Will plug-in-hybrid vehicles solve anything?

[redwards]

And if part of the justification for electric cars is to reduce the production of CO2 have you taken into account the fact that per joule of energy produced the burning of coal produces more CO2 than gasoline?

This is actually what I was referring to. You might argue a bit about losses in power transmission or emissions incurred from extracting, refining and shipping oil vs. coal, but there are a ton of variables there. Oil is often shipped from overseas and has to be refined, coal mining results in blowing off mountain tops, etc. Let's call this a wash just for the sake of argument right now.

So let's see here. The Chevy Volt uses 36 kWh of energy per 100 miles in all-electric mode. The average coal-fired power plant emits 2,249 lbs/MWh of carbon dioxide, which is 2.249 lbs/kWh.

This means that the Chevy Volt would produce 80.964 pounds of carbon dioxide per 100 mile trip if it were power exclusively by power from a coal-fired powerplant. That comes out to 0.81 pounds per mile. By contrast, the average passenger car produces 0.916 pounds of CO2 per mile (this is only the average passenger car, light trucks produce more, and big ****-off SUVs produce even more). All of the figures used above come from the EPA; I can throw up the links if you care to double-check.

So a Chevy Volt is cleaner than a passenger car even if we presume the Volt relies exclusively on energy from a coal-fired power plant. Considering that coal provides something like half of our nation's power, and that the other half produces varyingly lower levels of carbon dioxide emission, I think it's pretty safe to say that an electric fleet would produce fewer carbon dioxide emissions than the current gasoline fleet.

 

[redwards]

Also, I don't recall the exact figures, but last time I did the math, energy from the grid cost something like a tenth of what the equivalent amount of energy stored in gasoline costs. Granted, this would even out as the fleet moved towards electric vehicles, but it's safe to say that, for the moment, there's plenty of room for improvement on that front.

 

[Just thinking]

So a Chevy Volt is cleaner than a passenger car even if we presume the Volt relies exclusively on energy from a coal-fired power plant. Considering that coal provides something like half of our nation's power, and that the other half produces varyingly lower levels of carbon dioxide emission, I think it's pretty safe to say that an electric fleet would produce fewer carbon dioxide emissions than the current gasoline fleet.

I noticed a number of things missing from this comparison. For example, the cost of making/recycling/disposing of batteries (in energy/pollution) over the life of the car, given a lifetime of say, 200,000 miles. Also, the cost of recharging the vehicle. Yes, one's time needed to do this seems to always be ignored in discussions of this type. A regular car (let's use my 2008 Audi A4 as an example) in under 10 minutes can be effectively "recharged" to go another 500+ miles. Just how much charging time is needed for the Volt to go 500 miles? (Answer: at best, about 4 hours for 50 miles of electric driving.) Wow ... that's a full 40 hour work week to give you the range of 10 minutes at the pump. And how long will those batteries last? From what I can gather ... no one knows for sure. 5 years, 10 years ... maybe 20? Yes, electric cars may have their place right now for specific duties, but I think we're still quite a ways off from having them replace gasoline vehicles.

 

[redwards]

I noticed a number of things missing from this comparison. For example, the cost of making/recycling/disposing of batteries (in energy/pollution) over the life of the car, given a lifetime of say, 200,000 miles. Also, the cost of recharging the vehicle. Yes, one's time needed to do this seems to always be ignored in discussions of this type. A regular car (let's use my 2008 Audi A4 as an example) in under 10 minutes can be effectively "recharged" to go another 500+ miles. Just how much charging time is needed for the Volt to go 500 miles? (Answer: at best, about 4 hours for 50 miles of electric driving.) Wow ... that's a full 40 hour work week to give you the range of 10 minutes at the pump. And how long will those batteries last? From what I can gather ... no one knows for sure. 5 years, 10 years ... maybe 20? Yes, electric cars may have their place right now for specific duties, but I think we're still quite a ways off from having them replace gasoline vehicles.

I'm not sure what the costs of recycling lithium are (though I'm fairly certain that it can be recycled). Certainly no one is arguing that a hybrid or an electric vehicle is cheaper right now. Even with the dramatically lower cost of energy from the grid vs. gasoline, it's probably not cost effective to buy any kind of hybrid or EV at present.

The purpose of the comparison was to discuss whether they would, in fact, reduce emissions. I certainly wasn't comparing them based on their relative utility.

As far as utility does go, something like 95% of the average person's driving is under 40 or 50 miles per day. I don't recall the exact figure, but suffice it to say that most people could do almost all of their driving without ever running into the problem you describe. You simply have to plug the vehicle in when you get home and let it charge overnight. As battery technology improves, the range of electric vehicles will also improve, and charge times are likely to improve as well.

