i hope a plugin prius is only an option and not standard

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(poodlemaster @ Jan 31 2007, 07:42 AM) [snapback]383262[/snapback]</div>

There could come a time when all residential units are required to offer 110V power (which is all a PHEV would require - at least at first). 110 outlets are everywhere. Even if you can't use one at home, you may be able to use one at wor, while shopping, watching a movie, eating lunch, etc. The benefits of a PHEV go beyond just plugging it in. With more battery capacity, you can store and use more battery assist in daily driving as well.

My crystal ball tells me that of all the things to worry about in the future of personal transportation - that being FORCED into buying a PHEV is not one of them.

 

I suspect this is why many people do not consider the Prius - they think it's supposed to be plugged in. I've only had the vehicle a week and a half, but I've already lost count of the number of people who ask if I have to plug it in, or if it is running up my electric bill. <_<

 

This is actually one of the things I thought about when hearing the recent rumblings of PHEVs and EVs. I, too, rent. But I rent a townhouse and have to park on the street. To plug anything in I'd have to run an extension across the sidewalk and across the lawn.

I'd love to have something that would allow me to use even less gas (or none at all). It just wouldn't be a practical solution for me at this point.

 

If utilities were included in the rent it might be worth moving.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Jan 31 2007, 08:36 AM) [snapback]383302[/snapback]</div>

Again... I'm sure you park the car somewhere else during the day besides at home, yes? IF you only park at home, then you could probably save all kinds of money and just get rid of the car.

Anyway, we're looking for the solution to the "many" not the "every." And it'll be a long LONG time before anybody is ever forced to buy a PHEV!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Les Gas @ Jan 31 2007, 08:22 AM) [snapback]383291[/snapback]</div>

I hope you tell them that you WISH you could plug it in, and that you WISH your electric bill would go up $20 while your gas bill went down $100. That's what I tell people who are silly enough to engage me in conversation when I'm driving the gas-guzzler.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Jan 31 2007, 09:06 PM) [snapback]383691[/snapback]</div>

Not a chance that will happen. How about your electric bill going up about $200 while your gas bill goes down $100?

If that wasn't the case... every Edison truck would be a plug in right this instant....

Remember: you don't get something for nothing...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(John in LB @ Feb 1 2007, 07:28 AM) [snapback]383809[/snapback]</div>

But sometimes you get what you need...

If I remember correctly, we pay around 8 cents per kWh (too lazy to hunt up a bill and check the exact figure, but it's in the ballpark). Something like a RAV4 EV takes 30 kWh to charge up for 100 miles of driving, I think... Maybe there's someone on here who could provide more exact data So, for comparision, a conventional RAV4 would use 4 gallons of gas = $8.00 for that 100 miles, the EV's 30 kWh juice = $2.40. Even assuming a PHEV with similar energy usage characteristics to a RAV 4 EV (you'd hope it would be better, more streamlined for example, but would have an ICE to lug around), the electricity seems likely to be the best bargain on the PHEV energy usage costs, plus it can be utilized off peak etc. etc.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Les Gas @ Jan 31 2007, 11:22 AM) [snapback]383291[/snapback]</div>

I have encountered the same with my new Prius. At least four people have asked me, "Don't you have to plug the car in to make it work?" or words to that effect. One of these people works in IT, and I would have thought he would have been more knowledgeable.

If nothing else, our role is to set a good example for others, and do away with their bias against hybrids based on ignorance.

Harry

 

What's that sound? Maybe reality knocking at the door?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(John in LB @ Feb 1 2007, 04:28 AM) [snapback]383809[/snapback]</div>

Not only is there a chance. It is reality. You aren't the only one not to believe it.

Man, that would SUCK! Good thing it doesn't work like that, or EVs wouldn't have a chance.

Ha. Yeah. As long as there were not other influences involved. I'm not sure what "Edison" means in this context. Must be your power company? It may surprise you to learn that Southern California Edison owns the largest fleet of EVs around. They have about 300 of them. All Rav4EVs just like mine.

Nobody is getting something for nothing. That has no bearing on the fact that fuel for electric propulsion is substantially cheaper than fuel for gasoline propulsion. And here's the kicker: per energy unit, electricity is MORE expensive than gasoline! So how can it be cheaper to fuel an EV? Well, because an EV is 90% efficient at converting the fuel to traction power. A gasoline vehicle is about 15% efficient.

