Hybrid Cars -- a scam

[Derek 2.0]

I said polluting or Earthraping. Hydro produces no GHG, but the damage to the ecosystems up and downstream from dams is substantial.

But I’m talking big picture……Does a large V8 SUV have a greater negative impact on the ecosystem then a Tesla charged with Hydro?

[Derek 2.0]

The other thing people ignore is that hybrid and electric cars can make use of off-peak production, and would also represent a significant grid-storage component. Even if electric cars saw widespread adoption we would not necessarily have to build a single new plant to power them.

That’s a good point……We had the charging port installed in our garage, but the car does come with adaptor that plugs into a regular 110 wall socket….We figured the actually increase in our bi-monthly hydro bill is equivalent to running our clothes dryer twice as often……still far cheaper then feeding the Caddy 92...

Never mind the fact that electric motors produce a much more utilitarian torque curve. In most applications a 10hp electric motor can replace a 15hp gasoline motor. And they only have a single moving part compared to a ICE that has hundreds of them. Once perfected these engines will last much longer, and require a lot less maintenance and repairs.

I was sceptical at first, thinking electric cars would only be slightly better then golf carts, but our’s has over 400hp and has not a problem handling the sea-sky hwy..

[Derek 2.0]

I'm jealous! Sweet car... and no one can hear you coming!

That's how my wife explains the two speeding tickets she's got with it.......the car clearly need sound effects

[Bonam]

I was sceptical at first, thinking electric cars would only be slightly better then golf carts, but our’s has over 400hp and has not a problem handling the sea-sky hwy..

Now if they could just get the price of a reasonable model down to the 20-40k range that a typical person might consider buying.

[TimG]

Now if they could just get the price of a reasonable model down to the 20-40k range that a typical person might consider buying.

The gap between technically possible and practically useful is the most difficult. Electric cars have huge disadvantages such as the charging time, lack of emergency refueling options and a significant trade off between range and use of creature comforts like heating/air conditioning. These disadvantages mean they would have to be significantly cheaper that a combustion engine vehicle before the majority of drivers would consider them. The fact that many governments seem intent on increasing the cost of electricity as much as possible means that rising oil prices are not enough to close the gap. Oil would have to rise faster than electricity prices to make a difference. Edited June 13, 2014 by TimG

[The_Squid]

That's how my wife explains the two speeding tickets she's got with it.......the car clearly need sound

What kind of range are you getting? I see there are charging stations going up more and more for electrics.

Thanks for the classic Cosby. Hilarious.

Now if they could just get the price of a reasonable model down to the 20-40k range that a typical person might consider buying.

It's a luxury brand.... That's like asking for an inexpensive Ferrari.... Not a chance!

[Derek 2.0]

Now if they could just get the price of a reasonable model down to the 20-40k range that a typical person might consider buying.

It’s not cheap, with tax and some interest on our line of credit, we figure it was just shy of 130k…..With that said, when dirt burning cars first came out, I’d imagine they were comparatively expensive….I’m sure they’ll come down eventually.

But even with the cheaper ones on the market today, you have to factor the cost of recharging versus gas over the life of the car (much like the F-35 )

[TimG]

It’s not cheap, with tax and some interest on our line of credit, we figure it was just shy of 130k…..With that said, when dirt burning cars first came out, I’d imagine they were comparatively expensive….I’m sure they’ll come down eventually.

The first cars were electric. They lost out to the combustion engine because despite the fact that there was no existing infrastructure to compete with because of range and refueling issues. 100+ years later the problems still exist.

[The_Squid]

The first cars were electric. They lost out to the combustion engine because despite the fact that there was no existing infrastructure to compete with because of range and refueling issues. 100+ years later the problems still exist.

The problem only exists outside of cities. Most people don't drive very far on a daily basis.

[Derek 2.0]

What kind of range are you getting? I see there are charging stations going up more and more for electrics.

My wife’s return daily commute is ~60km and she hooks it up to the charger usually Friday night with ~40-50% left on the batteries……Yeah there are charging stations popping up, but with the adaptor you can charge (much slower though) into any regular outlet……..For example, we spent a week over on the Island visiting family (and showing it off) and topped it up (when it got to about 30% charge) for the trip home…..It’s quite impressive, but I do expect the batteries to wear and reduce performance with age.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Derek 2.0

[Derek 2.0]

The problem only exists outside of cities. Most people don't drive very far on a daily basis.

