article: Plug-in Hybrid

Tweaked hybrid gets 80 miles per gallon

By Tim Molloy Associated Press

CORTE MADERA, Calif. -- Politicians and automakers say a car that can both reduce greenhouse gases and free America from its reliance on foreign oil is years or even decades away.

Ron Gremban says such a car is parked in his garage.

It looks like a typical Toyota Prius hybrid, but in the trunk sits an 80 miles-per-gallon secret -- a stack of 18 brick-size batteries that boosts the car's high mileage with an extra electrical charge so it can burn even less fuel.

Gremban, an electrical engineer and committed environmentalist, spent several months and $3,000 tinkering with his car.

Like all hybrids, his Prius increases fuel efficiency by harnessing small amounts of electricity generated during braking and coasting. The extra batteries let him store extra power by plugging the car into a wall outlet at his home in this San Francisco suburb -- all for about a quarter.

He's part of a small but growing movement. "Plug-in" hybrids aren't yet cost-efficient, but some of the dozen known experimental models have gotten up to 250 mpg.

They have support not only from environmentalists but also from conservative foreign-policy hawks who insist Americans fuel terrorism through their gas guzzling.

And while the technology has existed for three decades, automakers are beginning to take notice, too.

So far, DaimlerChrysler AG is the only company that has committed to building its own plug-in hybrids, quietly pledging to make up to 40 vans for U.S. companies. But Toyota Motor Corp. officials who initially frowned on people altering their cars now say they may be able to learn from them.

"They're like the hot rodders of yesterday who did everything to soup up their cars. It was all about horsepower and bling-bling, lots of chrome and accessories," said Cindy Knight, a Toyota spokeswoman. "Maybe the hot rodders of tomorrow are the people who want to get in there and see what they can do about increasing fuel economy."

The extra batteries let Gremban drive for 20 miles with a 50-50 mix of gas and electricity. Even after the car runs out of power from the batteries and switches to the standard hybrid mode, it gets the typical Prius fuel efficiency of around 45 mpg. As long as Gremban doesn't drive too far in a day, he says, he gets 80 mpg.

"The value of plug-in hybrids is they can dramatically reduce gasoline usage for the first few miles every day," Gremban said. "The average for people's usage of a car is somewhere around 30 to 40 miles per day. During that kind of driving, the plug-in hybrid can make a dramatic difference."

Backers of plug-in hybrids acknowledge that the electricity to boost their cars generally comes from fossil fuels that create greenhouse gases, but they say that process still produces far less pollution than oil. They also note that electricity could be generated cleanly from solar power.

Gremban rigged his car to promote the nonprofit CalCars Initiative, a San Francisco Bay area-based volunteer effort that argues automakers could mass produce plug-in hybrids at a reasonable price.

But Toyota and other car companies say they are worried about the cost, convenience and safety of plug-in hybrids -- and note that consumers haven't embraced all-electric cars because of the inconvenience of recharging them like giant cell phones.

Automakers have spent millions of dollars telling motorists that hybrids don't need to be plugged in, and don't want to confuse the message.

Nonetheless, plug-in hybrids are starting to get the backing of prominent hawks like former CIA Director James Woolsey and Frank Gaffney, President Reagan's undersecretary of defense. They have joined Set America Free, a group that wants the government to spend $12 billion over four years on plug-in hybrids, alternative fuels and other measures to reduce foreign oil dependence.

Gaffney, who heads the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy, said Americans would embrace plug-ins if they understood arguments from him and others who say gasoline contributes to oil-rich Middle Eastern governments that support terrorism.

"The more we are consuming oil that either comes from places that are bent on our destruction or helping those who are ... the more we are enabling those who are trying to kill us," Gaffney said.

DaimlerChrysler spokesman Nick Cappa said plug-in hybrids are ideal for companies with fleets of vehicles that can be recharged at a central location at night. He declined to name the companies buying the vehicles and said he did not know the vehicles' mileage or cost, or when they would be available. On the Net:

CalCars Initiative: calcars.org

Reply to
Jason
Loading thread data ...

that's one of the dumbest articles i've ever seen. where do these idiots thing the "plug in" energy comes from? just pull out the gas motor & replace entirely with batteries! then it's an infinite mpg vehicle. thanks for the laugh.

Reply to
jim beam

difference."

What's dumb is your failure to consider the actual costs here.

It appears he spends 25 cents to fully charge his car's batteries. Then he gets 20 miles of driving using the battery-gasoline combo, achieving presumably "80 miles per gallon of gasoline." So 20/80 = 1/4 gallon of gasoline was used to drive 20 miles. At $2.40 per gallon, he paid 60 cents for that 1/4 gallon. Overall cost to travel 20 miles with this car: 85 cents.

By contrast, with my 40 mpg conventional Honda Civic, I pay $1.20 . He's paying only 85/120 = ~ 70% of what I pay. Those who drive cars and "trucks" getting only 27.5 MPG (the CAFE standard for passenger cars?) pay $1.75 for the 20 mile trip. Mr. Hybrid Engineer (in the article) pays less than half this.

Reply to
Elle

what's dumb is contending you have an 80mpg vehicle when you don't. may as well just go for the big kahuna and eliminate the gas entirely.

