The USA Needs a National Hybrid Retrofit Program

[Rokeby]

In 2009, the broadcast TV signal is changing from analog to digital. IIRC, this
whole scheme as launched by the electronics industry with the
approval/conivance of the federal gov. to justify/ameliorate the costs of the
broadcast equipment. Somehow, this is a necessary good for the country as
a whole. If you don't have a digital TV, then you need a converter box and
there are numerous info spots on TV about programs to help defray the cost.

So, why isn't there a similar program to develop and implement some after-
market system for upgrading the nations bazillion existing vehicles to some
kind of electrically assisted partial hybrid? And why shouldn't the Feds
fund/subsidize all, or a major part , or at least half of the cost to the
consumers... who after all, are/will be footing the bill for every one else's
bailouts.

I know this sounds whacko, and I know that with gas at less than $2US a
gallon this idea isn't going to get a whole lot of traction... but gas will go up
in price sooner or later... and if we go into a full recession/depression this
would help a lot of people; manufacturers, installers, just plain folks.

The big question I guess is what would the system look like that would have
universal application. I guess it would be something involving electric
motors connected to the rear wheels and a battery pack in the trunk.

I would think that a 20-25% FE/MPG improvement would be a good target.

So let's hear your thoughts...

I expect negative comment... but I'm more interested in how something like
this could be done.

[FL_Prius_Driver]

Originally Posted by Rokeby

In 2009, the broadcast TV signal is changing from analog to digital. IIRC, this
whole scheme as launched by the electronics industry with the
approval/conivance of the federal gov. to justify/ameliorate the costs of the
broadcast equipment. Somehow, this is a necessary good for the country as
a whole. If you don't have a digital TV, then you need a converter box and
there are numerous info spots on TV about programs to help defray the cost.

The real story has nothing to do with the electronics industry and everything to do with the US government making money with spectrum auctions and the National Association of Broadcasters trying to keep this spectrum from being sold out from under them. The end result of this Congressional/NAB battle is what we have now. This is very important for the rest of your discussion since the initial government motivation was to GET money from communication firms, not GIVE money to individuals.

Originally Posted by Rokeby

So, why isn't there a similar program to develop and implement some after-
market system for upgrading the nations bazillion existing vehicles to some
kind of electrically assisted partial hybrid? And why shouldn't the Feds
fund/subsidize all, or a major part , or at least half of the cost to the
consumers... who after all, are/will be footing the bill for every one else's
bailouts.

I know this sounds whacko, and I know that with gas at less than $2US a
gallon this idea isn't going to get a whole lot of traction... but gas will go up
in price sooner or later... and if we go into a full recession/depression this
would help a lot of people; manufacturers, installers, just plain folks.

The big question I guess is what would the system look like that would have
universal application. I guess it would be something involving electric
motors connected to the rear wheels and a battery pack in the trunk.

I would think that a 20-25% FE/MPG improvement would be a good target.

So let's hear your thoughts...

I expect negative comment... but I'm more interested in how something like
this could be done.

A couple of questions:
1) What basis (Constitution, legislation, lots of excess cash?) justifies the government getting into this business?
2) Why do we have to look to the government for ALL answers to ALL problems? You would thing after 100s of years of inferior government "solutions" we would figure out that big brother is not very smart when it comes to technology selections.
3) Why can't I spend my money on the solution I want, not the inferior result that is guaranteed to come from a government "solution"?
4) What exactly will the government create that is not being done better by industry right now?
5) Who pays?

[efusco]

As pointed out it's about money.

While I think much could be done by having such a program to force/promote more efficient vehicles the cost would be huge.

And let's face it, what's more important...reducing foreign oil dependence while reducing emissions.....or digital TV?? Clearly we must have digital TV.

[Rokeby]

Originally Posted by FL_Prius_Driver

...A couple of questions:
1) What basis (Constitution, legislation, lots of excess cash?) justifies the
government getting into this business?
2) Why do we have to look to the government for ALL answers to ALL
problems? You would thing after 100s of years of inferior government
"solutions" we would figure out that big brother is not very smart when it
comes to technology selections.
3) Why can't I spend my money on the solution I want, not the inferior result
that is guaranteed to come from a government "solution"?
4) What exactly will the government create that is not being done better by
industry right now?
5) Who pays?

Was down your way earlier this week; in Brooksville, Hernando County. Nice
area, with the possible exception being how everything is spread out far and
wide requiring lots of driving in between.

My thoughts come from conversations with family and friends who are
economically hurting already and are looking at a bleak future. Some are
driving up to 60 miles to their jobs, in 10 yr old cars, with no chance of
getting a new car. They have no way to move closer to their jobs. And what
good would it do anyway when they're scrambling for part-time and temp
jobs to pay their bills? They are confused and angry about being put in box
and feeling like the lid will be closed, and the box tossed into the river. Out
of sight, out of mind.

I can't directly answer your questions.
1) What justification was there for the WPA during the Depression?
2) I see the government's job to be forward looking and if not actually lead,
then to point the way. It would be a govt program based on industry's equipment.
3) You could do as you wish.
4) It seems to me that the condition of Detroit's Big 3 argues that they aren't
in a position to argue that they know what's best/needed.
5)Where's the money coming from for all the bailouts already/soon-to-be
implemented?

Memo to Treasury/US Mint: Fire up the presses boys,we need another $100
billion!

Originally Posted by efusco

As pointed out it's about money.

While I think much could be done by having such a program to force/promote
more efficient vehicles the cost would be huge.

And let's face it, what's more important...reducing foreign oil dependence
while reducing emissions.....or digital TV?? Clearly we must have digital TV.

I couldn't agree more. Give us more scripted Hi Def "reality" shows.