As Mr. Octet so nicely explained, charging an EV costs roughly 1/4 to 1/3 of what it costs to fuel a gasoline car for the same number of miles. His numbers reflect reality quite well. We drive our EV about 1000 miles/month (round number to make it easy). If I paid for my electricity from the grid, that would cost me about 2.4c/mile, or about $24 for the month. If I instead drove my 25mpg gasoline Rav4EV, I'd be paying about 10c/mile or $100/month (with gas at $2.50).

So to review: EV fuel per month: $24
gasoline fuel per month: $100

This isn't a dream or a guess. It is my reality.

And to top it all off, I power my EV from the electricity that I make from the solar panels on my roof, so today I actually pay nothing to fuel our main vehicle to the tune of 12,000+ miles/year. And of course the price of gasoline is going nowhere but up in the long term.

Lots more answers that may surprise you on my EV web site (see my sig).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Beryl Octet @ Feb 1 2007, 05:26 AM) [snapback]383814[/snapback]</div>

doesn't that come after "You can't always get what you want?"

I believe that is close to the current national average. Certainly close enough for a quick calculation.

I know some folks who may know some folks who might know. For the record, here is the energy data on the Rav4EV from my specs page: http://evnut.com/rav_data.htm

Pack capacity: ~26 kWh - the amount of energy in about 0.8 gallons of gasoline
AC power consumption to fill 26kWh pack: 30kWh typical (approximate 10% charge loss, and can be ~5kWh more if leveling)
Average Consumption from pack: 250 Wh/mile
Average Consumption from outlet: 275 Wh/mile (approximate 10% charge loss)
Charges from 240V at about 5.6 kW (18% SOC/hr).
Charges from 208V at about 5.2 kW (16% SOC/hr).
Charges at 15A, 4.9 kW into the batteries (from 208V 3-phase commercial power). About 15% SOC per hour
1 kWh = 3412 BTU
1 gallon of gasoline ~34 kW
1 US gallon of gasoline = typically 115,000BTUs (source: http://www.chevron.com) which is 33.7 kWh
From http://www.fueleconomy.gov (EPA):
2001 RAV4EV 290(city)-370(highway) Wh/mi and 104mpg combined equiv. (source: EPA)
2002 RAV4EV 270(city)-340(highway) Wh/mi. and 112mpg (equiv.)

The bold there is my car. 112mpg equivalent. From my direct experience and detailed record keeping, I get closer to 120mpg equivalent. My car holds less energy it its batteries than is contained in a single gallon of gas. And on that bit of energy, I can travel over 100 miles.

Yes, off-peak power costs less to make and benefits the entire system by making it more efficient. Off peak power should cost the consumer less, and Time Of Use metering is likely to become very common in the coming years.

 

Ah here. Go to about 12:10 in Sherry's video and she discusses this same thing!
http://business.fiu.edu/media/

The entire video is a GREAT intro to EVs and PHEVs.

 

Impressive data that I will have to digest. Am travelling in the next few days - so, I will be offline till next week.

My initial blush is that the carnot cycle is only ~35% efficient at the power plant... and by the time you take all the transmittion losses into account... you get the picture. I realize a car engine is less efficient than that power plant, but I don't think it's as low as 15%... I am thinking high 20's...

Either case, I don't think you can have a dramatic difference in efficiency between 1 system and the other. I am referring including the power plant all the way to your wheels - versus an engine to your wheels. Both systems start with fuel and some derivative of the Carno cycle.

One other thing to consider: In your state, you may have hydroelectric energy sources - those are federally subsidized and are part of the base load - Vehicles would be the incremental load and would have to be charged from incremental power supplies (I am referring to a national policy, rather than the economics in your particular case).

I would like to comment that in California, my incremental cost for power is 22.3 Cents/kWh. To be fair, my gasoline is also more expensive at about $3.00 per gallon.

Thank you for really detailing the problem out... I will really be interested to pursue further upon my return.

 

I look forward to every vehicle being a PHEV. The incentive is use of renewables (photovoltaic, hydro, wind, conservation) on every property, including highways, churches, schools, homes and businesses. A PHEV offers a constructive, quiet and simple alternative to help keep air clean.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(skruse @ Feb 1 2007, 04:59 PM) [snapback]384115[/snapback]</div>

I've certainly gotten more interested in a pure electric or PHEV after living with a Prius for a while. 100 mile range with a top speed of 70 would replace most of my Prius usage. Hey Tesla Motors, sure you don't need an East Coast beta tester?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(John in LB @ Feb 1 2007, 01:24 PM) [snapback]384093[/snapback]</div>

Excellent. I'm glad to hear that you'll look into it further.

We have to start at the same stage. I'm talking tank to wheels efficiency. NOT counting how gas is made or how electricity is made. IF you want to get into those cans of worms, it becomes more complicated and electricity looks even better. Hint: it takes as much electricity to make a gallon of gasoline as it takes for me to drive my EV about 20 miles with NO gasoline!

