, what this does is divert transportaion energy from oil to coal, natural gas or nuclear, since that's where electricity comes from.
Still on the fence big time about hybrid/electrics.
Also, power plants are not exactly the cleanest things on the planet. Unless nuclear plants are built be prepared to deal with the financial impacts of "global warming" (i.e., we will be forced to pay extra to make sure power plants are following Kyoto Protocol type standards).
Additionally, the extra emissions put into the atmosphere by additional power plants will cause regulators do what they currently do-- they force car owners to follow even more stringent and expensive smog & emissions requirements. "Additional sulfuric acid and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from coal burning plants? It's those damn SUV's!"....
On the surface it all looks good. When you really take a hard look at it, plug in vehicles are a bad idea all the way around....
The article doesn't mention the life span of the battery & the cost to replace it. Anyone know?
As little as I drive, I would probably do it.
Yes but you have to pay it all on your monthly electric bill.
One plus about these vehicles is that they are typically charged at night. Electrical demand is much less at night which is good for power companies and means less cost for the consumers.
Yum....
Not if 100 million vehicles are being charged from the hours of 6pm to 6am....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.