Deron Lovaas, who heads the vehicle campaign at the National Resources Defense Council, says that several such tax-incentive bills will likely be submitted this year. "There are sure to be others, because there's a lot of enthusiasm about this in D.C. right now," he says. Lovaas says that tax credits could have a significant impact on plug-in hybrid sales. He cites the success of tax credits for conventional hybrids, whose sales have doubled every year since 2001. (See a summary of current tax credits here.) Automakers have recently expressed increased interest in developing plug-in hybrids. Late last year, General Motors (GM) announced an upcoming plug-in version of its Saturn Vue. (See "GM's Plug-In Hybrid.") A123 Systems announced an agreement with GM to help develop a prototype battery pack for the Vue. The packs are scheduled to be ready for testing in vehicles by the end of the year. In January, GM also revealed its Volt concept car. The vehicle takes plug-in hybrids a step further by using an all-electric drive train. The battery pack can be recharged by an onboard gas-powered generator or by plugging it into the wall. (See "Powering GM's Electric Vehicles.") A study released last week suggests that over time, plug-in hybrids could cut overall vehicle emissions of carbon dioxide in half, while saving owners about $450 a year in fuel costs. According to a press release announcing the study, which was done by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, in Golden, CO, and the utility company Xcel Energy, based in Minneapolis, although plug-in hybrids would draw power from the electricity grid, they would not necessarily increase the need for electrical infrastructure. That's because they could be recharged at night when much of the capacity of power plants isn't being used. Another study, by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, also suggests that plug-in hybrids could be charged using existing power plants, at least in most of the country. (See "How Plug-In Hybrids Will Save the Grid.") |
 |
|
||
| |||
Audio »
Share »
Digg this
Add to del.icio.us
Add to Reddit
Add to Facebook
Slashdot It!
Stumble It!
Add to Newsvine
Add to Connotea
Add to CiteUlike
Add to Furl
Googlize this
Add to Rojo
Add to MyWeb
Favorite
Print
E-mail
Comments
MITBeta on 03/01/2007 at 8:36 AM
21
If hybrid cars get twice the mileage of regular cars, does that mean their overall efficiency is in the 30% range? If so, then it's about the same efficiency as converting coal to electricity and transmitting it to the charging station. Take 10% off for each of charging station losses, battery losses, and maybe you include electric motor losses.
Does this really end up being a better solution?
rick2653 on 03/01/2007 at 9:26 AM
5
If you get 150mpg from a PHEV, then what does it mean?. With a properly outfitted PHEV, the 1st 40 miles/day or so miles are all-electric. That means over 50% of all drivers don't buy gasoline for their average daily driving needs.
So analyze the grid: 50% Coal(with carbon sequestration on the horizon), 20% Natgas, 20% Nuke and 10% Wind-roughly. These plants operate much cleaner than autos so if you can't find progress here, then you need to do some research.
Further DOE analysis has shown that 84% of the US automobile fleet(If it morphed into PHEV's overnight) could be powered by the existing power grid and structure since these cars will, for the most part, be charged at night on off peak power. I just don't have time to find that link but if you search for it, it's out there.
lowilliams on 03/01/2007 at 10:56 AM
17
rick2653 on 03/01/2007 at 12:01 PM
5
I simply can't believe what I'm reading here on an MIT board???????????????? I suppose we should fiddle while Rome burns?
Look again at the Phoenix and it's AltairNano batery. I'll post the info again:
1) Top speed of the truck: 95mph all electric
2) Range: 135 miles all electric
3) Recharge time: 10 minutes with 440 electric
4) 12 year lifetime. 15,000 in house labtest cycles
============
This claim would encompass the driving needs of at least 80% of all automibile drivers in the US. Maybe the world.
Since:
50% of all drivers drive <40 miles/day.
80% of all drivers drive <60 miles/day.
That takes a lot of Internal Combustion Engines off the road. And that is progress.
