Toyota Unveils Plug-in Hybrid Prius 555
phlack writes "Toyota has announced a plug-in hybrid vehicle, based on their popular Prius. So far, it will only have a range of 8 miles on the battery (13km). They are going to test this vehicle on the public roads, apparently a first for the industry. From the article: 'Unlike earlier gasoline-electric hybrids, which run on a parallel system twinning battery power and a combustion engine, plug-in cars are designed to enable short trips powered entirely by the electric motor, using a battery that can be charged through an electric socket at home. Many environmental advocates see them as the best available technology to reduce gasoline consumption and global-warming greenhouse gas emissions, but engineers say battery technology is still insufficient to store enough energy for long-distance travel.'"
Please explain (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Please explain (Score:4, Interesting)
But there's really no reason to rule out a giant rubber band.
Works for me (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, I'll still keep my bigger, gas fueled beast for when I have further to go, but this should be a real option for many people.
Re:Please explain (Score:5, Interesting)
Gasoline for cars, diesel for trucks, furnace oil for ships and kerosene for the jets all come mainly from imported crude oil. The shortfall between domestic crude production and the demand has widened very rapidly in the last decade. To keep sending more and more money to the Middle East to import oil is madness. Sooner we kick the imported oil addiction better it is for the West. Plug in hybrids would reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
Re:Please explain (Score:5, Interesting)
Additionally, having an electric car means that when the electric company upgrades their plant, you're automatically greener. With a gas car, you're still polluting the same amount.
That's just off the top of my head, mind you.
Re:Please explain (Score:5, Interesting)
With internal-combustion-only cars, there is no migration path. Whatever method of energy generation you use, it all has to end up as gasoline (or similar fuel). This is, currently, enormously wasteful for energy sources that aren't fossil-fuel based.
With electric engines, you're right that *today*, we mostly use fossil fuels to generate it, and so it isn't a great solution.
But *soon*, we will be using more wind, solar, geothermal, nuclear, you-name-it energy sources, and as that happens, we start to eliminate the need for fossile fuels.
My father in law lives in L.A., and has enough spare energy from solar to power a car, but there's no option on the market that will let him do this. Right now, he just sells it back to the grid. But with this type of hybrid vehicle, he could be almost completely self sufficient.
Electricity is fungible - you can turn anything into it, and turn it into just about anything. Fossil fuels are only good for burning.
Hybrid is a misnomer (Score:3, Interesting)
Oh yeah, you put gas in the tank, and the engine will charge the battery, or you could put gas in the tank and drive it up a hill and brake all the way down. Either way it is powered by gasoline.
Re:Why the Prius?? (Score:5, Interesting)
120 miles? (Score:4, Interesting)
The batteries don't have a long way to go, they've just been forced out of the picture.
Re:nicad? (Score:3, Interesting)
Nimh batteries would be a more cost effective option, and Toyota used them in it's all electric Rav4. Sadly, Chevron now owns the patents and won't let the technology back on the market -- http://www.ev1.org/chevron.htm [ev1.org]
Re:why wasn't the original plug in? (Score:3, Interesting)
2 stages (Score:2, Interesting)
1) The jump to electric power is a must, it's cleaner, easier to transport over long distances, and it can be produced many different ways. What we don't have yet, is a great way to store electricity in medium-sized quantities efficiently. Batteries just simply won't take us there, chemical storage is not the best solution. While Fuel cells may provide some relief, I'm not sure they will be optimal long-term.
Electric power is best stored as electric power, and that means that we need to continue to develop ultra-capacitors. While the density is not yet on par with the other two technologies, there is a lot of promising research being done to increase the density. In time it will become competitive with battery densities, but there are much greater advantages to using caps over batteries:
*Caps can be charged very quickly, and as the technology matures, we're becoming more efficient at discharging caps at variable rates while retaining high efficiency.
*Caps can be charged and discharged millions of times with little to no performance loss.
*Caps are very safe for the environment, and also safe to put on board a vehicle and hand-held electronics. No hazardous waste, no explosions, and most likely no chemical leaks, etc....
2) The gap from cars and planes needs to be made back to trains. Japan and Europe have a huge advantage over the US, and we need to invest some money in making smarter decisions. The bullet trains in Japan get groups of people from one place to another at very impressive rates, almost rivaling airfare speeds. When you think about the time it takes to go through security, board a plane, load it with cargo, take-off, get up to cruising speed, land, get off the plane, go through security and get back on the road, there is a lot of overhead.
Bullet trains can offer speeds up to 200 mph, and typically have much faster boarding and unloading times. A trip from San Antonio to Dallas could take an hour and a half, but Google maps tells me that it takes over 4 and a half hours via automobile. I think it would be tough to beat an hour and a half total time from the time you stepped foot in the airport in SA until the time you left DFW. Similarly, you could easily make it from Boston to DC in under 3 hours.
