The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page
Google
  Web Elsmar.com
*Please be aware that SOME RECENT forum threads may not yet be indexed by Google.

View Full Version : Experimental Hybrid Cars Get Up to 250 Mpg


Marc
14th August 2005, 03:33 AM
Experimental Hybrid Cars Get Up to 250 Mpg (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/hybrid_tinkerers;_ylt=Au.LTKBSbzd_ETZd.GJYvuas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-) By TIM MOLLOY, Associated Press Writer Sat Aug 13, 7:08 PM ET

CORTE MADERA, Calif. - Politicians and automakers say a car that can both reduce greenhouse gases and free America from its reliance on foreign oil is years or even decades away. Ron Gremban says such a car is parked in his garage.

It looks like a typical Toyota Prius hybrid, but in the trunk sits an 80-miles-per-gallon secret — a stack of 18 brick-sized batteries that boosts the car's high mileage with an extra electrical charge so it can burn even less fuel.

Gremban, an electrical engineer and committed environmentalist, spent several months and $3,000 tinkering with his car.

Like all hybrids, his Prius increases fuel efficiency by harnessing small amounts of electricity generated during braking and coasting. The extra batteries let him store extra power by plugging the car into a wall outlet at his home in this San Francisco suburb — all for about a quarter.

He's part of a small but growing movement. "Plug-in" hybrids aren't yet cost-efficient, but some of the dozen known experimental models have gotten up to 250 mpg.

They have support not only from environmentalists but also from conservative foreign policy hawks who insist Americans fuel terrorism through their gas guzzling.

And while the technology has existed for three decades, automakers are beginning to take notice, too.

So far, DaimlerChrysler AG is the only company that has committed to building its own plug-in hybrids, quietly pledging to make up to 40 vans for U.S. companies. But Toyota Motor Corp. officials who initially frowned on people altering their cars now say they may be able to learn from them.

"They're like the hot rodders of yesterday who did everything to soup up their cars. It was all about horsepower and bling-bling, lots of chrome and accessories," said Cindy Knight, a Toyota spokeswoman. "Maybe the hot rodders of tomorrow are the people who want to get in there and see what they can do about increasing fuel economy."

The extra batteries let Gremban drive for 20 miles with a 50-50 mix of gas and electricity. Even after the car runs out of power from the batteries and switches to the standard hybrid mode, it gets the typical Prius fuel efficiency of around 45 mpg. As long as Gremban doesn't drive too far in a day, he says, he gets 80 mpg.

"The value of plug-in hybrids is they can dramatically reduce gasoline usage for the first few miles every day," Gremban said. "The average for people's usage of a car is somewhere around 30 to 40 miles per day. During that kind of driving, the plug-in hybrid can make a dramatic difference."

Backers of plug-in hybrids acknowledge that the electricity to boost their cars generally comes from fossil fuels that create greenhouse gases, but they say that process still produces far less pollution than oil. They also note that electricity could be generated cleanly from solar power.

Gremban rigged his car to promote the nonprofit CalCars Initiative, a San Francisco Bay area-based volunteer effort that argues automakers could mass produce plug-in hybrids at a reasonable price.

But Toyota and other car companies say they are worried about the cost, convenience and safety of plug-in hybrids — and note that consumers haven't embraced all-electric cars because of the inconvenience of recharging them like giant cell phones.

Automakers have spent millions of dollars telling motorists that hybrids don't need to be plugged in, and don't want to confuse the message.

Nonetheless, plug-in hybrids are starting to get the backing of prominent hawks like former
CIA director James Woolsey and Frank Gaffney, President Reagan's undersecretary of defense. They have joined Set America Free, a group that wants the government to spend $12 billion over four years on plug-in hybrids, alternative fuels and other measures to reduce foreign oil dependence.

Gaffney, who heads the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy, said Americans would embrace plug-ins if they understood arguments from him and others who say gasoline contributes to oil-rich Middle Eastern governments that support terrorism.

"The more we are consuming oil that either comes from places that are bent on our destruction or helping those who are ... the more we are enabling those who are trying to kill us," Gaffney said.

DaimlerChrysler spokesman Nick Cappa said plug-in hybrids are ideal for companies with fleets of vehicles that can be recharged at a central location at night. He declined to name the companies buying the vehicles and said he did not know the vehicles' mileage or cost, or when they would be available.

