Carmakers asked to hurry up on Plug-in Hybrids

"The three major U.S. automakers, General Motors Corp. (NYSE:GM - news), Ford Motor Co. (NYSE:F - news) and DaimlerChrysler AG (DCXGn.DE) (NYSECX - news), do not see hybrids as the winning alternative to gasoline-fueled vehicles.

GM is in the early stages of plug-in hybrid development and has not committed to any production, spokesman Dave Barthmuss said."

With thinking like this, no wonder GM is going broke.

We visited several Chevrolet dealers over the last week and the lots are full of big SUV's. Lots of them. And the buyers were no where to be found.

 

Of course PG&E would like to see the production of plug-in hybrids...they're looking to expand their market and sell more electricity.

 

LOL. Not if those that buy plug ins also put photovoltaic on their roofs.

 

The following is a press release issued today by The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE).

NEWS RELEASE

Contact: Jim Kliesch, 202-429-8873, x721
Therese Langer, 202-429-8873, x724
Media Contact: Glee Murray, 202-429-0063

Plug-Ins Promising - But Better Batteries, Cleaner Power Plants Essential

Washington, D.C. (September 21, 2006): Plug-in hybrid vehicles could contribute greatly to reducing automobile oil consumption and emissions, but reaching those goals requires major progress in key areas. According to a report released today by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, the environmental and economic appeal of plug-in hybrid vehicles will depend heavily upon cleaner power sources and further battery advances. The report, "Plug-In Hybrids: An Environmental and Economic Outlook," examines the benefits of plug-ins relative to today's hybrids. It finds that greenhouse gas emissions reductions associated with a plug-in powered by today's electric grid would be about 15% on average across the nation, ranging from 32% using California electricity to zero using Upper Midwest electricity.

Plug-ins' oil savings could be quite large. Battery size and cost rise steeply with the amount of fuel savings, however, suggesting that plug-ins with modest electric-only range will appear first. According to report co-author James Kliesch, the "electric-then-gasoline" depiction of plug-in operation is not realistic and has contributed to overstatements of the fuel savings potential of plug-ins in the popular media. "Achieving adequate battery lifetimes and minimizing battery costs will require a vehicle control logic that turns on the internal combustion engine when extra power is needed, even within the 'electric-only' range of the vehicle," said Kliesch. The ACEEE report estimates fuel savings relative to today's hybrids of 30% for a plug-in with a 20-mile electric-only range and 50% for a 40-mile range.

With high volumes and a drop in nickel prices, the cost of the nickel-metal hydride batteries used in hybrids at present could fall quite dramatically. To reach an appropriate balance of size, weight, and power for a long-range plug-in, however, researchers' bets are on lithium-ion batteries, which still need technological breakthroughs to reach commercial production for plug-in applications. Projections of long-term costs for plug-in batteries imply that the incremental cost of a plug-in could match that of a hybrid today.

"Plug-ins represent a major step toward the electrification of the transportation sector, a transition that has tremendous potential to help solve some big problems," said report co-author Therese Langer. "But realizing this potential means maintaining an all-out effort on advanced batteries, cleaning up electric power generators, and adopting policies that drive efficiency technologies by requiring a sustained ramp-up of average fuel economy."

"Plug-In Hybrids: An Environmental and Economic Outlook" is available for free download at http://aceee.org/pubs/t061.htm or a hard copy can be purchased for $16 plus $5 postage and handling from ACEEE Publications, 1001 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 801, Washington, D.C. 20036-5525, phone: 202-429-0063, fax: 202-429-0193, e-mail: [email protected]

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy is an independent, nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing energy efficiency as a means of promoting both economic prosperity and environmental protection. For information about ACEEE and its programs, publications, and conferences, visit http://aceee.org.

 

Eh... not so fast Pinto Girl. Plug-In Hybrids might increase electricity demand, but if they were expected to be plugged in mostly during the day (rather than charged overnight as expected), you wouldn't be seeing this petition in the mail.

It's in our best interest to make use of night-time electricity where possible, because it means constant sources of energy like wind power can produce useful energy 24x7, rather than being installed to feed peak times, and produce waste energy the rest of the day. Power companies encourage the consumer to think about that by pricing energy differently based on when you use it, but ultimately it's to everyone's benefit - not just the power companies - to have more stable demand throughout the day.

And obviously Plug-In hybrids are better for the air.

Let's applaud businesses when they do something that's good for the planet, not bash them. Bravo, PG&E.

Oh - one more thing. Although I agree more clean sources of electricity are important, I'd really like to see the statistics on owners of hybrids paired up with who pays the extra 3-5% (depending on where you live) for cleaner energy. For example, I own a Prius. In Cambridge I paid an extra 5% to NStar in exchange for all of my energy coming from renewable sources. In Los Angeles I pay an extra 3% for the same thing.

How many Plug-In Hybrid owners wouldn't pay that extra 3-5%, really? If 99% of Plug-In Hybrid owners pay the extra % then that would cause a boom in extra renewable funds, and in renewable power demands. The market would cause new renewable sources to explode on its own.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SoopahMan @ Sep 22 2006, 06:20 AM) [snapback]323299[/snapback]</div>

Good concept.

Poor plan.

Consider how much some are still fighting hybrids entirely and others are endorsing the type that don't support the ability to take advantage of a plug. The petition should actually be for providing the platform first. In other words, build more "full" hybrids. Skipping that essential step by jumping directly to the plug-in option makes a terrible business case, far too much of a risk for the current market.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SoopahMan @ Sep 22 2006, 06:20 AM) [snapback]323299[/snapback]</div>

I pay the extra $6/month to Seattle City Light for their Green Up program. I think it's a great deal! And I encourage others to participate too.

 

I applaud your social conscience Festus, but have to admit I consider the vast majority of 'green energy' programs offered by utilities a fraud.

They typically charge a premium for clean energy* THAT IS ALREADY IN THE GRID MIX, so your extra payment does not add one watt-second more of green energy, or decrease dirty energy one iota. I should also point out that the utility's definition of green energy includes nuke, which may not align with your own.

I spent my green dollars on the Prius, intend to spend more for residential PV, and hope to invest in community wind power. Practical results today, I say.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Sep 22 2006, 02:14 PM) [snapback]323479[/snapback]</div>

With Utah Power they guarantee to buy 1 extra unit of Wind Power for each unit you choose to buy from them each month. Seems to be a pretty damned good deal for me!