Exactly……..we have a Tesla and a 3500 diesel pick-up….best of both worlds, and I agree to some extent with Tim, I wouldn’t (yet) want an electric pick-up to go hunting up in the interior……But for a commuter, grocery picker upper, Sunday driving, electric in my view is the future.

[TimG]

The problem only exists outside of cities. Most people don't drive very far on a daily basis.

It is not the daily average that matters when people are looking at making the largest purchase they will make other than a home. Their occasional needs for out of town road trips which will tip the scales towards a combustion engine. A significantly lower cost is required to get people to put up with the limitations of an electric vehicle.

[Moonlight Graham]

Where do you get those numbers? Everything I see stated about the Yaris is closer to 6 L/100km.

http://www.toyota.ca/toyota/en/vehicles/yaris-hatchback/features/benefits/performance

"When you're talking performance, you also have to look at how a vehicle performs at the pumps. Here as well, Yaris Hatchback truly shines – with a fuel efficiency rating of 6.6L/100 km city, 5.2L/100 km highway (manual), or 6.8L/100 km city, 5.5L/100 km highway (automatic).^"

He is talking about the UK version which appears to have a different way to be measure:

http://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/yaris-specs-prices

On the same page you can see the hybrid about 40% better.

Yes Tim is right, I got the numbers from here: http://www.toyota-europe.com/cars/new_cars/yaris/index.tmex

Europe is where August1991 drove the car, plus i don't think they have Yaris Hybrids in North America, at least that I could find.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Moonlight Graham

[GostHacked]

I said polluting or Earthraping. Hydro produces no GHG, but the damage to the ecosystems up and downstream from dams is substantial.

The last one they build in China displaced over a million people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Gorges_Dam

As of June 2008, China relocated 1.24 million residents (ending with Gaoyang in Hubei Province),[105][106] about 1.5% of the province's 60.3 million and Chongqing Municipality's 31.44 million population.[107] About 140,000 residents were relocated to other provinces.[108]

Relocation was completed on July 22, 2008.[106] Some 2007 reports claimed that Chongqing Municipality will encourage an additional four million people to move away from the dam to the main urban area of Chongqing by 2020.[109][110][111] However, the municipal government explained that the relocation is due to urbanization, rather than the dam, and people involved included other areas of the municipality.[112]

Allegedly, funds for relocating 13,000 farmers around Gaoyang disappeared after being sent to the local government, leaving residents without compensation.[113

That does not even take into account the animal and plant life that was destroyed or displaced.

[Wilber]

Hmm whatever method they are using to measure must be pretty wrong and useless since they never get anywhere close to that kind of efficiency in practice. Even reaching the efficiency claimed on the Canadian or US sites (which is supposed to be a real life fuel efficiency) is far from assured.

A lot of diesels seem to for some reason. Hybrids and gas models don't.

[August1991]

I dont think your experience is geniune at all. And your juvenile usage of terms like "scam" and "fraud" suggest to me you already had your mind made up going in. Its pretty clear that you havent done any of the analysis and hard work that would be required to make any credible conclusions about hybrid cars.

dre, I accepted the "upgrade" in part because I was curious (and also because I didn't like the alternatives). I approached the car with skepticsm but an open mind. The experience convinced me that hybrids are a scam.

(I drove the car for about 2400 km and my average gasoline consumption was about 5.2 l / 100 km, or about the same as I would have with a diesel engine. This is real driving in a real car and not invented measures.)

The scam? Government regulators are subsidizing such nonsense, and some foolish people are willing to give their money away. "There's a sucker born every minute... " As I say, it's a scam.

[Michael Hardner]

(I drove the car for about 2400 km and my average gasoline consumption was about 5.2 l / 100 km, or about the same as I would have with a diesel engine. As I say, it's a scam.

More than a scam - if the published gas consumption numbers are false then it's a (scary cue) CONSPIRACY !

[GostHacked]

More than a scam - if the published gas consumption numbers are false then it's a (scary cue) CONSPIRACY !

False advertizing and false claims. That can end you up in court with a huge class action lawsuit. IF hybrids are no better than regular gas or diesel vehicle, they need to stop making the claims they do. Unless you think companies don't fudge their numbers at all. Another kick to the ballsack is that these cars are priced higher, and you also have an extra fee of charging the vehicle at times.

