Honda Insight + Hybrid Chatter: What the CR-Z should have been all along - Post 288

[Keef]

This sounds very weird to me. As if you're trying to say that cars are the basis for plant life...

He's also forgetting that while we're reducing the supply of CO2 for the plants, we're also reducing the number of plants demanding CO2. By the laws of supply and demand, the lower demand and lower supply should equate to the same conditions?

Aww man, you guys ruined it. You weren't supposed to think that hard. Instead you were just supposed to agree with me that hybrids are really, really crappy.

I agree with Follkiller, and presumably Omnis. Omnis loves diesels.

 

[Philly]

Oh, don't worry. I think we all agree on that front. 👍

 

[YSSMAN]

So if we're all ish-ish on Hybrids, gung-ho on diesels, what are we collectively saying about electric cars?

 

[niky]

Unless it's electricity from a bunker-oil burning plant, an electric car just isn't cool.

 

[homeforsummer]

So if we're all ish-ish on Hybrids, gung-ho on diesels, what are we collectively saying about electric cars?

Personally, I like electric cars. Well, some. I like the ones that are actual cars and not quadricycles that look like Noddy's next set of wheels. And I think that electric cars are where we're collectively going whether powered by batteries or fuel cells. Hybrids are just a bit of a wishy-washy in-between measure that are neither as good as something we already have (diesels) nor as exciting or innovative as other options (electric cars like the Teslas).

I've said it before and it's getting repeated - the only hybrid I have any interest in is the original Insight. It wasn't just a family car in drag like the current crop, it was focused solely on economy and yet according to road tests at the time, was still actually fun to drive.

 

[FoolKiller]

So if we're all ish-ish on Hybrids, gung-ho on diesels, what are we collectively saying about electric cars?

Like, as in plug-in electrics?

Since electricity does not grow on trees, nor is it free, I currently feel it is pointless. Moving the pollution to the power plant and the cost to your electric bill (unsure about the overall expense here) does not solve a thing. If we had more clean power plants then you could argue the environmental angle, but that is it.


And as no electric model that will even be remotely cost-effective and be used as more than a daily local commute car has been shown I personally find them pointless. I put, at a minimum, 80 miles a day on my car going to and from work. If I do anything social it is even more. I need to know the car will go that far on one charge at interstate speeds before I can even consider it viable.

Also, if it cannot go on a 12 hour drive it is effectively useless as an all-around vehicle, unless I can fully charge it as quickly as I can put gas in my tank.

 

[Bram Turismo]

Regarding CO2, I doubt the small overall reduction in CO2 figures really has any effect on plantlife, given that for the most part (not recently, obviously), the world generally buys more cars every year so any reduction at the source is probably canceled out by the increasing number of sources.

We shouldn't be busy with the thought we're actually harming nature with cutting down on CO2 emitting cars at all. Everything that breaths; humans, animals, and whatnot keeps plants alive. It's a balance that has been homing Earth for many, many, many years now. The biggest worry is that not only do cars emit CO2, which isn't the most dangerous part, but along with CO2 come other very dangerous particles, like NOX. It's these that we want to avoid.

So if we're all ish-ish on Hybrids, gung-ho on diesels, what are we collectively saying about electric cars?

Actually, I'm not all "ish-ish" on Hybridsas a matter of fact. I support manufacturers that work on a solution that doesn't make us as reliable on fossil fuels as we are now. I support manufacturers that produce or research cars that don't blow out so many dangerous particles out of the exhaust, to keep so many from getting cancer due to traffic and smog.

The problem is, that what it takes to produce these hybrids make them no longer green cars. The amount of energy it takes to assemble a Pius and get it delivered uses so much more times the fossil fuel as it would use during a lifespan if it were to have a normal petrol engine. Bio-fuel cars on the other side are saying that they drive on plants. If we would keep the production of these sources to farm lands, that'd be a brilliant start to get us of the fossil fuels. But farmers in poor countries with untouched nature where they see a chance to make a living, this solution is also not green anymore. Now you have South American farmers cutting down the Amazon forest to produce green cars. What a paradox.

 

[Keef]

I feel plug-ins will find their nitch, especially in suburban areas where points of interest are close, and electric outlets are easy to find at home. Like where I live. The location is great, because the malls, the groceries, work, any place you would ever need is within at most 10 miles, for sure. The only problem is the people. People in my area aren't likely to spend that much money on a plug-in when they could have an Accord or an Escape, or even the sparse Cadillac and Mercedes here and there.