As to the Volt in the example, obviously, it will also run on gasoline (in the Volt, the gasoline engine is basically just a generator for the battery, as opposed to the dual-motor setup of the Prius). Which sort of invalidates that whole argument from the get-go.

 

[jayh]

That's not what I've heard in the industry. They figure there is enough capacity to handle the load even if everyone owned an electric vehicle. ...

You do remember, do you not the rolling blackouts/brownouts of a few years ago caused merely by air conditioning?

The current grid is in really sad shape, patched together by bandaids. It needs to be replaced by DC distribution, but that involves complete rework. It also needs a lot more distribution lines and property rights of way often take many years in the courts.

Around here the electric utilities keep begging us to use less electricity, not more.

 

[jayh]

... By contrast, the average passenger car produces 0.916 pounds of CO2 per mile (this is only the average passenger car,...

to make it more accurate you should compare a passenger car as small as the Volt rather than an 'average' one.

 

[drkitten]

The current grid is in really sad shape, patched together by bandaids. It needs to be replaced by DC distribution,

This is nonsense. The current system is in bad shape, so let's replace it with a system that's thousands of times less efficient?

 

[Malerin]

I would buy one, but $32,000 is a bit steep (even with the tax credit). Hopefully others will buy and the cost will come down in the near future. My daily commute is 50 miles.

 

[redwards]

to make it more accurate you should compare a passenger car as small as the Volt rather than an 'average' one.

The Volt is a four door car that is longer, wider, taller, and 1,000 pounds heavier than a Honda Civic. It's hardly small.

 

[redwards]

If you want to compare a small electric vehicle, however, we can compare the Tesla Roadster. The Tesla Roadster is nearly twice as efficient as the Volt in terms of distance per kilowatt hour. If I do the same math, it would come out to 0.48 pounds of carbon dioxide per mile, or half of what the average passenger vehicle produces (again, on the presumption that 100% of the power is supplied by a coal-fired powerplant).

It's also sexy.

 

[Just thinking]

The purpose of the comparison was to discuss whether they would, in fact, reduce emissions. I certainly wasn't comparing them based on their relative utility.

As far as utility does go, something like 95% of the average person's driving is under 40 or 50 miles per day. I don't recall the exact figure, but suffice it to say that most people could do almost all of their driving without ever running into the problem you describe. You simply have to plug the vehicle in when you get home and let it charge overnight. As battery technology improves, the range of electric vehicles will also improve, and charge times are likely to improve as well.

And hope you don't have to use it while recharging. Plus, my best time was given that the owner will opt for the custom power installation allowing for the "short" charge time of 4 hours ... otherwise, it's 10 - 12 hours. I'm sorry, but this really does put a damper on relative vehicular utility. But of course, this is assuming 100% electric usage and technically the Volt is a hybrid, so it's not exactly fair to say it can't be used like a regular car as well. But then, it's also not fair to give it such low CO2 emissions if it is to be used as such. Also, where I live, one on average drives more than 40 - 50 miles per day, as the average cummute is 1 hour each way.

As to the Volt in the example, obviously, it will also run on gasoline (in the Volt, the gasoline engine is basically just a generator for the battery, as opposed to the dual-motor setup of the Prius). Which sort of invalidates that whole argument from the get-go.

Agreed.

 

[drkitten]

As far as utility does go, something like 95% of the average person's driving is under 40 or 50 miles per day. I don't recall the exact figure, but suffice it to say that most people could do almost all of their driving without ever running into the problem you describe.

And that's exactly why electric vehicles are useless.

A vehicle that lets me do 95% of my driving is basically 100% useless, because I still have to pay 100% of the price for a second car for the one day out of twenty that I need to travel fifty-one miles or more.

I don't want a car that will let me do "almost all of [my] driving" any more than I want to get on a ferry that will take me "almost all" of the way across a river.

 

[Just thinking]

I don't want a car that will let me do "almost all of [my] driving" any more than I want to get on a ferry that will take me "almost all" of the way across a river.

I like that analogy ... gets right to the issue.

Plus, let's say you run out of gas on the highway. An emergency vehicle can come up and give you 5 gallons or so of gas to get you to the next fueling station. A bit of an expense, I'm sure ... but compared to running out of electricity?

 

[drkitten]

I like that analogy ... gets right to the issue.

Well, that's why engineers overdesign. A bridge will not be designed to handle 95% of the expected traffic; it won't even be designed to handle 100% of the expected traffic. If you expect the bridge to take vehicles of up to 30,000 kg, the engineer will d*mn well make sure that it can actually handle 50 or 60 thousand before he approves the design.

If the average person drives 50 miles or less 95% of the time, I want a 100 mile cruising radius, thanks.

And even then, I probably don't want it. Sure, I only take 400+ mile trips once a month. But that's still once a month that the electric car would be an expensive nuisance.

 

[redwards]

And that's exactly why electric vehicles are useless.