Nope! You don't get to start with the raw material for electricity, and the already-made fuel for gasoline. You need to start with the oil in the ground for gasoline if you want to go there. And then you add a whole bunch of electricity, and NG - and you eventually get gasoline. We have to start at the same point in the cycle to get any meaningful comparisons. Either Tank to wheels or well to wheels - for BOTH final products.

Don't even get me started on subsidies. Gasoline has more subsidies than any form of electrical generation.

With Time of Use you could be paying as little as 5c/kWh. I'm in CA too.

I'm glad I didn't scare you off.

 

And meant to add: For sure don't just take my word for this stuff. Do some research on your own so it is more valid. You can start with some links on my site if htat helps.

I find that if I'm just sitting here answering questions that it becomes a "me against you" sort of thing. My hope is that you'll go find the answers from outside sources now that you have an idea of what to look for. This has been studied to death (pollution and energy for EVs vs gasoline cars). And the studies come to the same conclusion.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Feb 1 2007, 04:17 PM) [snapback]384128[/snapback]</div>

Darell, you've said this before and I referred to it when having a spirited discussion with a coworker a few months back. I tried to find this data on the web to confirm and didn't have any luck. Where can I track this down?

TIA, Jeff

 

Oops, duplicate post.

 

Hi Jeff -

Well, if you track it down, please copy me! I, and several other EV friends, have been trying to get hard numbers on this for too many years to count. The oil industry holds many of these numbers pretty close to the chest. But I can at least give you a head start on your quest:

http://evnut.com/emissions.htm
Go to the bottom of the page, and make sure you're sitting down and have a calculator handy. If you find anything to add, or would like to digest all the various numbers and links into a cohesive document, I'd love to host it!

The bottom line: The oil industry uses more electricity (and energy inputs in general) than any other industry in the world. Few people realize how much electricity each gallon of gasoline represents. It is not insignificant. Most folks (not you, of course!) just consider that gasoline pops cleanly into existence, while electricity has to be "made" in some dirty way. When we burn gasoline, it is just the tip of the iceburg of all the pollution that gasoline represents.

Drives me nuts when I hear that a hybrid like the Prius can be cleaner than an EV because the hybrid burns gas so cleanly... and an EV is powered by coal.


Here's a pretty good bit of writing from a friend of mine (this was written to the Sierra Club - an entity that should know better, but has done the same thing - ignored the pollution of creating gasoline, and comparing just the BURNING of gasoline with the creation of electricity).
----------

Emissions due to our vehicles will drop much more quickly with the introduction of mass-produced electric vehicles (EVs,) such as the Commuter Cars Tango, the Tesla Roadster (and, soon, its four-passenger EV,)and the Phoenix EVs now being built.

Looking through the electric vehicle (EV) vs internal-combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) carbon comparison, fuelmaking emissions are considered only for EVs. No fuelmaking emissions are included for ICEVs. Almost everyone initially overlooks this important point, for some reason.

Everyone assumes that electricity must be generated by some means, generally by burning fuel. So, to compare apples to apples, we must also consider gasoline's long tail of emissions. It does not magically appear in the pump.

Far greater emissions are caused in ICEV fuelmaking. Coal mine-to- wheels can only be fairly compared to oil well-to-wheels emissions (not tank-to-wheels, as in ASES's and many other studies.) Overall EV emissions, including fuel-production emissions for both vehicle types, are over 95% less than those of ICEVs.

To the mining, refining, storage and delivery emissions of coal, add those of actually burning it to make electricity that charges an EV. The EV itself is zero emission.

An ICEV emits exhaust when it burns gasoline; that's already in the comparison. Now add the emissions due to extracting petroleum, getting it to a refinery and making it into gasoline, then delivering it to the pump. These are still only part of the long tail, but must be considered ICEV emissions, if EV fuelmaking emissions are counted against them.

The locating, drilling, pipelining, storage, shipping, refining and delivery of petro-fuels cost more and create many times the emissions that even coal-fired generation of electricity does.

For example, huge amounts of electricity are consumed in the refining of oil.

The military emissions due to protecting overseas oilfields and pipelines, as well as sea lanes used for shipping foreign-derived oil must also be added to the emissions cost of petro-fuels.

Oil spills must also be considered as a cost of our shipped petro- fuels.

All of these emissions are entailed with gasoline being in the local gas station pump. Comparisons that leave them out of vehicle operating carbon loads are missing one side of fuelmaking costs.