So yeah, long live fossil fuel. I love high strung, high compression gas engines and I love gnarly torque from turbodiesels. And I want both. The tuner in me cries for a diesel, especially.

 

[Philly]

Since electricity does not grow on trees, nor is it free, I currently feel it is pointless. Moving the pollution to the power plant and the cost to your electric bill (unsure about the overall expense here) does not solve a thing. If we had more clean power plants then you could argue the environmental angle, but that is it.

That definitely depends on location. In the Midwest, where a lot of power comes from burning fossil fuels, plug-ins and electric cars aren't going to do a lot of good. But in places like Seattle, the majority of the power comes from renewables like hydro-electric. So here, electric cars do make a bit of sense. Plus, Seattle is a place where the city car actually works (well, in some locations, not all). Although the only one I've seen here was basically a golf car, and it was up for sale.

Since we all can't agree on hybrids, diesels, biofuels and electrics for our next cars, I propose we go back to the 90s:

 

[FoolKiller]

Seattle is a place where the city car actually works

City-only cars only ever work if you have another car or never intend to leave your city by road...ever.

 

[homeforsummer]

City-only cars only ever work if you have another car or never intend to leave your city by road...ever.

I presume this scenario is much more common over in Europe than it is in the States. I've certainly met people before in the UK who've never been out of their home county, let alone ventured further afield. For such people the city car makes lots of sense.

 

[FoolKiller]

I presume this scenario is much more common over in Europe than it is in the States. I've certainly met people before in the UK who've never been out of their home county, let alone ventured further afield. For such people the city car makes lots of sense.

Wait, no vacations or anything? You never leave the city for anything?

I live 40 miles from work. I drive through an entire county that I never stop in. In my daily drive I am in three counties. I know other members on here in similar situations or who are temporarily having to drive far to work due to the economy.

Just to add, my parents live 35 miles away, my brother about 80 miles away, and if I wish to see a movie in a theater without crackling speakers or enjoy a dinner that could be even remotely considered "nice" I have to drive 30-40 miles.

 

[homeforsummer]

Wait, no vacations or anything? You never leave the city for anything?

I never said I didn't. But many don't. And leaving the city in the UK isn't exactly the same as leaving it in the States. The next nearest place is usually only a few miles and I'd be happy to do journeys like that in a car with only 40bhp even. Like the diesel smart fortwo, off the top of my head. My grandparents do about 3000 miles a year in a Citroen C3 1.6. This is more than enough car for that sort of driving. I do about 6000 miles a year in a 60bhp Ford Fiesta 1.3. And have done for over 6 years now. Again, not a big deal, even when I've driven to the South of London and back in a day from home (roughly a 500 mile or 8-9 hour round trip). I regularly make the 90 mile journey to go home from uni, and the 90 miles back.

I'm not saying I'd want to do those journies in a little electric quadricycle (indeed, I couldn't, as the range wouldn't be great enough) but I can't think of a car on sale in the UK today which wouldn't be capable of the same journey without much difficulty.

And I expect there are many who don't even drive the sort of journeys that I do. I'd wager that a great many really don't need anything more than a city car over here.

 

[YSSMAN]

I rarely drive more than 40 miles in a day, with some exceptions (yesterday, for example). So, for the most part, if I can nab an electric car that can do 100 miles on a charge, that would make perfect sense. So, under my circumstances, a Volt, or a Tesla, or (insert modern electric car here) would do just fine. I do a lot of city driving, so a Hybrid would make a lot of sense as well.

...But, I'll stick with my petrol cars for now. People are already starting to complain about $2.50 a gallon, but it doesn't mean much to me. I'm still averaging 27-28 MPG with the Celica, all while blasting around at 70 MPH. That's good enough for me.

 

[FoolKiller]

But based on your Route 66 trip you can see how it isn't feasible in the US?

 

[YSSMAN]

Oh yeah, of course. These cars would have to have ranges extended into the area of 150-200+ miles, with faster charge times, before that becomes a model that is completely applicable to most Americans. While the Tesla Model S can, in theory, go 300 miles on a single charge, that still is barely enough to get me to Chicago and back. That's where something like the Volt would come in handy, having a gas engine to charge the battery when going beyond the electric range, but that ends up defeating the point if you operate outside of that electric range.