[DaveinOlyWA]

money is not the issue really. its feasibility. what car has extra space designed in under the hood "just in case?"

unlike older cars (i had a 65 chevelle that i could just about hide in under the front hood... a child could easily fit.

today, you lucky if you can find an area large enough to hide something the size of a six pack under the hood... where you could put another motor at??

as far as moving from analog to digital, there is a millions to do so, only legacy conversion costs (which are relatively small) to not.

power savings alone will far outweigh the costs in just a few years. plus it frees up bandwidth for more programing. allows for more wireless communication products, etc.

and sure, if the government can make a buck selling it, why not?

[john1701a]

Television is a great analogy. No matter how impressive a backward compatibility upgrade could be (converter box), the shape itself will continue to mismatch movies. Widescreen was the standard long before television. It's about dang time the shortcomings of 4:3 are finally being acknowledged.
.

[FL_Prius_Driver]

Originally Posted by Rokeby

My thoughts come from conversations with family and friends who are
economically hurting already and are looking at a bleak future. Some are
driving up to 60 miles to their jobs, in 10 yr old cars, with no chance of
getting a new car. They have no way to move closer to their jobs. And what
good would it do anyway when they're scrambling for part-time and temp
jobs to pay their bills? They are confused and angry about being put in box
and feeling like the lid will be closed, and the box tossed into the river. Out
of sight, out of mind.

No debate that the derailing of the economy has caught many unprepared. But this larger problem would not be solved, or even slightly improved with a government technology initiative. Heck, the government has already provided $25 billion to "improve" car technology and I can bet that you and I will see NOTHING in new technology from this. The track record of the government advancing auto technology is horrible. The track record of small companies is vastly better. Hymotion is just one example, but it should be clear that the new technology is relatively expensive.



I can't directly answer your questions. Some lighthearted responses
1) What justification was there for the WPA during the Depression?
Very little, and rather ineffective from many viewpoints
2) I see the government's job to be forward looking and if not actually lead,
then to point the way. It would be a govt program based on industry's equipment. I see governments job to legislate, and properly done, could be helpful. But when it comes to government types picking technology, then history has shown dismal results
3) You could do as you wish. And I wish that same freedom on everyone else.
4) It seems to me that the condition of Detroit's Big 3 argues that they aren't
in a position to argue that they know what's best/needed. Agree, but Telsa, Hymotion, Toyota, etc. seem to do fine without government help.
5)Where's the money coming from for all the bailouts already/soon-to-be
implemented? You know the answer as well as I do.

[Rokeby]

Originally Posted by FL_Prius_Driver

No debate that the derailing of the economy has caught many unprepared.
But this larger problem would not be solved, or even slightly improved with
a government technology initiative. Heck, the government has already
provided $25 billion to "improve" car technology and I can bet that you and I
will see NOTHING in new technology from this. The track record of the
government advancing auto technology is horrible. The track record of
small companies is vastly better. Hymotion is just one example, but it
should be clear that the new technology is relatively expensive.

I can't directly answer your questions. Some lighthearted responses...

FL_Prius_Driver,

Thanks for keeping this on a friendly level.

I agree, from what I've seen, the answers will probably come from small
businesses.

Let's not get lost in the political weeds here.

This conversation needs some hard data. Somewhere in the internet fog I've
read about two possible candidates for the retrofit. One was a whole electric
rear axle -- European in origin? -- the other was motors added to the rear
wheels.

My problem is I'm a rotten internet surfer, and now I can't find them again.

Can anyone find cites/sites for these or other applicable innovations for
inclusion/consideration?

[DaveinOlyWA]

addressing people who cannot change their driving habits is also another issue. mass transit will have a very hard time being accepted but must be nevertheless, but make the option attractive and people will come.

i work at a company that hires a lot of entry level workers, (we have more ex-employees than MacDonalds@!!) and most make entry level wages ($9-11 an hour) for the entire time they are there. so i talk with people daily who struggle with daycare, transportation costs, etc. although they work full time, they are one medium repair issue from being stranded with little or no options, so a new car purchase (in most cases ANY purchase at all!!) is completely out of the picture.

in an area like mine, primarily rural going all directions but towards the water, most are spread out and mass transit is a pitiful option (with recent budget cuts, its even worse) couple that with our 24/7 facility and even that is not an option for a large percentage here.

but i have lived in other areas were mass transit was brought in . i was living in Redwood City CA when BART was being expanded back in the 80's, and there was HUGE opposition to it. costs too much, no one would use it, etc...

but BART made it convenient, lots of trains, capacity, comfort, etc... and people came. and so will others if we make it a better option....and right now, we cant afford to continue to do what we have been doing.

my employer also provides things like free bus passes (works for a woefully few because of near zero service area out in the rural county area along with limited service hours but at least they provide the option) subsided van pooling (no car pooling yet, but we working on that) etc... but they are limited by what options the area provides.

van pooling does not really work because of the 24/7 nature and the over 130 different shift options, and the minimum 5 people requirement makes the logistics nearly impossible...

so a HUGE investment in the current bus system is the most likely way to go. my local transit system already invests heavily in mini bio-diesel and diesel-electric hybrid buses. sure it will be constant planning and re-evaluation to insure money is best spent especially on the rural routes where ridership is much lower. the bus system also provides free daily shuttle service in and around the capitol during lunch hours to reduce people using POV's for lunch. and until they started running buses every 10 mins, that project failed at first. its now a runaway success.

[Godiva]

It also has to do with keeping pace with the rest of the world.

We are woefullly outdated in our internet/wifi infrastructure too.

I think hybrid retrofit is a waste of money. But replacing current cars with hybrids/EVs and increasing the efficiency and availability of our mass transit is where we should be going. We're about 30 years behind on that.