Reply to
jim beam

The problem with electric (only) vehicles was that people and companies worried that the electric vehicles would run out of power and would have to be towed home or to a place were the drivers could plug them in. With a "Plug-in" hybrid car--the people and companies that own them would NEVER have to worry about these issues.

Reply to
Jason

"jim beam" wrote

Read the article.

Reply to
Elle

Have any of these hackers crash tested their vehicles?

I wonder what a rear end collision into a rear end filled with wet cell lead-acid batteries would do?

Also, where exactly is the electricity for these things supposed to come from? My home electric bill in the summer here in Northern California already is getting close to $500/month when the heat waves hit, and that is with solar energy taking care of all of our domestic hot water.

I really do not want to buy expensive electricity from PG&E for my automobiles as well!

John

Reply to
John Horner

John Horner wrote in news:qTdMe.6594$1b5.4941@trnddc05:

The guy in the article only used LA cells for initial tests;he then switched to NiMH. Others are using Li-ion cells.

Safe,clean nuclear power plants. Time to build more of them.

It would be a lot cheaper than buying gasoline.

Reply to
Jim Yanik

Ever heard of the nuclear waste problem?

Reply to
Brian Stell

John, You do NOT have to ever buy a hybrid vehicle. You did NOT mention how far you drive each day or how much you pay for gas each month. If you live close to where you work, I don't think that anyone would advise you to buy a hybrid vehicle since they cost much more then a non-hybrid vehicle. I don't do much driving so I will never buy a hybrid vehicle due to the cost. However, if I lived 50 miles from where I worked, I would buy a hybrid vehicle and plug it in every night since the price of gas is going higher and higher and higher. Jason

Reply to
Jason

And where is the "safe and clean" nuclear waste supposed to go, please?

formatting link
- "Butone has to plan storage and protection for the public on a time-scale ofthousands of years."

Reply to
tomb

ok, crash test someone using lithium batteries. I'll personally take hydrogen over that.

Reply to
flobert

Brian Stell wrote in news:JpoMe.1682$Z% snipped-for-privacy@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com:

Yes,one more part that has been stifled and progress halted by the anti- nuke idiots.

Reply to
Jim Yanik

flobert wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Why? Please explain exactly what Lithium-ion batteries will do in a crash.

Reply to
Jim Yanik

As has been well documented with Rc aircraft and especialy boats...

When puntured, they have a tendency to catch fire, or explode. reason is simple - LITHIUM. Lithium + water --> lithium hydroxide + hydrogen + ENERGY

Admitedly, if you put a piece of lithium in water, it just melts and fizzes, but its also at or below room temp - a battery isn't. Also, unlike potassium, and sometimes sodium, it doesn't get hot enough ina nd of itself to make the hydrogen produced light. HOWEVER batterys do get warm, there's lots of electrical sparts, and metal on metal. At least a hydrogen tank is design to rupture safe, and, being a gas, will dissipate the longer it goes without a spark. no so with lithium

- it constantly generates more hydrogen (moisture in the air, donchaknow).

Anyway, thats just what i've read in the dangers of the battery type in crash impacts. YMMV

Reply to
flobert

Would you like a nuclear waste dump in your town?

Would you recommend living near a nuclear waste dump to your child, nephew, pregant relative?

If you answer yes to these then more power to you but you'll be the first person I've met that does.

Reply to
Brian Stell

If the stuff is properly immobilized and shielded, why not?

Reply to
Doug McCrary

The irony is that there are many nuclear waste dumps across the nation right now because of this attitude. Rather than sensibly storing the waste where it will be less likely to be a problem, we have it distributed all over the country. The fear of nuclear waste baffles me. You can easily detect it and deal with it. The effects are known and understood. Many of the same people who are so afraid of nuclear energy and waste don't realize that they have much more hazardous products nearby that they will never even know about. I grew up in the midst of chemical plants in Louisiana and would trade a nuclear plant or storage facility for that in a second. You can detect radiation easily. Do you know what you are breathing as a result of the nearby plants and even the chemicals in use in your home? The relative environmental impact of nuclear energy compared to even the cleanest of fossil fuel generation or petro-chemical production is so small that I have to wonder about the intelligence of those who are so petrified by it. Geez, even many of the products that are produced and used everyday in the chemical industry are more dangerous and impact more people than nuclear waste.

Leonard

Reply to
Leonard Caillouet

How does that compare to a thin steel can full of 20 gallons of gasoline?

Reply to
Steve Bigelow

it really depends. here, we don't "handle" it, we just store it. if we dealt with it properly, like everyone else, we'd reprocess it. so if it were reprocessed, no problem. if it were properly stored, sure. improper storage is your real concern, but again, a lot of fear is based on misinformation.

technically, you get more radiation from coal power station fly ash. which is used for cinder block. which builds homes. and from granite. which is used in homes. there are many sources of background ratiation, and many parts of the country, where humans happily live where background is much higher than any emissions from your friendly local storage facility.

it's nuts to freak without the full facts. sure, there's a lot of misinformation around, on both sides, but the facts are plain: radiation is part of our existance on this planet. we cannot avoid it. it makes no sense to freak about the local power or storage facility if we're getting higher doses from our basement that is full of radon & from the cosmic rays that soak us every day of our lives. check out a bubble chamber some time. it's just a foaming cauldron of vapor trails left by the background radiation that is with us constantly.

Reply to
jim beam

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.