 

[Philly]

To be honest, I don't quite get the range argument. Yeah, sure they won't be able to do road trips, but they are city cars. If you live in a city (and want to be trendy or whatever), they're a perfectly good option for a second or third car. They'll be able to get you to the grocery store and pretty much anywhere you need to go. Although you're still going to need a second gasoline powered car because people will have to go farther than the range will be able to take them.

 

[YSSMAN]

I think it depends on what you're looking for I suppose. My typical range of driving, about three hours one way, is met completely. So, in theory, I could make do with an extended-range EV without any kind of problem. But, occasionally I will drive further as it is a cheaper option to flying - and an EV car would not make that trek. What this comes down to is what you're needs are, what you're willing to spend, and whether or not you're willing to deal with the charge times. The technology has moved forward at an unbelievable pace, and it is due to increase in the coming months and years, but we're still a long way away from a Watchmen-esque world of electric vehicles.

 

[Philly]

For trips like that, though, you'd still have a regular gas car. And then an electric thing for when you need to simply get into town. And especially since cars like the Tesla (maybe even pretty much all electrics?) are niche cars, the owners are pretty likely to own another car.

I think the only people who would own one of those street-legal golf cars electric cars are people who live in a condo within walking distance to downtown. And those are people who wouldn't own a car otherwise. But I do think it'll be a while until electric cars become more than a toy.

 

[YSSMAN]

I dunno. If I had the money, I think I'd consider buying a Tesla Model S as a primary car. I mean, it serves every purpose that I would need it to. The only major concern I would have would be winter operation. Even then, the same could be said for the Volt as well.

Of course, then again, I'd probably have some beat-around car to go with it anyway. Just as a "toy."

 

[homeforsummer]

But based on your Route 66 trip you can see how it isn't feasible in the US?

Of course, but then that's why I was talking about how they'd work much better in the UK. And as Philly pointed out, city cars are for use in the city, so you shouldn't expect them to be up to longer trips.

Nobody is saying that bigger cars shouldn't exist, but small cars have a purpose too.

 

[Jim Prower]

I dunno. If I had the money, I think I'd consider buying a Tesla Model S as a primary car. I mean, it serves every purpose that I would need it to. The only major concern I would have would be winter operation. Even then, the same could be said for the Volt as well.

Of course, then again, I'd probably have some beat-around car to go with it anyway. Just as a "toy."

Like....a VW Fox...:3

'cmon, be a preservationist of the mundane...

Anyway, I think the main thing is gonna be getting charge times down to two-and-a-half minutes or less to make the long-rang EV feasible. 200-300 miles is pretty typical range for a smaller car: I can get 250 out of the tank of my Nova if I try really hard.

Now, I don't know exactly how that would work. It would likely require special "electric stations" like gas stations, where you pay a hiked-up price per megawatt/hour (or even by the watt/hour) to "fill up" your car at such a high voltage/amperage rate that you get a full charge within minutes. of course, handling that much electricity is extremely dangerous in and of itsself.

at current, how long does it take to charge a car from "Batteries giving off Hydrogen" to "Raring to go?"

 

[homeforsummer]

Anyway, I think the main thing is gonna be getting charge times down to two-and-a-half minutes or less to make the long-rang EV feasible. 200-300 miles is pretty typical range for a smaller car: I can get 250 out of the tank of my Nova if I try really hard.

I can manage almost 400 miles from my 10.5 (US) gallon tank. When electric cars start managing that sort of range and charge quickly like you mentioned, then I'd have no problems at all running one as a daily driver. I think I'd always want something running on petrol as a weekend toy though.

 

[FoolKiller]

For trips like that, though, you'd still have a regular gas car. And then an electric thing for when you need to simply get into town. And especially since cars like the Tesla (maybe even pretty much all electrics?) are niche cars, the owners are pretty likely to own another car.

So, everyone (or family) has an extra car? I don't class that as a viable alternative. If the end goal is a new system to replace oil burning and polluting cars you can't have it be something that is in addition to your normal car. I'm not looking for a niche extra for the self-fart smelling crowd. If that were the goal then the "hybrid for everyone" campaign would be even dumber than I already think it is. If I have to buy an electric car at some point I had better be able to trade in my gas car and not notice the difference.