A vehicle that lets me do 95% of my driving is basically 100% useless, because I still have to pay 100% of the price for a second car for the one day out of twenty that I need to travel fifty-one miles or more.

I don't want a car that will let me do "almost all of [my] driving" any more than I want to get on a ferry that will take me "almost all" of the way across a river.

Almost every married couple I know has two cars. For the average family, there's certainly no reason why one of the two cars couldn't be an electric vehicle and the other be a traditional ICE or a hybrid.

And again, as with the Volt, an electric vehicle that happens to have a gasoline-powered generator in it could run on electric power 95% of the time and utilize gasoline for those rare extended trips.

 

[redwards]

Also, the Tesla Roadster has a 250 mile range and a recharge time of 3.5 hours. That's the existing state of electric vehicle technology.

Their next model is slated for a 2012 release. They claim a range of up to 300 miles, a recharge time of 3-5 hours, a 'QuickCharge' time of 45 minutes, and a battery swap time of 5 minutes (for those roadside breakdowns you mentioned). It's also a full-size sedan, rather than a tiny little roadster. And lastly, there's some talk about a 'range extender' option, which would add a gasoline generator, essentially making a Volt-style hybrid.

So again, I'd say: given the existing state of the technology, I can easily see electric and hybrid electric vehicles as viable replacements for (and improvements upon) today's internal combustion engine vehicles.

 

[drkitten]

Almost every married couple I know has two cars.

Well, that will be really useful when marriage becomes mandatory with the acquisition of a driving licence.

For the average family, there's certainly no reason why one of the two cars couldn't be an electric vehicle and the other be a traditional ICE or a hybrid.

Absolutely no reason at all. That way you will have someone to telephone and pick you up when your batteries leave you stranded at the side of the road 5% of the time (i.e. once every three weeks).

 

[drkitten]

Also, the Tesla Roadster has a 250 mile range and a recharge time of 3.5 hours. That's the existing state of electric vehicle technology.

Yup. Still useless; I can't make my monthly 400 mile trip.

Their next model is slated for a 2012 release. They claim a range of up to 300 miles, a recharge time of 3-5 hours, a 'QuickCharge' time of 45 minutes, and a battery swap time of 5 minutes (for those roadside breakdowns you mentioned).

Which means it's still going to be useless at least until 2013.

So again, I'd say: given the existing state of the technology, I can easily see electric and hybrid electric vehicles as viable replacements for (and improvements upon) today's internal combustion engine vehicles.

Only if by "viable replacement" you mean "useless expensive toys."

You're still designing for the median; cars are infrastructure and need to be overengineered for reliability.

 

[redwards]

Well, that will be really useful when marriage becomes mandatory with the acquisition of a driving licence.

Or, for, you know, the millions of Americans who live in an average family unit with two parents and two cars. But I suppose we're also free to ignore any technology which is only useful for huge portions of the population.

Absolutely no reason at all. That way you will have someone to telephone and pick you up when your batteries leave you stranded at the side of the road 5% of the time (i.e. once every three weeks).

Any other awful scenarios or statistics that you'd like to pull out of your butt?

Yup. Still useless; I can't make my monthly 400 mile trip.

Yup. Useless for you means useless for everyone. Until quick-swapping batteries becomes the new function of gas stations, at which point swapping out an electric battery would be faster than refilling your tank.

Which means it's still going to be useless at least until 2013.

By remarkable contrast, most of these baseless comments are useless now.

Only if by "viable replacement" you mean "useless expensive toys."

You're still designing for the median; cars are infrastructure and need to be overengineered for reliability.

Where in all of these discussions have we touched on the issue of reliability, and when did it become a reasonable assumption that electric and hybrid vehicles were doomed to be eternally unreliable as compared to internal combustion vehicles? Considering the comparatively fewer movable parts, if anything I would expect electric vehicles to be relatively more reliable.

 

[davefoc]

And that's exactly why electric vehicles are useless.

A vehicle that lets me do 95% of my driving is basically 100% useless, because I still have to pay 100% of the price for a second car for the one day out of twenty that I need to travel fifty-one miles or more.

I don't want a car that will let me do "almost all of [my] driving" any more than I want to get on a ferry that will take me "almost all" of the way across a river.

With respect and as other have suggested the electric vehicle well may not be a good solution for you, but that is a long way from proving they are useless. For two car families such as mine (just my wife and I now, the kids have left us to face the world) an electric vehicle would be great. No oil changes, no stops for gasoline, a range that is much greater than we would almost ever need for a second car. We have a another car that would serve all of our other car needs like long commutes, vacations, trips to the hardware store. An inexpensive electric vehicle with a range of 50 miles or so would fit very nicely with our needs.

ETA: Does anybody know who on the forum has driven a Tesla?

Here's a hint as to who it might be: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=189633&highlight=tesla