While I understand that planes can make these times currently, they do it on fossil fuels, and they are not efficient. Trains can use a lot less power to move people a lot more efficiently, and they can do it on electric power. Trains with caps on board could pick up charge at various stations, while the passengers load and unload, and then travel on cap power to the next station. Wind and solar power could be set up at these various stations to keep a steady supply of power waiting for the next train to arrive.
Trains also offer safety over both cars and planes. There are much fewer accidents, as there are fewer drivers and more passengers. This is also an advantage in places like Europe where passengers can make their long trips while sleeping in a cabin at night. Imagine boarding a train in Denver at 10 PM and waking up the next morning in New York City with enough time to make an 8 AM meeting. Imagine paying prices similarly to taking a bus to get there.
I know that was a long comment, but I really think this could be promising if the government would tax gasoline more and start funding the construction of a better train transportation system. It would have to start out small, Boston to New York, DC to Philadelphia, Dallas to San Antonio, Atlanta to Miami, Chicago to Detroit. Eventually it could expand. For inner city travel we could use subway systems and buses.
Trains are affordable, efficient, clean, fast, safe, and versatile.
Re:Battery Life (Score:4, Interesting)
Heat, deep discharges, cell reversal, and overcharging is hard on batteries. The long range drivers do the worst.. Top the batteries off to get maximum range, run them till they go no more and repeat. Plan on buying new batteries every few years just like you do for your digital camera, MP3 player, cell phone, laptop, and other devices that get deep cycles often.
I think the Toyota 8 mile range is to extend the battery life to 10+ years. It is not for maximum driving range at a high cost.
Re:Please explain - dielectrics (Score:3, Interesting)
Batteries have energy storage on the order of 1 MJ/kg. The numbers I quoted for the theoretical limits for capacitors are on the order of 1 MJ/kg. You aren't doing a very good job of disproving my point with your examples.
I assumed you had a magical dielectric with a dielectric constant of 1000 capable of supporting electric fields of 10 MV/m (capacitors are typically rated to half the breakdown voltage, so this means 20 MV/m). The best reported dielectrics I've heard of have constants of around 6000, but no breakdown information was provided (10+ MV/m is very hard to get).
Supercapacitors and ultracapacitors get their performance by using nanoporus materials to vastly improve surface area. Electric double-layer capacitors get their performance by using clever techniques to get a very uniform dielectric layer, which lets them work closer to maximum tolerances. No magic in either of these.
If you're claiming much more than 1 MJ/kg, provide citations, or it's vapour.
Electric Vehicle (Score:3, Interesting)
For anyone interested, he has a site describing how he did his conversion here:
http://www.evhelp.com/ [evhelp.com]
-Nate
Re:Please explain (Score:2, Interesting)
I did a little research to find approximate values...
most efficient current US coal turbine: 35%
power transmission: 92%
HV to MV Transformer: 99%
MV to mains Transformer: 98%
rectification: 90%
DC motor: 85%
====
total: 23%
Typical internal combustion engine: 25%
Closer than I thought, anyway.
Re:Please explain (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:120 miles? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Please explain (Score:3, Interesting)
That's fascinating; I can see how small flywheels could fit into that application very well. They use them for some small machines to even out performance, essentially storing energy across inputs, as in a car transmission.
I think the Mr. Hates Ultracaps guy was talking about something like this [hybridcars.com]; as near as I can tell, that's state of the art for flywheel ideas with regard to cars. Of course it can't store nearly enough energy to be useful to actually run the car for any length of time so its not really germane to the general discussion; but it is clever enough as far as it goes. That page imagines 36% as the efficiency for an electric vehicle's regen system (as a comparison) but of course it would be (using their numbers) 80% of 80%, or 64% for an ultracap assisted or based electric car - no chemical conversions. Which is better than the number quoted for the flywheel. The assumption of 80% is pretty harsh, too - most motors and generators can do much better, and while you might not have great control of the braking (generator) conversion in the worst case, you certainly have direct control over the acceleration phase, so I think the 80% back conversion is too conservative, which would bring it up past 64% quite handily. Numbers like 85% for a DC motor are pretty conservative, and using them, it is 85% of 85%, or 72%. Kind of obviates the whole flywheel idea; it's that CVT that kills it, of course - how to get a continuously variable wheel rotation into a flywheel's accelerating spin without wasting energy with some form of a clutch is troublesome for the whole "keep the energy kinetic" idea. It's a wonder they can hit 60%.
Re:Tesla (Score:3, Interesting)
Sports sedan
Tesla is also currently working on an announced but unrevealed sedan, codenamed "WhiteStar", which may be introduced in 2009 as a 2010 model. It is being designed as an alternative to the BMW 5 Series, with an estimated price of $50,000-70,000. [1] WhiteStar is to be built in a new plant in New Mexico.
[edit]Future models
Future plans include a more affordable third model. The development and production of this future model, codenamed "BlueStar", will be funded by profits from the WhiteStar sedan. According to Tesla, if everything goes according to plan, BlueStar will be released in 2012 and cost around $30,000.[3]
Re:8 miles? (Score:2, Interesting)