NOV 13

http://www.energyislife.org/?p=52 ;D

http://www.energyislife.org/?p=52&lang_view=en ;)

Start with a Prius.
Then add a battery, a plug, and some wires, ala A123 Systems. Problem solved.

Or at least as soon as possible. We certainly don't want to wait another three years.

If Tesla can expand the battery range from 220 to 500 miles, and be able to re-charged it in less than 1 hour, they will dominated the market.

How much does a plug in hybrid conversion cost on a Prius today?

Seriously, the engineering problem of a mass market EV is significant. I think Toyota could probably make a plug-in hybrid with a pure electric range of 50 miles relatively quickly (1-1.5 years) as the battery pack wouldn't have to be as huge and expensive as Tesla's who has a VERY large battery pack in their car already - its nearly 1/2 ton! A 500 mile EV range just won't happen unless we see energy density double or triple in batteries.

However, if you want them to go for a 300 mile range, then you've just sent the cost through the ceiling (even with mass production).

We need to realize that we have to change the way we use cars (obviously driving less is good), but plugging your car in a night needs to become as much of a habit as locking the doors.

I'm not saying this isn't possible in the future, I'm saying with the technology out there today meeting all of those demands is fiscally impractical (unless families can afford to buy Tesla Roadsters as family cars).

Battery cost shouldn't be a prohibitive factor in high end luxury models. I don't understand why there arent some $50,000 plus models on the road already unless the car companies just want to kill them. These cars would be cool, fast, convenient and be a conversation piece to those who can afford higher price cars. Mass production of higher cost models would help bring the cost down for everyone. Why arent all the celebrities who talk about the environment demanding these cars?

so someone should explain to me how plugging a car in makes it greener than a hybrid. to my understanding, both require a high carbon count, one from a gasoline engine, and the other from a power plant. sure there are hydro-electric power plants, but aren't they known to impede fish migration and pollute in other ways? Plus all those power lines had to be put up somehow, not with a hybrid Prius I guarentee. People drive back and forth to the power plant too, don't they? so it just seems like a transfer instead of actually having a smaller carbon footprint. where have I misunderstood?

Fieldmedic,
Obviously such dramatically wide-tallying numbers are hard to come up with and argue concretely... but the idea I've come to believe in about plug-ins (and EVs in general) is that distributed energy production from fossil fuels (combustion in each car) is at least theoretically less carbon-efficient than centralized production (power plants) where stack-scrubbing and other technologies can be employed.

More long-term, however, as the EV infrastructure grows, it creates a pathway to a solar-, fusion-, or other renewables-based energy supply to replace all of the carbon in the equation. For example: if someone tomorrow made a tremendous breakthrough that allowed them to bring focus fusion or some other radical technology to market in 5 years that produces virtually unlimited clean energy, we would still have a ba-jillion gas-burning cars on the planet that would keep chugging away. If those cars are replaced by electrics or Plug-in hybrids, we're better set up for the "post-fossil" energy revolution.

I have no proof that it's better, just a vision and a hope. I think only the scientists have much more to go on than that these days! :-)

DIY'ing a hybrid into a plugin wouldn't work well. I don't have the numbers, but I don't think a Prius could go more than 10-20 miles on a full charge. This is because they designed the batteries to be as small as practically possible--plug in hybrid use was never part of the idea.

Fieldmedic:

The plug-in has the advantage of drawing energy from a non-liquid fuel source. Given the US's huge dependance on oil, it's important for many reasons that we create alternative for powering cars that are not-oil based.

Here in the Pacific Northwest, Plug-in's would largely be powered from hydroelectric power which is clean.

Even if powered from coal, my understanding is that a Plug in is less polluting from a CO2 standpoint, given the efficiencies of an electric engine.

In addition, it is the hope that our grid can be de-carbonized over time by adding renewables and learning how to sequester CO2 at coal plants-- sequestration would prove much more difficult at the tailpipe of a hybrid.

Finally... it is my understanding that there is alot of off-peak energy at night when the wind is blowing, water running through turbines, or coal plants still burning, that is not effectively utilized... what better way to store it than in millions of plug-in batteries?