Others are modifying hybrids, too.

Monrovia-based Energy CS has converted two Priuses to get up to 230 mpg by using powerful lithium ion batteries. It is forming a new company, EDrive Systems, that will convert hybrids to plug-ins for about $12,000 starting next year, company vice president Greg Hanssen said.

University of California, Davis engineering professor Andy Frank built a plug-in hybrid from the ground up in 1972 and has since built seven others, one of which gets up to 250 mpg. They were converted from non-hybrids, including a Ford Taurus and Chevrolet Suburban.

Frank has spent $150,000 to $250,000 in research costs on each car, but believes automakers could mass-produce them by adding just $6,000 to each vehicle's price tag.

Instead, Frank said, automakers promise hydrogen-powered vehicles hailed by
President Bush and Gov.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, even though hydrogen's backers acknowledge the cars won't be widely available for years and would require a vast infrastructure of new fueling stations.

"They'd rather work on something that won't be in their lifetime, and that's this hydrogen economy stuff," Frank said. "They pick this kind of target to get the public off their back, essentially."

db
15th August 2005, 04:03 PM
Which brings up the question. How much would you pay for a car that got 250 MPG? Folks pay $50,000 + for vehicles that get less (but may offer more protection in an accident). Based on my figures (40,000 miles @ 20 mpg vs 40,000 @ 250 mpg, and $2.50 per gallon), I should save about $4600 per year in fuel. That's like double my salary!

Jennifer Kirley
15th August 2005, 05:48 PM
Which brings up the question. How much would you pay for a car that got 250 MPG? Folks pay $50,000 + for vehicles that get less (but may offer more protection in an accident). Based on my figures (40,000 miles @ 20 mpg vs 40,000 @ 250 mpg, and $2.50 per gallon), I should save about $4600 per year in fuel. That's like double my salary! If I looked at a $20K vehicle that I'd drive 20,000 miles a year and it gets 22 MPG and then spent $30K on a vehicle that gets 230 MPG at $2.50 a gallon prices, the yearly $2,055 savings would regroup the extra $10K spent in just under 4 years.

A $2,000 tax break for buying the hybrid sweetens the deal, reducing payback time to 3 years. I'd end up with a car having 80,000 miles on it (my Stratus has about 122,000 now) and in the black. So long as repair costs don't kill me I'd be in pretty good shape because I feel sure gas prices will only rise.

I'd consider the diesel engine conversion to vegetable oil, but I understand there is a pesky thickening problem in cold weather.

Tim Folkerts
15th August 2005, 06:50 PM
I don't think the numbers look as impressive as they might seem.:mad: I wish science writers would take the time to analyze the numbers they have!

$0.25 is about 3 kWh, which is about 10^7 Joules of energy

A gallon of gas is a little over 10^8 Joules of energy.

So the energy in the electricity is about the equivalent of about 1/10 of a gallon, or $0.25. Wow! I can replace $0.25 of gasoline with $0.25 of electricity. :confused:

Now an electric motor is more efficient than a gas motor, so the 10^7 Joules of energy in $0.25 of electricity will get you farther than the $0.25 worth of gasoline. So gas + electric will get you a few more miles/$ than a pure gas car. But not by leaps & bounds. And now you need expensive batteries & long charging times.

You simply can't add $0.25 worth of electricity to a $25 tank of gas and expect to double or triple the mileage. It is just bad science!



And numbers like "250 mpg" are almost meaningless for cars with battery assistance. Take out the gas motor all together and you get infinite miles per gallon, 'cause you don't use any galllons.


Tim F

Dave Dunn
16th August 2005, 06:17 AM
I have to agree with Tim. If the estimate of fuel economy is not based solely on the gasoline you put into the car, the comparison to others is invalid as the energy has to be produced and paid for in another fashion. Cost per mile would be more appropriate since that would necessarily include cost of battery charges off your home power grid.

250 mpg..that's like comparing apples to battery powered oranges.

Tim Folkerts
16th August 2005, 09:37 AM
To be fair, I will say that I found the website of the developers of this car, and they were much more accurate about the energy use and cost of operations on their site. They appear to be pretty knowledgeable engineers who really are hoping to make a better car. They even considered the costs of amortizing the expenses.

It was the reporting that picked a few bits out of context and distorted the effectiveness of the battery assist.


