150 mpg Hybrid SUV outperforms gas powered SUVs

[robinson]

I saw a News story about this last night. Not a scam, but definitely going to upset a few applecarts.

http://www.afstrinity.com/



Meanwhile, Detroit and Japan are working on it.



Seems they were pretty secretive about this until after the official testing was done.



AFS Trinity Perfects Plug-in Hybrid Saturn Vue
http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1386

Restraining his obvious pride and excitement, he explained that a standard Saturn VUE Green Line can accelerate from zero to sixty in 12.5 seconds. Despite weighing some 1,400 lbs (635 kg) after its PHEV upgrade, the VUE demonstrated 11.6 second 0-60 performance in electric-only mode. But even more impressive, Furia told me with obvious delight, in full hybrid mode, it turned in an impressive 6.9 seconds, faster than a Porsche Cayenne.

Furia stressed that the vehicle makes use of largely off-the-shelf components and that in mass production, he estimates the weight of the plug-in drive system could reduced to the point that overall vehicle weigh could be reduced from 500-1000 pounds.

Equipped with a custom-made Ricardo Engineering transmission, the SUV has a theoretical top speed of 90 mph -- Furia said it's been test driven at Michelin's Laurens, South Carolina proving grounds to 87 mph with four adults on board. It was at the same track that it drove 41.9 miles in EV-only mode, achieving that GM is hoping to accomplish with its Volt and clearly besting Toyota's own plug-in Prius efforts.

The combination of high-power ultracapacitors, which discharge from 100-20% in seconds and are recharged in just "a couple minutes", and high-energy lithium-ion batteries, mean the trademarked "FastEnergy" system appears to address the need for both a long-life and high energy-density storage system. Furia told me that he hopes to license it to automakers who are looking for a plug-in hybrid solution that can bypass the shortcomings of battery-only approaches.

Interesting.

Full electric mode for 40 miles, high performance, 150 mpg. 8,000 bucks add on kit.

 

[nimzov]

Questions.

How many charge/discharge cycles on these lithium-ion batteries ?

And what will be the cost of replacing the battery ?

nimzo

 

[Bikewer]

Yes, that seems to be the limiting factor with these vehicles; the batteries are of limited life-span, and expensive to replace.
It' well known that electric motors feature very good torque characteristics.

 

[technoextreme]

Yes, that seems to be the limiting factor with these vehicles; the batteries are of limited life-span, and expensive to replace.
It' well known that electric motors feature very good torque characteristics.

For those that don't know maximum torque occurs when an the electric motor is stalled.

 

[not_so_new]

So here is what I have often wondered.

The guy here says something to the effect that if you want to limit greenhouse gas emissions and decrease our reliance on fossil fuels the "obvious" answer is electric hybrid cars. But isn't hooking my car up to the existing grid to get power just pushing back the burning of fossil fuels from under the hood of my car to the power plants that are still mostly coal fired?

Don't get me wrong, I am REALLY interested in this technology and I see all sorts of positives for "me" not the least of which is decreased dependence on foreign oil (a dependance which only serves to supply tribal cultures with a great deal of wealth to practice tribal customs).

I just don't see how this car has positive effects for the environment, other than to say we hope someday the electric generation plants all take huge steps towards greening their processes.

So, an honest question, am I missing something there? I hope I am but as far as I see, there is no free lunch to energy production and a car like this is still coming at the same cost to the environment from a different source, fossil fuel at the power plant vs. fossil fuel at the pump.

Thanks in advance.....

 

[GodMark2]

So here is what I have often wondered.

The guy here says something to the effect that if you want to limit greenhouse gas emissions and decrease our reliance on fossil fuels the "obvious" answer is electric hybrid cars. But isn't hooking my car up to the existing grid to get power just pushing back the burning of fossil fuels from under the hood of my car to the power plants that are still mostly coal fired?

Don't get me wrong, I am REALLY interested in this technology and I see all sorts of positives for "me" not the least of which is decreased dependence on foreign oil (a dependance which only serves to supply tribal cultures with a great deal of wealth to practice tribal customs).

I just don't see how this car has positive effects for the environment, other than to say we hope someday the electric generation plants all take huge steps towards greening their processes.

So, an honest question, am I missing something there? I hope I am but as far as I see, there is no free lunch to energy production and a car like this is still coming at the same cost to the environment from a different source, fossil fuel at the power plant vs. fossil fuel at the pump.

