RE: Hybrids are the 'next diesel': Tell Me I'm Wrong

[kambites]

I think the problem is people have a strange desire to believe there is a single best solution for providing motive force in cars. Diesels, petrols, EVs and hybrids all have their various places for people with different requirements.

[LasseV]

bhstewie said:

I switched from a Golf TDi to a Toyota hybrid (albeit with a Lexus badge on) and the real world economy is almost identical in that both achieve 52-55mpg across a tank of fuel with 40 miles a day commute.

If I did long motorway journeys daily it might be a different situation, but I don't so it isn't so I guess somewhere someone's driving whichever vehicle is best for that use case.

Yeah, Toyota/Lexus hybrids are very economical and clean in real life driving situations, even in long distance journeys. And they are much more reliable than modern diesels so they are much cheaper to run. We have had several diesels and my Prius is the cheapest to run. Performance is better than 1.6 tdi+dsg combo so better in that area too.

However, i do not want to have a performance hybrid. They are too disconnected, heavy and the performance is not stable ie low on batteries and performance is worse. I prefer n/a engine and manual box, you always now what you get.

[suffolk009]

robemcdonald said:

suffolk009 said:

I've no problem with the idea of having hybrid as a means of reducing fossil fuel consumption. All the kinetic energy in slowing an IC car is simply wasted. That doesn't make sense.

I think there is a seperate problem that sees hybrids and electric cars as an environmental solution. I think it was Gordon Murray who wrote an essay about the whole life-cycle polution of a Prius being greater than an all petrol Fiat Panda. IIRC it was by a considerable margin.

As mentioned a few posts above there is (apparently) as much polution produced by the 15 biggest ships as all the cars in the world. The real environmental problem in the world is that we all buy far too much stuff. Cars are no different, and the new ones with the new tech inside are marketed to the rich, early adopters, as something to clear their conscience. Of course, it's just marketing smoke and mirrors. I'd be interested to know the lifecycle polution of cars in Cuba, big well built, American gas guzzlers that had to be kept running - there was no alternative.

I have a friend who is one of those early adopter, one-percenters - she drives a Tesla Model S. I call it her Coal Powered car. She does not find it amusing.

That's probably because only around 22% of UK power is generated from coal, still let's not let facts get in the way of a nice joke eh?

Well, yes, you're quite right. And as you say calling my friends Tesla a 30% gas, 29% coal, 19% nuclear, and 32% renewable and others powered car isn't actually at all funny.

But it does, I think, show up the clean-energy-car myth for what it is.

[RobDickinson]

suffolk009 said:

But it does, I think, show up the clean-energy-car myth for what it is.

You cant fix it all at once. Fix cars and its easier to fix power generation.

And as I said above not everywhere has as big a problem

[kambites]

suffolk009 said:

But it does, I think, show up the clean-energy-car myth for what it is.

You don't think half of the energy coming from non-polluting (sort of) sources sounds cleaner than none of the energy coming from non-polluting sources as with an ICE?

[delta0]

kambites said:

You don't think half of the energy coming from non-polluting (sort of) sources sounds cleaner than none of the energy coming from non-polluting sources as with an ICE?

A number that is also going to increase significantly over the next decade. There is a reason why many manufacturers have stopped devolment on new ICE engines. They aren't the future.

[Mattjevans]

The continued improvement of hybrids will kill the so-called all-electric future, or at least push it off a long time.

Continued improvements in fuel efficiency, particularly with the step-change a hybrid can make, will slash demand for fossil fuels resulting in low pump prices for the next 20-30 years. In that environment it will make no sense to swap out the national fuel infrastructure for all-electric and frankly the all-electric cars - particularly the hour long+ refuelling time - will make less and less sense vs a hybrid which gives a back-up option either way.

[Oddball RS]

On a very basic level, if a Hybrid isn't even diesel I tend not to take it as a serious effort, and using hundreds of kilos of rare earths and metals in each one never was really going to 'save' anything was it?

[kambites]

Oddball RS said:

On a very basic level, if a Hybrid isn't even diesel I tend not to take it as a serious effort, and using hundreds of kilos of rare earths and metals in each one never was really going to 'save' anything was it?

What on earth do you think they use hundreds of kilos of rare earth metals for in a hybrid?

[robemcdonald]

sasha320 said:

robemcdonald said:

So Dan is now basically trolling pistonheads?

I'm unclear on the point of the article, worse case hybrids (of all varieties), have identical fuel economy, relocate some energy production and have lower particulate emissions.

Best case they're more fuel efficient (on vehicle and off site electricity production), lower emissions and have better fuel economy.

Not sure what the article is actually having a pop at?

Deliberately missing the point of something and baiting people to reply is basically trolling. Or have I got that wrong?

[98elise]

kambites said:

Oddball RS said:

On a very basic level, if a Hybrid isn't even diesel I tend not to take it as a serious effort, and using hundreds of kilos of rare earths and metals in each one never was really going to 'save' anything was it?