Tim F

Jim Wynne
16th August 2005, 09:47 AM
To be fair, I will say that I found the website of the developers of this car, and they were much more accurate about the energy use and cost of operations on their site. They appear to be pretty knowledgeable engineers who really are hoping to make a better car. They even considered the costs of amortizing the expenses.

It was the reporting that picked a few bits out of context and distorted the effectiveness of the battery assist.


Tim F
Journalists who write about science and engineering are often woefully ignorant when it comes to science and engineering. It's always best to find and read the source material whenever possible.

db
16th August 2005, 11:07 AM
Okay, Tim, so let me see if I got this straight. I may save a bunch of money on gasoline, however, my electric bill will increase (no net gain?). Of course, if everyone follows suit, then the law of supply and demand will result in electricity prices increasing and gasoline prices decreasing. This will cause folks to jump from electric, back to gas and the see-saw ride begins.

Tim Folkerts
16th August 2005, 11:25 AM
Dave,

That is pretty much it. It does look like you would have some overall savings on energy costs going to the battery assist. That must be balanced against the increase in car weight (due to batteries), the inconvenience of having to charge the car (it is much faster to refill a gas tank than a battery), and the increased cost of adding the electrical systems to the already-existing gasoline engine.

Typically, electric cars are promising to commuting - you travel a relatively fixed distance and have lots of time (at work or overnight) to recharge the batteries. For a cross-country trip, you would find yoursef stopping for a couple hours every few hundred miles.

Tim F

db
16th August 2005, 11:30 AM
Dave,
For a cross-country trip, you would find yoursef stopping for a couple hours every few hundred miles.
I would just look at that like it was an extended normal mandated potty break

Bill Pflanz
16th August 2005, 01:56 PM
Okay, Tim, so let me see if I got this straight. I may save a bunch of money on gasoline, however, my electric bill will increase (no net gain?). Of course, if everyone follows suit, then the law of supply and demand will result in electricity prices increasing and gasoline prices decreasing. This will cause folks to jump from electric, back to gas and the see-saw ride begins.

Tim's analysis is correct in that energy is energy. The difference is in the cost of production and the related efficiency for converting it into useable energy. If a significant number of hybrids entered the market place, it should drive down the price of crude oil assuming that crude oil is not used to make the electricity. With the increase in knowledge and improvements in nuclear power, the use of electricity could result in less crude oil usage from that source.

We ran out of $3 oil in 1973, then we ran out of $12 and then $30 oil. Now we may be out of $40 oil. That is different then being out of oil entirely. There are analysts who are predicting oil to stabilize back to $40-50 oil as production increases and demand decreases as a result of the current $60+ price. Oil producers seem to be willing to invest to find oil at a cost of $25 and expect to get a reasonable return even at $35-40 per barrel.

There are some geopolitical implications of choosing one form of energy over another. Reducing crude oil usage will have a signficant impact on not only the Middle East but also countries like Mexico and Venezuela. Less money in the oil producing countires may result in more instability in the world rather than less since they may not have an economic replacement for that wealth.

While we are picking on journalists, I find it humorous that the news people keep showing a drum whenever they talk about a barrel of oil. A barrel is 42 gallons and is never stored in drums. Oil is moved by pipeline, ships, barges, and trucks but not by drum.

Bill Pflanz

Jennifer Kirley
16th August 2005, 07:46 PM
Here's a site that does a better job of explaining the details than the reporter did. http://www.hybridcars.com/plugin-hybrids.html

To be fair, I am pretty sure the editorial team places downward ("dumbing") pressure on reporting in places or subjects where they think their readers won't understand the brainy stuff.

Jim Wynne
16th August 2005, 10:52 PM
To be fair, I am pretty sure the editorial team places downward ("dumbing") pressure on reporting in places or subjects where they think their readers won't understand the brainy stuff.
I know from personal experience that that sort of thing happens, but it doesn't account for the many times I've seen journalists get the facts wrong because they didn't understand what they were writing about.

Jennifer Kirley
17th August 2005, 12:25 AM
I know from personal experience that that sort of thing happens, but it doesn't account for the many times I've seen journalists get the facts wrong because they didn't understand what they were writing about.You're quite right.

I've come close to just settling for getting the apostrophe usage right.