Thanks in advance.....

What you're missing is that electricity is able to be produced through several non-fossil fuel dependent means (solar, geothermal, hydro, nuclear). So, by using a fully electric car, we're allowing for a reduction in the need for a fossil fuel distribution system, and increasing the demand for a 'charge my car' distribution system. Currently, 'charge my car' means "burn fossil fuels to make electricity", but that can change in the future (and probably will, if fuel prices continue to rise).

Right now, the big limitation for all electric cars is that you can't charge them up anyplace but your own home, or maybe a willing friend's home (Sorry, kids, no trip to JellyStone national park this year.). But with enough electric cars out there, someone will most likely start trying to make a profit off of charging them. Currently, there is almost exactly zero profit to be made doing this, as the number of chargeable cars is close enough to zero to be discounted.

But introduction of hybrid "You can charge me at home, and fuel me on the road" cars allow for the customer to use the easily generated electric most of the time, but not be tethered to his charging station. This in turn will create a possible profit motive for charging stations to be built, which will reduce the amount of fuel necessary to run the cars.

Chargeable Hybrid Electric cars are not a solution, but more of a way of allowing the solution to be implemented. You won't necessarily see much improvement in carbon emissions right away.

 

[robinson]

So, by using a fully electric car, we're allowing for a reduction in the need for a fossil fuel distribution system, and increasing the demand for a 'charge my car' distribution system. Currently, 'charge my car' means "burn fossil fuels to make electricity", ...

Uh, no. Wind, solar, hydro and Nuclear are all part of the grid. Adding a solar film to a vehicle means it charges itself in the parking lot all day.
Can you see the Oil execs hearing about that?

...Currently, there is almost exactly zero profit to be made doing this, as the number of chargeable cars is close enough to zero to be discounted.

Actually there are quite a few full electric vehicles. They just don't go on the highways. And communities that use them do have charging stations all over. They ar called "wall outlets", where you plug the car in.

But introduction of hybrid "You can charge me at home, and fuel me on the road" cars allow for the customer to use the easily generated electric most of the time, but not be tethered to his charging station. This in turn will create a possible profit motive for charging stations to be built, which will reduce the amount of fuel necessary to run the cars....

Shucks, even if you don't charge the SUV, it reduces the gas needed by at least 60%. This is a huge matter. And one that car companies keep trying to say can't be done.

...Chargeable Hybrid Electric cars are not a solution, but more of a way of allowing the solution to be implemented. You won't necessarily see much improvement in carbon emissions right away.

I don't know enough about it yet, but if this same technology was used for all vehicles, it would reduce vehicle emissions by 80%. It doesn't seem possible, does it?

Lets look at one possible scenario. Here is an SUV, it gets 20 mpg on a good day.

Here is the same SUV, it costs more, but it gets 150mpg, goes faster, and if you charge it up doesn't need any gas for the first 40 miles.

Which one would you buy?

Of course the batteries are going to be an issue. What do you dump into your ecosystem? Used batteries every few years? Or tons of pollution into the air, a little every day?

 

[robinson]

So, by using a fully electric car, we're allowing for a reduction in the need for a fossil fuel distribution system, and increasing the demand for a 'charge my car' distribution system. Currently, 'charge my car' means "burn fossil fuels to make electricity", ...

Uh, no. Wind, solar, hydro and Nuclear are all part of the grid. Adding a solar film to a vehicle means it charges itself in the parking lot all day.
Can you see the Oil execs hearing about that?
"What? What They don't have to buy gas? How did that happen?"

...Currently, there is almost exactly zero profit to be made doing this, as the number of chargeable cars is close enough to zero to be discounted.

Actually there are quite a few full electric vehicles. They just don't go on the highways. And communities that use them do have charging stations all over. They ar called "wall outlets", where you plug the car in.

But introduction of hybrid "You can charge me at home, and fuel me on the road" cars allow for the customer to use the easily generated electric most of the time, but not be tethered to his charging station. This in turn will create a possible profit motive for charging stations to be built, which will reduce the amount of fuel necessary to run the cars....

Shucks, even if you don't charge the SUV, it reduces the gas needed by at least 60%. This is a huge matter. And one that car companies keep trying to say can't be done.

...Chargeable Hybrid Electric cars are not a solution, but more of a way of allowing the solution to be implemented. You won't necessarily see much improvement in carbon emissions right away.