I dunno. If I had the money

This phrase right here should never be used in a conversation about finding an alternative technology to replace what we currently have. For a niche car it is fine, but an alternative should include the phrase "every car owner can afford it."

Nobody is saying that bigger cars shouldn't exist, but small cars have a purpose too.

I have nothing against small cars. I drive a Golf/Rabbit and my wife drives a Yaris. But even the smallest gas powered car can also take you on a long road trip. Electrics are not at that point yet. It is the technology I have an issue with because it is not completely able to replace the utilitarianism of the current technologies.

The reason why we supposedly need to find a viable alternative is that cars have become a multi-purpose tool and as such they create a lot of pollution and have created a dependency on oil. You will not have an alternative until it can eliminate the oil/pollution issue and provide equal tool status. Electric only meets one of those criteria.

Anyway, I think the main thing is gonna be getting charge times down to two-and-a-half minutes or less to make the long-rang EV feasible. 200-300 miles is pretty typical range for a smaller car: I can get 250 out of the tank of my Nova if I try really hard.

As I get 350-400 (really trying) I think the other issue may be that the higher MPG cars we are getting in the interim now will put a higher expectation on the range for an alternative. The longer we wait the farther people will expect the range to be.

 

[Jim Prower]

I can manage almost 400 miles from my 10.5 (US) gallon tank. When electric cars start managing that sort of range and charge quickly like you mentioned, then I'd have no problems at all running one as a daily driver. I think I'd always want something running on petrol as a weekend toy though.

As I get 350-400 (really trying) I think the other issue may be that the higher MPG cars we are getting in the interim now will put a higher expectation on the range for an alternative. The longer we wait the farther people will expect the range to be.

Well, you've gotta remember that I have an Aisin 2-barrel Carb, bricklike aero, and no overdrive gear, as well as 120,000 miles of wear. I figure the tank's not much less than the 10.5 gallons homeforsummer has.

But, yes, as cars get more efficient, more range will be expected from an alternative. consider this: my car is 21 years old. Yours are probably...much, much younger. In those 21 years, we've seen range nearly double on the same amount of fuel. Electric may need to figure out how to do the same in as little as five years.

 

[Philly]

So, everyone (or family) has an extra car? I don't class that as a viable alternative. If the end goal is a new system to replace oil burning and polluting cars you can't have it be something that is in addition to your normal car. I'm not looking for a niche extra for the self-fart smelling crowd. If that were the goal then the "hybrid for everyone" campaign would be even dumber than I already think it is. If I have to buy an electric car at some point I had better be able to trade in my gas car and not notice the difference.

How many American families do you know that operate using one car? If you go out and buy an electric car, chances are very high that you're still going to have another car at your house that'll take you on long trips for the rare occasions that you need to go on one. And the people who buy them anyway are going to be people living in cities. Those people don't need to drive very many miles daily to get where they need to go. I could even see the biggest appeal for electrics to come from the people who would buy a Smart (or showy car), who live in urban centers and who probably don't own another car, and have lived without one just fine for some time.

I think you are seeing electric cars as a direct replacement for petroleum power cars. At this point, they are not. With some of the new generations of electrics (Tesla ect.) coming out, there is nothing wrong with them being a supplement to the gasoline powered car currently in many driveways.

If we are talking replacement, I do see that becoming feasible over time. But the factor is time. However, I am sure technology will progress far enough in the time it takes electric cars to gain popularity and usage as a supplement to make them a feasible replacement for something running on gasoline.

 

[FoolKiller]

How many American families do you know that operate using one car?

Plenty, but it is usually just one per employed driver. If there is a need for two people to drive out of town at the same time (as happens every time my wife has to go out of town since my daily drive is out of town) it can quickly become a problem. Even if it isn't a problem most long trips tend to be in the more efficient car (like we always take my wife's Yaris) and not the one that instantly adds cost to the trip.

I think you are seeing electric cars as a direct replacement for petroleum power cars.

But that is the reasoning behind the push for these alternative technologies, is it not? That is the end goal. Otherwise all we have are a bunch of expensive, pointless "cars" that have the sole purpose of satisfying the egos of guys that want to smell their own farts while talking about reducing their carbon footprint. Sadly though, I think that may be their real purpose. I'm just just looking ahead at what may actually be a viable way to remove oil dependence, and maybe even reduce our environmental impact, while creating the smallest amount of life alterations for everyone. That is the end goal and that is my focus. If this in-between stuff was what mattered we would all be happy with hybrids.

