Featured Plug-In Hybrids No Greener, Or Even Worse, Than ICE Models, Study Finds

i'm moving back to a nice comfortable escalade

 

This has been discussed when other outlets ran it.

Here we go:
BBC News: Plug-in hybrids are a 'wolf in sheep's clothing'... | PriusChat

 

wasn't it just about a month or so ago that another pretend journalist broke this same nugget of lame mis-information?
that's ok ... it never gets old.
.

 

Was a local journalist recently tested a PHEV Outlander - yes, great when he could plug it in. Then he used it for a period as "a Hybrid". Very disappointing - averaged 10 l/100km. I have a friend with a RAV4 Hybrid - she tells me she's been getting 4.8 (best) and up to 5.5 l/100km. The Hybrid used nearly ½ what the PHEV did.

 

The latest Outlander PHEV has a more efficient engine and slightly bigger battery, but it hasn't gotten to all markets yet. Those still have the old, non-Atkinson engine under the hood.

 

No, we've had the Atkinson engine here for quite a while.

A road test in February said "The former 2.0-litre petrol engine-generator has been replaced by a 2.4-litre, making 94kW and 199Nm. It’s 7kW and 13Nm more powerful to help with towing up to 1500kg and tackling hills, but also capable of similar fuel efficiency thanks to a variable-valve-timing system that reduces fuel burn by switching between Otto and Atkinson cycles."

 

According to his estimates, in order for a plug-in hybrid to efficiently replace conventional ICE models (in Germany at least), its all-electric range would need to be between 80 km and 90 km (50-56 miles), instead of just 30 km to 60 km (18-37 miles).​

I throughly agree! I've owned a Prius Prime, 25 mi EV, and continue to own a BMW i3-REx, 72 mi EV. The BMW made the Prius into 'driveway art' as the BMW was a '10 stop' EV in Huntsville AL. In contrast, the Prime was a '3 stop' car before it needed charging. We traded in the Prius Prime for our Tesla Model 3 with a 240 mi EV range (new in 2019.) Today, the Model 3 has ~232-236 mile EV range.

Bob Wilson

 

dang - there were high hopes that mitsu upgrades would do much better. What a disappointment.
.

 

Makes you wonder why there seems to be such a concerted effort to anti-sell PHEVs.

 

Because they negate hydrogen's advantages.

These studies are valid, but they apply to Europe only. Then the issue isn't with the PHEVs, but with how Europe handles them on efficiency and emission labels, which incentives are coupled to. WLTP is better than NEDC, but still has results farther removed from actual real world use than EPA. Then they don't list hybrid and EV ratings separate, but do a combine number that gives even inefficient PHEVs a CO2 rating low enough for incentives.

 

At the last glance, solar was very popular in many parts of Europe. Seems to be the case gleaned from the op article that even rooftop PV recharging doesn't add to to the possibility of european efficiency/ Environmentality.

.

 

Because they are working with car test results not based in the reality of how PHEVs are driven, and the higher CO2 emissions they are complaining about come from the cars' engines getting used more often than those results predict. It isn't the grid they are worried about as BEVs would also be catching the complaint.

Remember how the very first year window sticker for the Volt had a MPGe value for EV and gas modes combined? The EPA got it by picking a distance beyond the car's EV range for the calculation, but it was obvious that such scenario would apply to very few owners. Europe is using such a set distance today. The published MPG and carbon emission numbers are from starting fully charged over a set distance.

So it is easy for the manufacturer to get a PHEV's carbon emission low enough to qualify for incentives; just have enough EV range to cancel out the needed carbon emissions for the engine being used on that calculation. Earlier European brand PHEVs probably had such short EV ranges, because that was all they needed to qualify at the time.

If the PHEV's miles are mostly EV, the car doesn't have a problem meeting or beating its carbon emissions. Add more hybrid miles, and they quickly exceed them as most drivers won't get the WLTP results. Then many places in Europe don't have easy access to private parking, which is why it seems they are doing more on the curbside charging front, so PHEVs aren't being charged all the time.

On top of that, incentives include tax perks that are attractive to businesses. So they buy PHEVs for business cars, and give them to employees regardless of whether they can regularly charge, if at all. Those employees might even have a company gas card, giving them no incentive to make use of EV.