I don't know enough about it yet, but if this same technology was used for all vehicles, it would reduce vehicle emissions by 80%. It doesn't seem possible, does it?

Lets look at one possible scenario. Here is an SUV, it gets 20 mpg on a good day.

Here is the same SUV, it costs more, but it gets 150mpg, goes faster, and if you charge it up doesn't need any gas for the first 40 miles.

Which one would you buy?

Of course the batteries are going to be an issue. What do you dump into your ecosystem? Used batteries every few years? Or tons of pollution into the air, a little every day?

 

[not_so_new]

What you're missing is that electricity is able to be produced through several non-fossil fuel dependent means (solar, geothermal, hydro, nuclear). So, by using a fully electric car, we're allowing for a reduction in the need for a fossil fuel distribution system, and increasing the demand for a 'charge my car' distribution system. Currently, 'charge my car' means "burn fossil fuels to make electricity", but that can change in the future (and probably will, if fuel prices continue to rise).

Yep, I agree with that.... in fact that is why I said in my post

I just don't see how this car has positive effects for the environment, other than to say we hope someday the electric generation plants all take huge steps towards greening their processes.

LOL

 

[GodMark2]

Uh, no. Wind, solar, hydro and Nuclear are all part of the grid.

They are a part, but even in my neck of the woods, where we pride ourself on the extensive network of dams on the Columbia river system, we still get 42% of our electricity from coal, and 14% from natural gas. Hydro only makes up for 41% of the total. The amount from wind, solar, "waste" (burning garbage), and "other" isn't even 3%. So a plug in hybrid, charging from my home wall outlet, still gets most of it's energy from burning fuel.

Adding a solar film to a vehicle means it charges itself in the parking lot all day.

Sorry, I must have missed where in the thread someone mentioned adding solar film to the car itself.

Actually there are quite a few full electric vehicles. They just don't go on the highways. And communities that use them do have charging stations all over. They ar called "wall outlets", where you plug the car in.

And, if you can't take it on the highway, then either you'll need two cars (which most people can't afford), or a different one that can go on the highway. Plus, if it gets it's power from a 'wall outlet', then it's really just burning fuel anyway.

Shucks, even if you don't charge the SUV, it reduces the gas needed by at least 60%. This is a huge matter. And one that car companies keep trying to say can't be done.

I don't know enough about it yet, but if this same technology was used for all vehicles, it would reduce vehicle emissions by 80%. It doesn't seem possible, does it?

And I agree it would be a Good Thing, assuming the external costs aren't too large.

Lets look at one possible scenario. Here is an SUV, it gets 20 mpg on a good day.

Here is the same SUV, it costs more, but it gets 150mpg, goes faster, and if you charge it up doesn't need any gas for the first 40 miles.

Which one would you buy?

Does it get those 40 miles for free? Oh, you have to "charge it up" from the "wall outlet" all night to get those miles. That means the power company has to burn fuel. Well, at least the emissions won't be coming out of your tailpipe.

Of course the batteries are going to be an issue. What do you dump into your ecosystem? Used batteries every few years? Or tons of pollution into the air, a little every day?

How, exactly, do those batteries get produced? What and how much waste products are created in the process? How many tons of used batteries each year would need to be 'dumped'? Without those answers, you trying to compare apples to spanners.

But, all that said, Hybrids are still a good idea, if only because they allow for competition in the "What do I use to power my car" market. Currently, the choices are Fuel A (gasoline) or Fuel B(diesel). Adding "Any electric generator" to the mix allows for a market shift and more competition. Hybrids allow for this, without compromising the utility of the vehicle (tethered to home charging station).

Can you see the Oil execs hearing about that?
"What? What They don't have to buy gas? How did that happen?"

We can dream of the day...

 

[Ziggurat]

What you're missing is that electricity is able to be produced through several non-fossil fuel dependent means (solar, geothermal, hydro, nuclear).

At this point that's irrelevant, because marginal electricity (that is, any additional electricity generated because of the increased demand) comes from fossil fuels, and will for the forseable future. The only real greenhouse advantage you get with a plugin is if the electric generation/charging process happens to be more efficient than the internal combustion engine, which is possible but not likely dramatic. But there is another advantage, which is that coal can be used to generate that marginal electricity, and we have lots of domestic coal.