What on earth do you think they use hundreds of kilos of rare earth metals for in a hybrid?

Its also worth pointing our that rare earth metals are not actually rare. Its also its an engineering choice to use them. Telsa use a 3phase induction motor so use about the same amount of rare earth metals as an ICE car.

[anonymous-user]

delta0 said:

A number that is also going to increase significantly over the next decade. There is a reason why many manufacturers have stopped devolment on new ICE engines. They aren't the future.

All manufacturers have stopped development on ICE. That's a sweeping statement

[Strider]

The most perceptive article on hybrids I have read, and on-the-button. Good points also from Steve and ManiS. The other issue, not mentioned, is the terrible environmental impact of lithium batteries. Extraction causes devastation and unlike an IC engine, recycling is not currently practical. Hybrids should have two functions; 1) to allow further optimisation of IC efficiency, eg filling in the torque gaps to allow further downsizing and 2) energy recovery. It’s also useful to have higher energy on board to run devices more efficiently and allow the addition of electric boost assist. It all leads to 48V being the way forward, at least in the medium term.

So far we have seen only hybrids that have been squeezed in around carry-over elements of existing technology – either the platform, some body-in-white or the powertrain – so it will be interesting to see what architectures appear now we are on the cusp of new generations of vehicle that are designed for hybridisation.

Edited by Strider on Monday 20th March 13:32

[Wkotuning]

Here's a pick of my hybrid at the last pistonheads santa pod day.

Electric recovery from the brakes, range extends 500 miles a tank or drives in electric in comfort mode round town .

Put it in sport + Uses the batteries for extra power, will beat a MK1 tt-sport (240bhp) down the strip. (6 sec 0-60) 14 sec quarter miles .
Best of both worlds for a boring company car driver looking for tax breaks and fuel economy, yet needing a few kicks every now and then.

[Bald Eagle 1975]

unfortunately the solution for these impossible to achieve fuel economy numbers is some time away. there are large changes planned for the the way vehicle emissions are captured and correlated back to the laboratory. this will end the crazy numbers game. in the mean time there are websites that already adopt this type of testing and publish there results. there a new vehicles on the site (hybrids included) but this is all they have for the Panamera at the mo.

[Amanitin]

suffolk009 said:

But it does, I think, show up the clean-energy-car myth for what it is.

I will bet you 100 quid even the coal plants you mention are way cleaner on a kWh basis than any ICE car.

[suffolk009]

kambites said:

suffolk009 said:

But it does, I think, show up the clean-energy-car myth for what it is.

You don't think half of the energy coming from non-polluting (sort of) sources sounds cleaner than none of the energy coming from non-polluting sources as with an ICE?

I think clean energy is great. The more the merrier. As I said a few pages back, using all the regen possible in a car makes sense. I'm not convinced about the energy effeciency of centralised energy generation, distribution, consumption and then in-car storage. And I don't think plug in electrics are were we'll be in twenty years time.

My big problem with all environmentalism is that it is oversells it's virtue. When I was studying at Architecture school the biggest myth was the "green build". For example high performance windows, would lose much of their thermal efficiency a few years down the line as the gasses leaked out of the glazing. Our Enviro teacher started the lecture with the bold statement "there is no such thing as green building". Similarly there can be no such thing as a green car.

[kambites]

suffolk009 said:

And I don't think plug in electrics are were we'll be in twenty years time.

I can't speak for you, but I'm pretty certain it's where I will be (at least for the family car).

I do agree about the sensationalism in environmentally but unfortunately that's a factor of modern life - since absolutely everything gets sensationalised by the media/politicians/etc. people have come to expect it; anyone who tries to be dispassionate and rational about anything these days gets ignored.

Edited by kambites on Monday 20th March 10:20

[98elise]

Strider said:

The most perceptive article on hybrids I have read, and on-the-button. Good points also from Steve and ManiS. The other issue, not mentioned, is the terrible environmental impact of lithium batteries. Open cast mining causes devastation and unlike an IC engine, recycling is not currently practical. Hybrids should have two functions; 1) to allow further optimisation of IC efficiency, eg filling in the torque gaps to allow further downsizing and 2) energy recovery. It’s also useful to have higher energy on board to run devices more efficiently and allow the addition of electric boost assist. It all leads to 48V being the way forward, at least in the medium term.

So far we have seen only hybrids that have been squeezed in around carry-over elements of existing technology – either the platform, some body-in-white or the powertrain – so it will be interesting to see what architectures appear now we are on the cusp of new generations of vehicle that are designed for hybridisation.

Are you saying that mining is a bigger environmental problem than oil. Hardly a decade goes by without some sort of O&G disaster. Plus of course you know that there is very little lithium in a "lithium" battery.

[ukaskew]

There are far better tests out there for things like emissions and economy than the current system used, a bunch of clever guys down the corridor from me are doing just that.

Employ one of these systems and make the test cover a much broader range of circumstances (maybe with an average score at the end of it) and it would be significantly more difficult to 'game' the system.