Marc
17th August 2005, 12:37 AM
Here's a site that does a better job of explaining the details than the reporter did. http://www.hybridcars.com/plugin-hybrids.html Excellent link Jennifer! Plug-In Hybrids

EV button found on Japanese and European Prius

The "EV" button, found on the Prius in Japan and Europe, allows the driver to "encourage" extended driving in all-electric mode. Though intriguing, there is no evidence Toyota plans to produce plug-in hybrids.

How would you like to run your car for the equivalent of fifty cents a gallon with much lower emissions? Impossible, right?

Not according to Dr. Andy Frank, Professor of Engineering at University of California at Davis and Felix Kramer of The California Cars Initiative (CalCars). Frank and Kramer are leading a campaign to encourage the development of the"gas-optional" or “plug-in” hybrid (PHEV), which they claim will yield dramatic gains in fuel economy.

Just when the American public is finally starting to understand that you don’t have to plug hybrid cars in, here comes the plug-in hybrid. With the plug-in hybrid, you still will not be required to plug the car in, but you’ll have the option. As a result, drivers will get all the benefits of an electric car, without the biggest drawback: limited range. You'll be able to go all-electric for the ninety percent of your driving which takes place close to home. When the electric charge runs out, a downsized gas engine kicks in and your car drives like a regular hybrid.

Staying in Stealth Mode

Most hybrid car drivers enjoy keeping the car in all-electric “stealth” mode. Prius and Escape drivers can keep this going when the car is in slow stop-and-go traffic. Plug-ins would extend the stealth mode for the lion’s share of our local driving.

* A hybrid gets about twice the fuel economy of a conventional car
* A plug-in hybrid will get about twice the fuel economy of a hybrid

What are the naysayers saying about plug-in hybrids? And how do Frank and Kramer respond?

* The extra batteries will weigh too much.
Response: The extra weight of the batteries will be offset somewhat by the reduced weight of the gas engine. At high speeds in particular, fuel efficiency is affected primarily by aerodynamics—the added weight of the equivalent of one or two additional passenger reduces MPG only minimally.

* The extra batteries will cost too much.
Response: New, more powerful and cheaper NiMH or Li-Ion batteries will keep additional costs to only a few thousand dollars above today’s hybrids. Recharging will take place mostly at night during cheaper off-peak hours. Counting purchases, fuel and service, total lifetime cost of ownership will be lower than a gas car.

* Producing power from the grid (to charge the cars) will produce additional emissions.
Response: What the industry calls "well-to-wheel" emissions (including greenhouse gases) for grid-powered vehicles is far lower than gasoline, even for the national power grid (which is 50% coal). Cars charging off-peak will use power from plants that can't turn off at night. Plus, many parts of the country get most of their power from cleaner sources like natural gas and hydropower. Finally, plug-in hybrids recharged from rooftop photovoltaic systems will be zero emission.

Future Benefit of Vehicle-to-Grid Connection

Someday, the larger battery packs used in plug-in hybrids could juggle power back and forth from the car to your household current. If adopted on a widespread basis, a fleet of plug-in (a.k.a. "gridable" hybrids) could offer what are called "regulatory services" (keeping voltages steady, etc.) to a modernized electric power grid. It is estimated that what's called "V2G" could benefit individual car owners by as much as two to three thousand dollars per year for the use of their energy storage capacity—offsetting their purchase and operating costs.

I think a lot of the desirability of this technology has to do with a person's income, as well as how far into the future each of us feels 'personally responsible' for. For folks with a lot of money the price rarely matters - It's a short term issue - I can buy it so big deal. For others, it has to do with what one can do as a legacy in addition to 'immediate' personal benefits.

jmp4429
17th August 2005, 11:45 AM
You're quite right.

I've come close to just settling for getting the apostrophe usage right.

Here you go, Jennifer.

http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif

Jim Wynne
17th August 2005, 11:47 AM
Here you go, Jennifer.


And here: The Apostrophe Protection Society (http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/)

Jennifer Kirley
17th August 2005, 02:53 PM
I loved the cartoon, thank you! :lol:

Clearly there are people who feel very strongly about the subject, since they have gone to some effort in creating these media.

It really is a bit disturbing that such formal signage is displaying the ignorance. It's getting worse, not better I am afraid.

Oh well. Back to my marketing work of the day.