Toyota's not the only one questioning GM's logic in pushing for plug-in hybrid technology. Honda's CEO Takeo Fukui told the Wall Street Journal that plug-ins don't have enough environmental benefits to interest his company. In fact, GM's Hail Mary Chevy Volt makes little sense. In a news conference, Fukui characterized plug-in hybrids as "a battery electric vehicle equipped with an unnecessary fuel engine and fuel tank." He added that Honda could easily develop a plug-in hybrid but won't because "I don't think that would contribute to the global environment, to reduce [global warming gas] emissions." Yes but– Fukui hinted that Honda is developing a battery electric vehicle. "Assuming that we can come up with a really high-performing battery that we are working on currently, I think a battery electric vehicle [that uses such battery technology] would actually be a plus from an environmental point of view." Given Honda's engineering track record, GM and Toyota both better watch their backs.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Is a diesel electric locomotive, “a battery electric vehicle equipped with an unnecessary fuel engine and fuel tank.” People always complain about the lesser range of EVs, so it makes sense to me to try to extend that range without resorting to an almost full-time ICE like the Prius.
The traditional diesel locomotive doesn’t use batteries. The diesel engine spins a turbine to produce electricity which runs the motors. The massive amount of torque available from electric motors, at zero rpm, is a big plus when pulling away from a station trailing 100 fully loaded box cars.
When slowing down, those traditional locomotives reverse the motors to generate huge amounts of electricity. In the past that surplus electricity was converted to heat using the devils own hairdryer. This is a great application for batteries to store the power for the next acceleration leg, and new locomotives are starting to take advantage.
A Diesel-Electric uses a diesel engine to turn a generator, which via electrical transmission turns the traction motors attached to the wheels.
Only recently have battery-diesel-electric hybrid railroad locomotives (see the “Green Goat”) come onto the market.
But Mr. Fukui states the critical question of if battery-heavy electric hybrid vehicles are economical considering the great deal of weight involved. Tack on an internal combustion engine and it has to be a certain size itself just to charge the battery.
It seems unsporting to pick on GM, but he does have a point. If battery storage and recharge times are sufficient to run an electric car effectively, then the ICE is unnecessary. If the ICE is necessary, then the “plug in” feature doesn’t net you much at the end of the day.
With an EV, I probably must be able to recharge securely at home and office, and I can still only use it for roughly 100-mile trips. EV-1 users accepted those limitations, but I think this restriction would dissuade most would-be purchasers.
Although some mfrs say they can add more batteries, or more complicated & expensive batteries, to extend the range, I have to wonder if I’m going to be shelling out ten grand to replace those batteries after a cold winter or something.
Until mfrs have proven that batteries can last in service for five or ten years, the serial hybrid that I can plug in for my daily commute, and fill up for the occasional business drive out of state, really doesn’t seem like such a bad idea to me.
I dunno; there are a lot of desirable, envionmentally-friendly traits to a plug-in hybrid:
Regnerative braking – in hilly terrain, the gas mileage suffers much less, brakes last longer
Plug-in feature — ICE doesn’t even run for short hops, lasts longer, needs less routine maintenance (oil, belts filters, etc.).
Off-Peak charging — uses existing infrastructure to extend “gas” mileage to 100 “MPG” or better – no goofy, wasteful “Hydrogen Economy” required.
Owner Awareness: Plug-in hybrid buyers are more likely to carry the “green” theme to many other areas of consumption (albeit, with a sometimes “holier than thou” attitude).
Although there will be better solutions, PIH vehicles are an important “bridge” to the future; and I applaud those willing to take up the added initial cost to support the redirection towards more efficient use of resources.
Edit: Honda’s throwing their lot into the “Hydrogen Economy” may have influenced their position on PIH vehicles.
It would be interesting to see how this plays out. As Frank points out, Honda’s engineering record is nothing to sneeze at. But if they are betting against plug-in hybrids and for the Hydrogen Economy (harp music in the background), I am going to have to score them behind in the count.
Hmmm… One of GM’s major competitors, the first hybrid maker, and a company that’s investing in an alternative to this alternative propulsion system, thinks it’s a bad idea. I wonder what their real motives are….?
Sounds just a bit too desperate for me. (Can’t you just smell the fear that GM might ACTUALLY pull this off!).
A vehicle that gets around 100 mpg, which can go short trips without using any oil, that has a range over 600 miles, and does not require building a whole new support system (unlike Hydrogen) makes a hell of a lot of sense to me.
GMis4GoodManners wrote: “Can’t you just smell the fear that GM might ACTUALLY pull this off!”
No.
Hydrogen Economy (harp music in the background)
Hehe, good one. There is no chance in hell of the hydrogen economy actually happening within the next 20 years.
There’s a balance to be struck with the Volt. For the Volt to win, GM must use the smallest possible engine, to keep the vehicle as light as possible and to maximize battery range as much as possible.
But if the engine is too small, it might not be able to keep up with the demands of certain long trips, which negates the advantage of the engine.
Buzzing along the road at a constant 70mpg probably takes something on the order of 30hp. So your engine has to be able to make more than 30hp in order to go 70 AND charge the battery at all. What happens when you hit a hill? Power demand increases. Now you need more power to climb, which is less power for charging.
With a small engine, I can see situations developing where demands on the powerplant might exceed the energy budget. For example, suppose you approach the base of the Rockies, intending to go over, with a discharged battery? If the engine didn’t get sized to propel the car 70mph uphill, you’ll have to slow down to match demand to whatever output the engine can provide. In a case like that, merging or passing uphill is going to be very problematic.
