2 Prius related articles in the NY Times

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(syclone @ Oct 25 2006, 06:45 AM) [snapback]337921[/snapback]</div>

The plug-in hybrid is an excellent concept. It requires relatively little modification and does not require the complete overhaul of existing infrastructure. The infrastructure is the "dongle" and extension cord. Some Prii have already been converted.

Excellent video on the Plug-in hybrid (PHEV) at pluginpartners.org.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(syclone @ Oct 25 2006, 09:45 AM) [snapback]337921[/snapback]</div>

The PHEV article was certainly crap.

Consider this statement in the second paragraph:

"Commercially available batteries will not store enough electricity to move a full-size car more than about 60 or 70 miles, ... "

DarellDD, care to comment on that one? Aside from the fact that it's incorrect. Or maybe a RAV4 is not a full-size car?

Then, regarding PHEV, move on to " ... engineers say there is no prospect of this happening in the near future ... At Toyota, ... the executive engineer for environmental engineering, is horrified."

I though Toyota announced some hazy plans to offer PHEV in the near future.

The, the cost-benefit analysis is classic sleight-of-hand:

"But if the plug-in goes four miles on a kilowatt-hour, and does its first 40 miles on electricity, the incremental cost would be about $20,000, but the saving is only about $15 a year larger than for the Prius-type vehicle. The car could be registered as an antique before the owner earned back the additional investment."

I'm not exactly sure where the figures come from but I believe a passable English translation would be as follows: "If a take AN SUV and convert it to PHEV 40, it'll cost about as much to run as a Prius." I think that's the translation, because that's about what I calculated: a Ford Escape Hybrid with PHEV 30 would be about as efficient as an unmodified Prius. No idea where the $20K figure comes from, as Hymotion is doing Prius mods now for $12.5K US.

The second sleight-of-hand comes from comparing the payback periods in these two sentences:
Regarding hybrids:
" If the hybrid costs an extra $3,500, then the payback period is seven years, the report said."
Regarding PHEV:
"Ricardo Bazzarella, president of Hymotion, a Toronto company that sells conversion kits, said that gasoline would probably have to hit around $5 to get a four-year payback."

Oddly, they quote that from Hymotion, but not any other interesting cost data that Hymotion has put out: current conversion price ($12.5k US), current battery cost ($US 3600), projected next-year conversion price $US5700.

Hybrids good, PHEV baaad.

 

You know, i think the articles had the proper intentions: They wanted to display both the good, and the bad, of the technology. And in that, they succeeded. Plug in hybrids can be great. But their math and numbers don't quite work out... They say that, on a per-mile bases a PHEV cost 6 times less for those EV miles (estimated at 40 miles), but only saves an additional 15 dollars a year. lets do some math:

12.5 cents per mile for the current Prius
2 cents per mile for a PHEV version of the prius in EV mode
12,000 miles traveled per year.
15.00 / 0.02 = 750 miles traveled in EV mode for that 15 dollar savings. Or a mere 6.25%.

I don't know about you guys, but i rarely put more than 40 miles on the car a day. in fact, if you drive 12,000 miles per year, you'll put, on average, 33 miles per day, or within the EV range. Of course, that's just average.

for me my normal weekly schedule puts on about 20 miles per day, with a few larger trips each year. That works out to over 7000 potential miles in EV mode, or a savings of $735 per year for plugging it in.

Anyways, back to the point of this rant.

The first article says some very good things about PHEV's. the energy to move them can be had from multiple sources, which are more abundant than oil. It costs less to drive in EV mode than with a conventional car. The battery tech needed is extremely advanced compared to what we use now. and finally, it's an expensive job converting them.

All good and valid statements, just some of the facts supporting them are blown out of proportion. It just wouldn't make good print unless someone can say "so you can convert this $20k+ car to PHEV for the cost of another $20k+ car?"

For the second article, i really have no substantial complaints. They presented the car for what it is, and pointed out that a comparison between muscle cars and the Prius just isn't practical. they're made for entirely different purposes, and fit into different niche's. Of course, I'm not sure I agree with the "professor of evolutionary psychology" who went on about what the type of car meant to your personality and what you're looking for in the opposite sex.


And on a completely different note, my new Firefox 2.0 spell checker now recognized PHEV and Prius as actual words/terms

 

This quote from the 2nd article:

Sums up precisely how I feel sitting in the Prius at a stoplight. I love the zip it has when accellerating from a dead stop...gotta love that low-end torque! I know I sure do!!