Second point. MIT proposes Ethanol from Garbage which they claim can be produced fo $.05-.95/gallon. Search this site for "Etahnol from Trash". They further claim that the US generates enough trash to replace 25% of the gasoline we currently consume. Think about that. With a combo of PHEV's and Ethanol from Trash this country could eliminate 90%+ of it's oil imports, dramatically clean up the air, eliminate landfills and risk to water tables, etc,etc and set the economy on an global economic boom like we haven't seen since the '90's.
VCRAGAIN on 03/03/2007 at 8:26 AM
33
GO TO IT GUYS - IF YOU DONT DO IT OTHERS WILL - AND YOU KNOW THEY MAKE GREAT PRODUCTS !!
DONT ALLOW BIG OIL TO SQUASH THE NEW IDEAS - CAPITALISM ISNT ALWAYS THE BEST WAY - MAYBE WE NEED A MOTOR INDUSTRY CZAR AT THIS POINT (:>) ?
esteeze on 03/07/2007 at 2:58 PM
1
I think electricity is about .10 / kWH in most markets (on average), so if you can find the overnight power draw for a charging cycle, you could reasonable figure the expected costs for consumers.
rollsplit on 03/08/2007 at 1:52 PM
4
Anyways, if an 'immediate' goal is to reduce oil imports, hybrids can help. Yes, the energy is coming from the grid instead, but America has vast coal reserves. It's easier to reduce pollutants at the factory level than at each car on the road. We can deal with replacing coal after we deal with reducing oil imports... one thing at a time.
GaryB on 04/02/2007 at 3:48 PM
39
If we had plug in hybrids, reducing carbon release from electricity production on the grid would in turn save it in transportation as well. This would be a good step forward.
westernmine on 12/12/2007 at 7:12 PM
2
beesidemeusa on 03/02/2007 at 12:07 PM
4
rick2653 on 03/01/2007 at 8:41 AM
5
1) Top speed of the truck: 95mph all electric
2) Range: 135 miles all electric
3) Recharge time: 10 minutes with 440 electric
4) 12 year lifetime. 15,000 in house labtest cycles
============
This claim would encompass the driving needs of at least 80% of all automibile drivers in the US. Maybe the world.
Since:
50% of all drivers drive <40 miles/day.
80% of all drivers drive <60 miles/day.
theBike45 on 03/01/2007 at 9:22 AM
13
tla723 on 03/05/2007 at 3:21 PM
20
theradicalmoderate on 03/01/2007 at 9:53 AM
5
$4200 tax credit--maybe going to $6000, as a SWAG.
$450/year fuel savings.
So, $4000 incremental cost after tax credit / $450 = 8.9 year amortization period.
Median age of passenger cars is now 9.2 years, so this would be getting close. I wonder how much battery life will affect resale? (A lot, I'd guess.)
If you can get the pre-tax-credit incrmental cost down by 25-30%, looks like you've got a clear winner, as long as the tax credits hold up.
jazambra on 03/01/2007 at 6:46 PM
3
To travel 100 miles in a current car would take 4 gallons and cost $10.00 (approximately)
An electric vehicle would need about 21 kwh to travel this distance.
At 50% efficiency you would need to purchase 42 kwh which (at 12 ยข/kwh) would cost $5.04 or half of what the gasoline costs.
So a plug in vehicle costs half as much and has the added benefit that the source of this energy can be much cleaner, does not depend on unstable world regions, and is not about to run out.
bobkro on 03/01/2007 at 11:19 PM
1
In the "Past Posting" column on the right, click on "Ethanol or Hybrids? - the Real Story, Part IV."
Contact: bobkro@hotmail.com
dotcommodity on 03/02/2007 at 12:40 AM
6
<a href="http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/02/us_air_force_pl.html">scroll down the page for details</a>
"Dyess AFB in Texas, Fairchild AFB in Washington, and Minot AFB in North Dakota achieve nearly 100% of their electrical energy requirements from wind energy systems located near their installations."
So the next step is get more energy from infinite sources like wind. Then the plug in is the way to go.
dotcommodity on 03/02/2007 at 12:51 AM
6
Heres Thomas Edison on energy:
"You see, we should utilize natural forces and thus get all of our power. Sunshine is a form of energy, and the winds and the tides are manifestations of energy.
