NY Times: Cruze "Fossil fuel milage champ"; hybrids still win city, burbs

In California electric rates are regulated by PUC. It takes an act of god to increase electric rates. Gasoline the price at the pump can change daily.

Consumers who want stability in energy costs will gravitate to EV

The Prius is the best selling Car in Japan and California. Places where gas is expensive.

I purchased a Prius about 10 months ago. The savings in gasoline about $200-$300 a Month. I put the savings in a vacation fund. I just got back from Maui 7 day action at the Hyatt. I rather invest my money in myself than give it to the oil companies.

 

That's likely true although I'm hoping we can gain an extra year or two of advantage through good public outreach and education. Given that many people will be waiting to see how the early battery packs work out, that is all the more reason why it's important to subsidize and get an initial round of cars available for purchase today.

 

That analysis was based on electrified, and that includes full hybrids. I like the term plug-in for those that plug-in as electrified seems to get people mad.

The model T was mainly run on ethanol at the beginning, it was flex fuel like the diesel. Prohibition killed flex fuel. Price hurt virgin vegetable oil. The epa doesn't like wvo

I think the chart kind of tells where we are going. In some applications diesel "electrified" (hv, phev) makes sense. IMHO in 20 years in america there won't be much room for a non-hybrid diesel car.

 

shouldn't one factor in the higher btu content of diesel to keep things apple to apples? They pay more for diesel, so it seems fair they'd get more 'bang' for the buck.

 

Musk is confident of $200/kwh soon.
And the fact that China and India are set to add 300 million cars by 2030 makes ME confident of $6 gas.
Bottom line: I see that purple box ('Recent US conditions') moving to the upper-left corner rapidly.

 

Yes absolutely, but I am hesitant to compare things on efficiency except in ballpark figures, YMMV. IMHO btu's are a losing game, but when we hear about 20% better efficiency with diesel, energy content likely makes up half the increased efficiency. The reason this is a hard thing to talk about is biodiesel, E10, real world versus EPA or worse European ratings. If we set a hurdle at 50%, epa above the median its got enough slop for diesel. It is not terrible. If we are judging efficiency we should specify driving conditions - route, speed, temperature, etc, as well as account for difference in energy.

Bang for buck is also a good measure, and it accounts for some of the differences between Europe and the US. How far can you go for a $?

 

To me this discussion, comparing hybrids, plug-ins and "clean diesels", is absolutely moot. Some of the best selling vehicles in the US are pickup trucks, many of which are not work vehicles but simply daily drivers. The relatively low cost of gasoline is driving the sales of trucks and SUV's -- and this is what is keeping GM, Chrysler and Ford profitable. We're just looking at the wrong end of the spectrum. A possible reduction in the pump price of gasoline will be a disaster.

 

Well we have been here before haven't we. A increase of price at the pump sent GM and Chysler to the US government for a bail out. SUVs have been shrinking (the market is moving smaller), and the only reason to have a hummer is to be ironic.

Fuel prices fluctuate and people like trucks. If gas prices drop and we all are driving efficient vehicles that's great, its not a disaster. If gas prices spike, and car companies only have suvs and trucks, that's another economic crisis. There is not a reward for making inefficient vehicles.

 

The ONLY way to divorce the gasoline price from the roller-coaster of the global crude market is through government intervention (a price floor or carbon tax). Good luck getting that through a Republican congress. I have more hope for this:

Citizens Climate Lobby - Pushing for a US Carbon Fee and Dividend

 

I want to tie this back in with your graph. I think it's fair to say:
(1) that the trend in $/kwh is steady, and headed downwards
(2) that the trend in $/gal is volatile, and headed upwards

So where does this leave us? Well, (1) is good news, and thanks to the research going on (I think a GM executive said there will be more advancement in batteries in the next 5 years than the past 100 combined), this means $/kw will only get better.
And given the volatility in (2), that could mean that we find ourselves at the left-end of the chart, violently oscillating between BEV or all-ICE.......completely cutting out the market for PHEVs and HEVs

This is not a remote possibility. It's possible that eventually light-duty passenger car drivers will tire of the volatile/high prices and switch to an EV, ditching gasoline altogether.
SUV and Pickup drivers are likely to do the same, except ditching gasoline for CNG or LNG (superior energy density compared to batteries is better for hauling, towing)

 

Maybe when people stop judging diesel fuel economy and emissions by comparison with the Prius maybe people will stop judging diesel performance by comparison with the Prius.

