Why Can't Other Plug-In Hybrids Copy Chevy Volt's All-Electric Running?

Think that we should be down to $175/kwh tesla/panasonic pack, $275/kwh lg pack, $450 panasonic not needing liquid cooling pack by 2017. Say liquid cooling costs $800.

A 8 kwh lg style pack with liquid conditioning should cost about $2700, if a nimh costs $500 then the difference is about $2200 more for a blended hybrid with liquid pack conditioning and 20-25 mile aer range over a hybrid. Make mg2(b) or the flywheel motor in a hyundai/bmw/mercedes/vw type set up and you get better acceleration on top of that range and better feel. So let us say $3000 more than a hybrid today, with battery prices falling. For many even without the tax credits that is a better value proposition than a hybrid. The problem really is simply packaging the larger battery pack. As packs decrease in size this should be easier, and why not shrink the gas tank a little.

Then we get to the 18 kwh (gen II volt)- 22 kwh (bmw i3) ever style phv. Here we get about 10 kwh or $2750 above the price of a blended hybrid. There is no way you can simply package the battery in an old ice design though, so you need a car designed from the ground up to carry the bigger battery. As battery prices approach $100/kwh and phev volumes get high enough to justify clean sheet designs, this looks like a future winner. The driver can drive as a bev on 97%+ of trips, and fill up at all the gas stations for longer trips. The problem is the clean sheets of the volt and i3 are not that appealing, but the drivetrain should be a winner if they can put it in the right car.

Finally the zev mandated bev. Say 40 kwh are necessary for unsubsidized battery size. If we go tesla style that is only $7500 for a pack and liquid cooling. There is no need for a mg1 or ice as there is in the hsd style hybrids. Bigger packs for faster cars or longer range.

If battery costs do continue to go down, blended hybrids will likely fade away. We should know in about 15 years, until then, a blended hybrid makes a great deal of sense.

 

I think we are still riding the curve of public education and acceptance of anything with a battery in it including non-plug hybrids. I suspect the large majority of car buyers still haven't gotten behind the wheel of a hybridized or electrified car even after 15 years of the Prius.

The public is slow to accept change and new information. We are the enlightened ones on this particular topic. It's easy to underestimate how long it takes for new facts like "big batteries in cars" to slowly permeate the protective membrane of the average consumer. I'm convinced a large percentage of car buyers still doesn't know much about hybrid options and frankly doesn't want to know. It's going to take another human generation and lots of their own children and neighbors scooting around in hybrids and EVs before many folks will finally get interested regardless of the quickly improving battery tech.

 

I was driving in this morning listening to the Autoline After Hours podcast that covered Volt V2.0. Most of it has already been beaten to death in this thread but his comment about the Malibu peaked my interest:

This is an interesting twist and towards the goal I share with John1701a ... get our technology into the mainstream. Our hybrid transmissions should replace the existing automatic transmissions and the sooner the better.

Bob Wilson

 

Electricity is fungible in term of energy, but not in terms of carbon footprint or price. Cleaner electricity costs more, hence not fungible.

If you pay someone to make clean electricity, you make the entire grid a little cleaner. You are not getting the clean electricity. Grid acts as a storage, meaning everything is mixed and there is no way to separate it out at the receiving end.

 

yes the majority non japanese have not. Hybrids are in the late majority buying pattern in Japan.

In Japan the tax structure and dealership structure pushes people towards hybrids, and there are more places to plug-in than gas stations.

Part of the problem is the dealership model and the way toyota, honda, and ford have presented hybrids. They make it complicated. Most dealerships would rather sell you a camry, accord, or fusion than a hybrid, and the advertising has just been horrible. I would say the ford advertisments for the c-max looked the best, but they were pushing fuel ecomomy, and ford faked (well probably legally slid through rule loopholes) to

The public is slow to accept change and new information. We are the enlightened ones on this particular topic. It's easy to underestimate how long it takes for new facts like "big batteries in cars" to slowly permeate the protective membrane of the average consumer. I'm convinced a large percentage of car buyers still doesn't know much about hybrid options and frankly doesn't want to know. It's going to take another human generation and lots of their own children and neighbors scooting around in hybrids and EVs before many folks will finally get interested regardless of the quickly improving battery tech.[/QUOTE]

Well I say welcome GM to the fwd efficient hybrid club. What was it in 2005 that bob lutz said gm should bring out more hybrids.
How Detroit is learning to stop worrying and love hybrids - Jan. 12, 2005

So what after Lutz admission over a decade ago, and some poor selling 2-modes, you think the malibu hybrid is going to be a big boost to hybrid market share? I don't get this. There are the camry, fusion, accord, sonata, optima, and jetta hybrids in the same midsize 4 door sedan hybrid market place. Four of these outsell the malibu in non-hybrid trim, and ford and toyota likely have cost advantages in hybrid trim, fusion and sonata will also have phev versions when the malibu hybrid premiers. I think at best this will stop malibu customers from buying another companie's hybrids. I see it as a me too car technologically. It does beat four of those 6 cars in claimed mpg, but the jetta and acord hybrids, the ones with better mpg sell worse.