I am also wondering why the price of gas is going up based on conflict in Iraq when the US gets less than 10% of it's oil from the region. If you want to talk conspiracies. But when the price of oil falls, the gas price stays the same. What gives??!

[Derek 2.0]

Saw this:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/13/tesla-elon-musk-electric-cars-patent-technology

Tesla CEO, Elon Musk, promised on Thursday to give away the company’s entire patent portfolio, as long as they promised not to engage courtroom battles over intellectual property.

“If we clear a path to the creation of compelling electric vehicles, but then lay intellectual property landmines behind us to inhibit others, we are acting in a manner contrary to that goal,” Musk wrote in a blog on the company’s website.

This further reaffirms my opinion of Musk…….I hope he does become a zillionaire, and receives the international recognition that he deserves….The next Gates or Jobs perhaps?

And this:

The decision opens the door to more collaboration with Tesla, which is already making electric systems for Daimler and Toyota. Other automakers using Tesla’s technology could potentially share the cost of Tesla’s charging stations, for example. And more charging stations could entice sceptical buyers to try electric cars.

And this also further reaffirms my other belief that environmental progress will be spearheaded by private industry and seconded when needed, by governmental seeding……

[TimG]

This further reaffirms my opinion of Musk……

Musk is the poster boy for crony capitalism. Much of the money that Telsa makes comes from the credits that other car companies are forced to purchase because of arbitrary rules set by the government. Telsa has successfully convinced the government to manipulate the rules in its favor which further increases the profits that Telsa makes from rent seeking.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/12/analysis-tesla-may-have-made-over-100-million-off-the-carb-enabled-battery-swap-scheme/

His work with SpaceX is mre impressive but it is was only made possible because of development contracts with NASA (i.e. SpaceX is selling tech that NASA paid to develop). But this is not a bad thing since getting the R&D out of government agencies has likely improved efficiency but it still means the SpaceX could not exist without taxpayer dollars.

Edited June 15, 2014 by TimG

[Wilber]

More than a scam - if the published gas consumption numbers are false then it's a (scary cue) CONSPIRACY !

All hybrids are not equal and there are several different versions of the technology called hybrid. Many do get much better city mileage than the equivelent conventional vehicle but not so much on the highway. The number of Prius being used as taxis is a testiment to that. Whether government should be involved in subsidizing them is another question.

[Michael Hardner]

Many do get much better city mileage than the equivelent conventional vehicle but not so much on the highway.

But are the published numbers FALSE ?

[Wilber]

But are the published numbers FALSE ?

Because almost no one drives the same way as the tests are done, very few vehicles get their rated mileage so the question is, more false than what? Government would have to do their own test and see if their numbers match. The US did this with some Hyundai's and Kia's last year and the result was big fines and some class action suits.

[Derek 2.0]

Musk is the poster boy for crony capitalism. Much of the money that Telsa makes comes from the credits that other car companies are forced to purchase because of arbitrary rules set by the government. Telsa has successfully convinced the government to manipulate the rules in its favor which further increases the profits that Telsa makes from rent seeking.

Doesn’t successful capitalism today require pressure put on Government?

His work with SpaceX is mre impressive but it is was only made possible because of development contracts with NASA (i.e. SpaceX is selling tech that NASA paid to develop). But this is not a bad thing since getting the R&D out of government agencies has likely improved efficiency but it still means the SpaceX could not exist without taxpayer dollars.

I’ve no qualms with taxpayer money being used to seed the development of both space and “Green” technology……I see both as a direct investment in ones own national security.

[cybercoma]

Because almost no one drives the same way as the tests are done, very few vehicles get their rated mileage so the question is, more false than what? Government would have to do their own test and see if their numbers match. The US did this with some Hyundai's and Kia's last year and the result was big fines and some class action suits.

But are the cars tested in the same way? That's what's important. It allows us to compare the fuel efficiency of vehicles, all other things being equal. The mileage it gets in the test might not be the same mileage you get, but then the mileage you get won't be the same as the mileage I get. Eliminating the variability between drivers, geography, etc. and just comparing the vehicles to each other will tell you the vehicle specific variability in mileages.