 

[Hellbound]

Ziggurat:

There is another advantage to electric, assuming all other factors even out: centralized production. Just the fact that the power, and thus, the pollution and by-products, are all produced in one area instead of spread out all over (as in IC engines) makes it easier to contain and/or clean up the leftovers. Not to mention that it makes it easier to implement improvements in technology that can increase output and efficiency.

Of course, there will be costs associated with any cleaning or containment that might well through the energy efficiency out the window *shrug*..and I don't know what effect the need for increased distribution systems would have.

There's always trade-offs, and contrary to what many seem to argue, it's rarely a black and white issue.

 

[Cuddles]

Shucks, even if you don't charge the SUV, it reduces the gas needed by at least 60%. This is a huge matter. And one that car companies keep trying to say can't be done.

And yet this was in fact built by a car company.

Here is the same SUV, it costs more, but it gets 150mpg, goes faster, and if you charge it up doesn't need any gas for the first 40 miles.

I doubt it goes faster. It certainly accelerates faster, but that is not the same thing. The hybrid version only has a theorectical top speed of 90mph, and hasn't actually reached that in reality (although it's come pretty close). I don't know how fast the original could go, but I seriously doubt it was that slow.

 

[IllegalArgument]

And yet this was in fact built by a car company.



I doubt it goes faster. It certainly accelerates faster, but that is not the same thing. The hybrid version only has a theorectical top speed of 90mph, and hasn't actually reached that in reality (although it's come pretty close). I don't know how fast the original could go, but I seriously doubt it was that slow.

Top speed, as long as it can go say 80 MPH, shouldn't be a concern, except possibly for emergency vehicles.

It's only our American obsession with cars that makes this even a concern. It's my understanding that going over 70 or 75 MPH is grossly inefficient for almost all cars.

 

[quarky]

specialized roadways would help.
and going 40 mph instead of 80

why must we move so fast when we aren't really going anywhere?

 

[Cuddles]

Top speed, as long as it can go say 80 MPH, shouldn't be a concern, except possibly for emergency vehicles.

It's only our American obsession with cars that makes this even a concern. It's my understanding that going over 70 or 75 MPH is grossly inefficient for almost all cars.

Inefficient and illegal. However, while this hybrid SUV does look interesting, there's no point pretending it's better than it actually is, and I seriously doubt it can go as fast as the original petrol version, given that I've seen 20 year old, 1 litre scrapheaps go faster than 90mph. It isn't at all surprising really, as technoextreme said, electric motors are best when stationary and less powerful at high speeds, so good acceleration but low top speed is exacly what would be expected.

 

[Cuddles]

There is another obvious problem with this. It's an SUV. No matter how much more effcient you make them, they're still far bigger, heavier and less efficient than they need to be. A normal estate car or people mover is more than enough for the vast majority of people. I know for a fact that a fairly small estate can fit four adults, four kayaks and all their clothes and kit for a week, and still break the speed limit and be more efficient than most SUVs are when empty. Just think how much better it would be if they were making improvements to cars like this instead of wasting their time with penis extensions.

 

[IllegalArgument]

There is another obvious problem with this. It's an SUV. No matter how much more effcient you make them, they're still far bigger, heavier and less efficient than they need to be. A normal estate car or people mover is more than enough for the vast majority of people. I know for a fact that a fairly small estate can fit four adults, four kayaks and all their clothes and kit for a week, and still break the speed limit and be more efficient than most SUVs are when empty. Just think how much better it would be if they were making improvements to cars like this instead of wasting their time with penis extensions.

I agree. SUVs are a waste for 99% of the people that own them.

A quality mini-van or station wagon would be better for most families.

 

[soylent]

Questions.

How many charge/discharge cycles on these lithium-ion batteries ?

And what will be the cost of replacing the battery ?

nimzo

It depends on the batteries. Typically the batteries never really die; they just gradually lose capacity and charge/discharge rate over time. Normal lithium-ion batteries tend to do about a 1000 cycles before their capacity has dropped to 80%. It's possible to build them much better, but the goals of capacity, discharge rate and durabillity tend to be in competition with each other.

 

[Prometheus]

I'm trying to find an article I read about a year ago which mentioned a hybrid system in development that will use a 1 or 2 horsepower gas motor that runs 24 hr.s/day at full throttle to charge batteries for an electric primary drive system. Supposedly, this produces the same total energy that most people use in a couple hours per day of stop-and-go driving, but uses a lot less gas because IC engines are grossly inefficient when not operating at full throttle.