 

Agreed. Apples and oranges.
Diesels are ideally suited for trucks, as well as car owners who gain 'psychological' satisfaction from driving a diesel (see above post quoting Bob Lutz)

With that being said, let's be clear what "people" we are talking about.

It is always diesel 'enthusiasts' and auto journalists who are raving about the "Prius-like" mpg of their diesel. It is NEVER the other way around. You don't see people coming onto PC and bragging about how much better their mpg is than diesels, unless it's in reaction to an article such as this.

Prius owners take superior mpg and cleanliness as a given, and most never even considered a diesel (more likely to go PHEV or EV).

Diesel drivers, OTOH, are always dissing the Prius, perhaps because they feel insecure about their own purchase. This leads to the second part of your argument - performance.

Because of their insecurities, diesel drivers will diss the performance of the Prius (to make themselves feel better about inferior mpg). Prius drivers never claimed it was a 'performance' car, and most readily admit that just about any diesel will outperform it. So this entire line of attack is just a big strawman, coming straight from diesel-heads' insecurities.

The REAL problem is when people start conflating 'Prius' with 'hybrid' as they mindlessly go about trashing the performance of the Prius that no one said is a sports car.

When this happens here on PriusChat -with users that drive a Prius- you know we've got a problem!!

I think that's pretty much where we have to draw the line. Look, the fastest Ferrari EVER is a hybrid, and if that isn't enough to put the "diesel performs better than hybrid" meme to rest, nothing will.

 

<AHEM!> "We" do not have a problem. The poster of nonsense has a problem. But we don't have to go hunting for "someone who posted something wrong on the Internet." <grins>

Bob Wilson

 

Haha, Bob yes your point is well taken. I guess I was just stating that the 'nonsense' which exists outside of PC (especially w./ regard to "hybrids can't perform") somehow made it into PC as gospel truth! I found that to be both surprising....and frustrating.

 

Interesting, never knew I was insecure.

 

Judging by your signature, I would say no, you are not.
I was very clear in singling out diesel drivers/automotive press who diss the Prius (and often all hybrids) for reasons that (I can only guess) have to do with making themselves feel better about their purchase.
Clearly, this does not apply to you.

 

I think there is a disconnect between owners of the two different cars. Prius owners compare the cars on the criteria that they bought the Prius for, such as efficiency and emissions., whereas the diesel drivers compare on the criteria that they bought the cars for.

"Prius-like economy" comes about because the Prius is the icon for fuel economy. Phrases and comparisons like that always arise, such as "Porsche-like handling", or "Kia-like affordability".

 

It can be cracked, but may require addition reformation afterwards to attain the proper octane for motor vehicles. Even without reformation, cracking has an energy cost. To meet gasoline demand, some refineries are already doing this. Because of variability in crude quality, it's hard to pin down a general amount for this energy and environmental cost. Then you can toss in transport costs to the mix of shipping our extra diesel to Europe, and their petrol to us.

My original post on this was in reference to biodiesel though, and it appears research is looking into hydrocracking vegetable oils instead of transesterfication for diesel production.
http://www.nt.ntnu.no/users/skoge/prost/proceedings/aiche-2008/data/papers/P134226.pdf

 

My observation is that drivers tend to instinctively defend the car purchase that they've already made. It is certainly true of this site.

 

That, or they are hyper-critical.

The important thing is -- NO MIDDLE GROUND