We burn up wood and coal, as renters burn up the front fence for fuel. We live like squatters, not as if we owned the property."
We need to stop thinking like "squatters, not as if we owned the property"
And quickly: because we have about 10 years.
alternativee.org on 03/02/2007 at 5:50 AM
9
www.alternativee.org
tla723 on 03/05/2007 at 3:50 PM
20
wmerck on 03/05/2007 at 8:01 PM
4
tla723 on 03/07/2007 at 3:51 PM
20
gwf_fly on 03/02/2007 at 12:29 PM
9
ferrerister on 03/02/2007 at 6:57 PM
2
I'm curious about a few things. When people say that electric cars are going to be bigger pollutants because of the plants that are burning tons of coal, I have to wonder how much energy is wasted in transporting fuel to gas stations that is done primarily with trucks. How much oil does that use per year? How much electricity is needed to power the pumps at gas stations? Does anyone know these statistics. They obviously wouldn't factor in as greatly unless we moved to purely electric cars, but I'm curious.
While that seems like a pipe dream, or at least a far, far off reality, I think the possibility of a trash based ethanol is pretty amazing for the obvious reasons.
I also have a question about battery regeneration in electric cars. It seems to me, that if you used not only the braking system to recharge the battery, but also the wind power from the car's movement and kinetic power from the rotation of the tires, you should be able to sustain much longer distances. I'm by no means a physics major, but these in conjunction seem like they'd provide a lot of energy considering that an electric engine powers off when it's not in use.
Does anyone know if a car like this? Is it feasible? How much battery regeneration would take place in a car like this? Sorry if it's a dumb question, but like I said my physics knowledge is pretty abysmal :0)
enoch on 03/03/2007 at 10:35 AM
3
dotcommodity on 03/03/2007 at 11:29 PM
6
You drive in and swap batteries, drive off in your Solar-charged battery. It apparently takes 9 hrs to recharge the Prius battery at 1 kw per hr, about like a hairdryer.
gman on 03/25/2007 at 11:13 PM
3
desolation0 on 03/06/2007 at 6:37 PM
13
RedChina on 03/03/2007 at 11:24 PM
1
What we need to do is start using "clean" energy. There already exist this type, it covers our planet by almost 80%, and it's called water. But what keeps us from using it, is the cost to extract the hydrogen from the oxygen. If you really are going to fund research, do it where it matters the most for everyone on this planet, as once we understand the answer to produce the hydrogen from seawater, and affordable we all can stop going to war, stop polluting and change our pattern of destruction upon the only environment we all share on this planet.
If we don't do this soon, there isn't going to be blue skies, clean water, fresh air for anyone. Come to China and your discover this now. Honestly, most of our polluted cities we cannot even see the Moon and the stars. It's become a luxury to experience a "blue sky" day here in China.
China's development is based upon the American consumers, as more than 80% is exported mostly to the US. This is the reality, and I haven't even begin to paint the full picture here.
No oil company is going to care, and if you check your oil companies, such as Exxon, your see they have made record profits in all of history this last year. Yes, profits in the billions of dollars when you Americans were paying more to drive.
Please understand the whole picture, and know the best course of action isn't the Bush Administration, it's with the people, for them to choose... you are able to still do that right?
dotcommodity on 03/03/2007 at 11:35 PM
6
Any links to their websites?
I heard that we can't export our cars to China because the miles per gallon (mpg) is too low on our cars.
One reason Detroit is in trouble. We just lost 100,000 jobs. I suspect its the same in Europe. They have like 100 choices of cars that get good mpg: we have only the Prius hybrid...long waiting lines
desolation0 on 03/06/2007 at 6:43 PM
13
jmaximus9 on 03/04/2007 at 1:55 AM
32
As far as the tax credits go consider this, we already subsidize the oil industry to the tune of hundreds of billions every year. If you added the cost of our middle east adventures to the cost of a gallon of gas how much would it be? 10 or 20 dollars a gallon?
Lets put this cost where it belongs, on the oil companies. Then we wouldn't need any credits.
dotcommodity on 03/04/2007 at 2:34 PM
6