In the end, I think GM will put a fairly large engine in it, so the Volt is going to end up somewhat heavy. It might be a win in terms of fuel economy, especially around town, but it’s hard to see it as a grand-slam home run. The alternatives, the Prius and whatever Honda does next, are still going to look pretty good.
Look at this another way… Honda and Toyota will have access to the same battery capability as GM, so they can engineer a Volt-like car, if they so choose. Toyota has an advantage in 10 years’ experience with the Prius and Honda might have an advantage because they already make a lot of very small engines.
I don’t think they’re losing any sleep over the Volt. In the interim, Toyota is working to drive down the cost of the Prius, extend the capability to more cars in their showroom and is expecting the next generation to get significantly better fuel economy.
And we still must wonder, can GM build the Volt at a competitive price?
Toyota is going to be very hard to beat.
ASPO Houston casts some doubt on the idea that there will be fantastic batteries for us all:
“On the broader question of future natural resource abundance, it seems like the bad news keeps pouring in. In the context of soaring Asian demand, Colorado state geologist Vince Matthews presented slide after slide showing rising spot prices for base metals and other commodities, an indicator of increasing scarcity. Consider Soaring metal prices hurting tech firms, where we learn that—
… soaring prices of metals are threatening the profits of electronics manufacturers.
The metals suffering from high prices are nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co) and indium (In), the [nikkei.net] report said.
These metals are important because they are used in lithium-ion batteries, although some manufacturers are now experimenting with using manganese (Mn) instead.
The Prius hybrid currently uses nickel-metal hydride batteries. Toyota’s next generation of plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV) is supposed to use lithium cobalt oxide technology, but implementation has been delayed. (See also Toyota denies battery woes delay next prius from MSNBC, September 28, 2007.) The battery issues are complex, but it is fair to say that skyrocketing prices for metals used to power electric vehicles will not make these cars more available and affordable as substitutes for standard internal-combustion engines in the future.”
http://www.energybulletin.net/36102.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21030638/
Ahhh…yesss, the Volt.
The reason the Volt is nothing more than smoke-and-mirrors has been explained before, so there’s no need to retread that. What’s puzzling is Honda and Toyota’s reaction – of all people, they know damn well that the Volt is impractical – so why are they wasting time drawing attention to the Volt? Let GM build their failure.
I really don’t get it. Perhaps it is a clumsy attempt to reclaim favorable press coverage from the Chevy Volt? Or they’re worried that a catastrophically poor Volt will sour America on plug-in hybrids?
altoids: I think you hit the nail on the head. Honda and Toyota do not want some crappy GM product derailing a potentially profitable market. Which makes me want to take back what I said – if Honda and Toyota are worried about it, there must be some logic to the plug-in hybrid, and they just don’t want it to be rushed.
As an aside, the next major improvement in battery technology will (supposedly) come not from batteries at all but ultracapacitors. In labs, ultracapacitors really do accomplish amazing feats – incredibly rapid charge times, huge storage capacity per unit of mass, controlled discharge, etc. BUT (there’s always a “but”, isn’t there? :) no one seems to be able to build one that works outside the lab. They are too fragile to stand up to the rigors of production, let alone the rigors of use in an automobile.
So color me “skeptical” when it comes to any car design which requires advancements in energy storage.
brownie: Personally, I’d stay away from the ultra-capacitors. If there’s anything worse than an uncontrolled battery discharge, it’s an uncontrolled capacitor discharge. Even a micro-farad capacitor (found in TVs or microwaves) can vaporize a screwdriver if shorted, sending out fragments of molten metal. (Really – but don’t try it.) Now imagine giant banks of ultra-capacitors in a car crash.
IF you had cheap, large batteries AND you could charge them in 5 minutes AND there were electric charging stations all over, THEN battery-only vehicles make sense to me. Until then, hybrids are the way to go, and Honda is losing out.
Finally, it’s about time someone said something about these plug-n-play hybrid. Honda knows Toyota knows that these are just a waste of time and money.
My engineering manager once told me “I don’t care how you do it – Just do it “. I’m sick of the auto industry telling us about all the BS technology in the works and how their plan A is better than everyone else’s plan B. Just build me a cheap reliable and fairly powerful car that’ll get me through my 50 mile daily commute much cheaper than the machine I’m running now. It can burn pig $%&@ as far as I’m concerned.
As far as GM is concerned, the Volt (and the new Camaro for that matter) are just GM pipe dreams. Where’s the fuel cell technology they flap about on their TV commercials ? I guess if it doesn’t have a truck frame and small block V8 it just isn’t worth the time. Whatever happens, I’m sure GM will be 5 years behind everyone else and will make a half A$$#@ effort at it.
Actually, a properly engineered combination of a battery pack (long-term power needs) and ultracapacitors (short term acceleration, quick absorption of regenerative braking energy) would signal the arrival of the true “next gen” hybrid that’s even less dependant (in stop-and-go driving) on the ICE. The capacitor’s potential danger (of being able to supply huge current on demand) could be managed, I’m sure; I would rather have a capacitor bank in my vehicle than a 3000 PSI hydrogen tank.
Hmmm…..
Two hydrogen vehicles collide: squeaky-pop, everyone within a 1 mile radius deafened and singed.
Two capacitor cars collide, all the electrical equipment within a one mile radius left ineffective…
The hydrogen dog and the capacitor cat,
side by side on the table sat.