Top 20 Best-Selling Cars In America - February 2015 - GOOD CAR BAD CAR
Choice is good, but all I see is a me too car produced after all the competitors except nissan and mazda had one.

The volt though, that created a new catagory. i can understand the doubt in some peoples minds, but I don't understand the lack of understanding that erev phev's may expand the market, while another me to midsize hybrid is likely to add little growth. That is unless you see something I don't where the malibu hybrid is better tech than hsd.

 

This is literally true but mostly uninteresting -- sort of like your old argument that it was somehow a good thing that the PiP finished charging sooner than the Volt.

The interesting thing about clean renewable electricity generation is the reduction in carbon emissions over a period of time.

You could install a dedicated off-grid solar system and use it just to charge your plugin car. Or, you could install just enough solar panels to generate about the same average monthly kWh as you use to charge your car at night. Either way, roughly speaking, you have not caused an increase in carbon emissions by plugging in your car

Yes, by charging at night, your car is using electricity from the average grid mix which likely includes a large mix of fossil based generation. But, you are offsetting that over time by generating solar during the day and preventing the need for fossil generation to fulfill the daytime grid demand.

It's bizarre to assert that in an off-grid case your car is driving on clean energy but in the grid with solar panels case you are not. Over a period of time like a monthly billing cycle there no principled reason why those carbon emissions are not fungible. What matters is the overall reduction in atmospheric carbon emissions.

If you go out of your way to offset your plugin car's carbon emissions directly (off-grid) or indirectly (grid-connected rooftop solar or green energy utility options) it has the same effect on the total atmospheric emissions and that is all that matters.

Someone doing that has legitimate bragging rights that their car is effectively driving on sunshine.

 

It's larger than Toyota's offerings, the money, profits and jobs all stay local in America. That's important to some Americans.
The fuel economy promises to be very competitive, especially for the size, comfort and quietness of a car like this.
Only time will tell how it is marketed and priced.

 

The Cars.com American-Made Index - Cars.com

 

"Parts of it" are made in America ... don't you you mean . . . . . because if you want more American parts - you gotta go Toyota or Honda


Toyota Camry: 80%.
Honda Accord: 80%.
Chevrolet Malibu: 75%.

Report: The two 'most American' cars are Japanese

just sayin'
.

 

Ok let's look at them one at a time.

1) Yes it is going to be competitive in fuel economy - outpacing the current big sellers in the 4 door sedan hybrid market fusion and camry, but it just ties the jetta and accord. I think if that epa rating was the deciding factor the jetta and accord would doing better. So I say welcome to the club to the malibu, but really its a me too hybrid. will it outsell the two leaders in this crowded segment? Time will tell.
December 2014 Dashboard - HybridCars.com

2) Its larger than toyota's offerings. I didn't know that, but toyota also has the avalon and lexus es hybrids built on the same platform. Accord and avalon hybrids have more passenger space. We should see what the cargo space is, but its likely the camry hybrids 13 cu feet, or the accord's 16 cu feet are enough.

3) camry and avalon hybrids are built in the US, some fusions are built in mexico some in the US. Lots of gm's profits go to support money losing plants in europe and expansion in china. I can see people choosing an american company, but Ford is that, or american jobs and Camry hybrid has that. The malibu likely will beat these by a little in epa mpg. But the next generation, they may leap ahead. The accord hybrid looks like it is the winner in terms of tested epa mpg, but falls far short in terms of sales. Part of this could be honda's hybrid reputation, but part is also the cost of the car versus the choices from toyota, ford, and hyundai.

I'm not hating on the malibu hybrid, I just don't see it as special or market expanding at all. I just can't get excited over it in 2015.

The volt seems to have pushed a different vision of the plug-in, based mainly on percieved problems with the ev-1. To me its a much more exciting car than the malibu hybrid.

 

The assumptions in this forum are what hold back constructive discussion. In this case, there's the belief of better/worse and success/failure causing the problem. People continue to assume that's the stance being taken when posts are made. And no matter how valiant the effort to focus attention on the market instead of individual automakers, some just plain don't see it.

The lack of understanding fits that. The category... or whatever other identification means chosen to describe a technology... makes no difference. It's still the same problem. Paradigm shift simply isn't possible. Period. That's been overwhelmingly confirmed. So, no matter how great the technology, it just plain will not interest a majority of the consumers until their current offering is discontinued. They will just keep purchasing what they feel comfortable with instead.

Some people have fought so many years for the advancement & acceptance of battery vehicles, they've lost sight of the original problem... which is what has allowed it to persist for so long. It is absolutely vital to be attentive to the predecessor. Focus solely on the end-state creates a new barrier to overcome... an avoidable challenge if you establish a bridge.

Ironically, that idea of a "stop gap" being given a stigma of bad caused people to dismiss the very solution needed to overcome anchors to the past.