The problem isn't the PHEVs. It is how they report the efficiency and emission test results. Then tying incentives to buy PHEVs to those results without having incentives to actually charge them.

 

I don't know how you figure that that the anti-selling of PHEVs is happening from developers of HFCEVs. I've seen no evidence to suggest this.

 

That was a non-serious response, because supporters of HFCEV cars love pointing out the faster refuel time, but always seem to forget that PHEVs exist.

Really, it's groups concerned with the carbon emissions. Greenpeace sponsored one report for instance. Then these reports mostly call for fixing the incentives, not banning PHEVs.

 

When I saw this I wondered if there was a legit test ever run on real world use hybrids. Not plug-ins. Just a simple hybrid. Since there is a lot of pollution at start up as the cats aren't warm and since the engine starts and stops a lot more than a simple ice...

For example, how cold does it have to get before there is a crossover between better and worse. Or is there that crossover?

And this is a serious question posted by someone whose last two cars are hybrids and who is about to buy another one.

 

As usually I am probably the last one to the table and am missing something.

However doesn't the title and findings of this study defy physics and common sense!

A vehicle that can run on electric energy stored in the battery then switches over to ICE after 26 miles pollutes more than a vehicle that runs completely on gas?

We live in a small city and our PHEV runs on electric almost at all times. It would use gas only on infrequent long trips.

Because of Covid I believe at the end of this year will will have used less than 25 gallons of gas for 2020. We drive the vehicle daily but usually never far enough for the ICE to turn on. This study just doesn't seems to pass the common sense test to me.

I realize the study says if it is not regularly plugged in, which to me negates the study. Like most PHEV drivers I know our vehicle is plugged in at all times and only unplugged to drive.

It is similar to a study that would find hunters who don't put bullets in their guns have less hunting success that hunters who do use bullets. The appropriate study might be Why does someone buy a gun and go hunting without putting bullets in the gun

I think a more appropriate study would be Why would someone buy a PHEV if they don't intend to plug it in?

 

The start up pollution is mostly a factor of how cold the engine is. Once up to temperature, a hybrid engine isn't going to drop down to cold until it has been parked for a some time.

Catalytic converters warm up to operating temp pretty quickly. The exhaust is quite hot. I think Toyota claims 45 seconds. Then they retain that heat quite well. Somewhere in the owner's manual, there is a warning about parking over dry grass because it might catch fire from the heat alone.

The engine will be shutting off during the EPA test, and others have done emission testing. The cars have been shown to be low polluting.

PHEVs have been bought with no intention of plugging in just for the HOV access in California.

These studies are looking at Europe though. There PHEVs get tax breaks over multiple years for business use. So they get bought as company cars, and given to employees without consideration for whether they have easy access to charging. To make things worse, the company may give the employee a gas card without a way of reimbursing the worker for charging fees.

Then Toyota isn't has big there as in the US. Many of the PHEVs are likely a domestic brand. Those we get here are 30mpg or lower when in hybrid mode. Compare Side-by-Side

So a PHEV could very easily emit more CO2 in hybird mode than a small diesel or even gas car available there.

 

We've owned two PHEV:

• 2017 Prius Prime - once the engine comes on, it will reach catalytic converter temperature in ~45 seconds (measured!) But then it runs at least another 2-3 minutes to bring the coolant temperature up. But the 25 mi EV range meant it was a "3 stop" car in Huntsville AL.
• 2014 BMW i3-Rex - once turned on, the engine continues to run until either the car is turned off or it runs out of the 2.3 gallons of gas (after coding.) With 72 miles EV range, it is a "10 stop" car in Huntsville AL.

We traded out Prius Prime in for a Std Rng Plus Model 3 so it no longer burns gas for us. I'm ambivalent about PHEV provided it has at least 72 mile EV range. That is enough range to handle our urban trips. But under 72 miles, especially 25 miles, should be banned.

Bob Wilson

 

Seems like a lot of the data from the test came from Germany, the Champions at "fixing" the results, ah la VW. Their findings are what they hope to find. What a coincidence That was my immediate suspicion. Call me 3 shades of Jade, but they've already fooled all of us once.
.