In other words, that's why FULL hybrids have been so fundamentally important. They are what will bring the production of traditional vehicle to a drawdown, not EV alone.

Ordinary mainstream vehicles have never been appealing to enthusiasts.

Notice the self-deprecating problem?

 

It could be but I want to keep an open mind until we see the product EPA tested and priced on the show room floor.

There is no love lost in our family with GM past practices and products. So I'll wait for the Mailbu to show up and give it the same review given any other fuel efficient vehicle.

Bob Wilson

 

And here I thought the discussion was about pushing forward technology that would help spread electrified cars (and here we can include hybrids, phevs, and bevs). So again, I will admit to not understanding your point.

Now sure the Camry hybrid expanded the market and hybrid perception. If you noted my 2005 link about Lutz also talked about gen I accord hybrid. It was a nice experiment, but too expensive, and didn't do much for the market. The fusion hybrid, sure, lets give credit, same package ice, hybrid, phev. Although acceleration is worse than the camry, better handling, and validates the camry hybrid. Kudos to #2 sucess in the segment. OK on a limb kudos also to #3 sucess in the segment, the non-psd two clutch full hybrid hyundai sonata. This hybrid system although not as efficient in the city might be less expensive to build and more efficient at higher speeds, hyundai used the tech on the opima. That seems to have expanded the market. But then its tireing, the accord and jetta hybrids, sure everyone needs one, but not much market growth there. And now after my lack of excitement there, I am supposed to think wow, the seventh in the catagory is going blow up the market. OK I hope that fields my lack of enthusiasm for hazaas that gm produced the malibu hybrid with volt R&D, and its going to make the hybrid market explode or that gm deserves credit for being so late to the party.

Still, I will await the reviews and the sales figures, and see if this is a better mousetrap, and if gm prices it low enough to greatly outsell the volt;-)

 

The energy in this thread reminds me of the good old days: Ford brings hybrid, EV work in-house to beat Toyota | PriusChat

Ford's Flexible Michigan Assembly Plant Makes History by Launching C-MAX Energi Plug-in... -- WAYNE, Mich., Nov. 8, 2012 /PRNewswire/ --

 

You are misquoting and putting it out of context. The initial discussion was about more EV miles and high speed EV driving without any mention about their consequences. I mentioned the recharge time, along with bigger heavier, more expensive battery to accomplish that.

PiP recharge finishes faster because it'll only need to use electricity for city and lower speed/power driving requirements. Trying to do 99 mph in EV for 15-20 mins would need 10 hours of charging.

You are also increasing reliance on fossil fuel at night by charging from it.

You are using the grid to shift the time of electricity consumption (energy storage). In order to do that, you need fossil fuel.

Nope. You can brag you added x amount of renewable energy to the grid. But you cannot claim you are driving with solar energy -- absolutely false.

I am not sure about over there but here, I had to sign the interconnection agreement for my grid-tied PV system.

 

Many people fall into the "advancement" trap. It's far more common than you'd ever expect too.

The belief is that pushing forward technology can only be achieved by reaching beyond the current limitations.

That makes a lot of sense, which leads to a lot of incorrect assumptions. Reality is though, the advancement requires sunset of the older technoloy.

It's why traditional vehicles are still such a massive barrier. They are holding back steps forward.

The gauge of progress is measured by how the step is taken. Using a carrot (tax incentive) or a push (government mandate) will only help to advance the technology itself. That will not change the attitude of the masses. They'll continue on, perfectly content driving their traditional vehicles.

 

This is incorrect.
People become interested in new technology when they see value in it.
The majority of the market seems to value comfort, convenience, performance, quality of drive, more than getting the highest mpg they can possibly get.

To break out of that market, you need to add some/all of the above attributes to efficiency.
If the GEN 4 Prius can do this, awesome.
I know the Volt, Leaf, Tesla, i3 and a few others already have. And the market, even though it requires a drastic change in how the car is fueled, seems to be responding faster than it did for the hybrids when they came out.

 

"use fossil grid kWh at night" - "inject renewable kWh into grid during day" = zero CO2 emission increase

What part of that do you disagree with?

You need more fossil fuel at night and less than you would have otherwise needed during the day so the fossil fuel use and emissions over a 24 hour period cancel out for that person who is plugging in their electric car at night and putting out matching rooftop solar kWh to compensate during the day.

Injecting solar (for example) during the day reduced the energy demand measured by the grid system operators and causes them to not order up additional fossil grid generation that would have otherwise been required to run everyone's air conditioners etc.

 

Not true.
Automobiles were not successful because horses disappeared.
They were successful because most people viewed them as better.

Government rebates do nothing, directly, to advance the technology.
The rebates help the market grow faster. The existence of the market convinces companies that want a piece of the developing market, to invest in the technology.
It is completely about creating a market, or in other words changing attitudes of enough individuals to create a market.

When will enough people's attitudes change? That is the million dollar question.
It won't happen overnight. It happens slowly, in fits and starts until it reaches a tipping point.
All we can do is watch the annual sales and see it unfold.

 

it won't happen at $2. gas.