 

[Philly]

Plenty, but it is usually just one per employed driver. If there is a need for two people to drive out of town at the same time (as happens every time my wife has to go out of town since my daily drive is out of town) it can quickly become a problem. Even if it isn't a problem most long trips tend to be in the more efficient car (like we always take my wife's Yaris) and not the one that instantly adds cost to the trip.

You also live and work in different towns, correct? And I take it you're not in a city? If that's the case, then electric cars definitely aren't aimed at you. For my family, it is very rare that anybody has to go more than 30 miles away from home. And a huge majority of people in Seattle probably work no further than 20 miles from their home. So electric city cars will work just fine here. It will be a very long time before people living way out in the boonies are trading their Tahoes in for the latest and greatest electric subcompact.

They are city cars because they are to be used in the city. Most city dwellers tend to do the vast majority of their driving in the city, so a city car meets all the criteria they would need.

But that is the reasoning behind the push for these alternative technologies, is it not? That is the end goal. Otherwise all we have are a bunch of expensive, pointless "cars" that have the sole purpose of satisfying the egos of guys that want to smell their own farts while talking about reducing their carbon footprint. Sadly though, I think that may be their real purpose. I'm just just looking ahead at what may actually be a viable way to remove oil dependence, and maybe even reduce our environmental impact, while creating the smallest amount of life alterations for everyone. That is the end goal and that is my focus. If this in-between stuff was what mattered we would all be happy with hybrids.

The idea is to eventually replace petroleum cars. It's definitely not going to happen overnight, but technology advances pretty quickly these days. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we were seeing electric cars in showrooms five years from now that can match the usefulness of most gasoline cars in showrooms today.

But yes, in order for something like this to advance, you do need some early adopters. In this case, it is mostly people have their candles scented like their own farts and have their head way up in the clouds because "I'm better than you because i'm saving the planet and you're destroying it." And I know this. Seattle pretty much is the headquarters of the so-called earth muffins.

And it is working. All the hyper-milers in Priuses have had their effect. Just look at the number of companies investing in EV research.

 

[FoolKiller]

You also live and work in different towns, correct? And I take it you're not in a city?

Two different cities, and if you consider the state capital to not be a city, then no I guess I don't live in a city. But Louisville, where I work, is in the top 20 US cities by population size. Kentucky is mostly farms, but I live in the metropolitan triangle (Louisville-Lexington-Cincinnati area). But because we are Kentucky not a lot of stuff comes here because we get a lot of stigma. Concerts go to Nashville, Indy or Cincy because they are close enough, but that is like saying a concert won't go to Philadelphia because it is in New York.

If that's the case, then electric cars definitely aren't aimed at you.

Electric cars aren't aimed at me because I like my cars to actually be fun and I love long road trips. Even if they did work for me as a daily car they do not work for people who actually embrace driving, as I do.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if we were seeing electric cars in showrooms five years from now that can match the usefulness of most gasoline cars in showrooms today.

Including a recharge from empty to full in under five minutes?

And it is working. All the hyper-milers in Priuses have had their effect. Just look at the number of companies investing in EV research.

The question is: Is it the proper effect? There are many more fossil fuel burning power plants than there are other kinds combined in the US. Unless that changes too then EV research is going in the wrong direction.

Another thing that needs to be looked at is how much energy and other forms of environmental damage goes into making the car vs. petrol cars. I don't want a CFL situation, where years after the fact someone says, "Hey, these things are poisoning our drinking water."

 

[Philly]

Two different cities, and if you consider the state capital to not be a city, then no I guess I don't live in a city. But Louisville, where I work, is in the top 20 US cities by population size. Kentucky is mostly farms, but I live in the metropolitan triangle (Louisville-Lexington-Cincinnati area). But because we are Kentucky not a lot of stuff comes here because we get a lot of stigma. Concerts go to Nashville, Indy or Cincy because they are close enough, but that is like saying a concert won't go to Philadelphia because it is in New York.

I was just seeing if you were viewing this from a rural standpoint or as an urbanite. I can't say how well current electric technology would work in a Midwest city, but I'm pretty confident that they are at least reasonably practical in denser cities like what we have out West here, and probably some East coast cities.

Including a recharge from empty to full in under five minutes?

Who knows? It is quite a hurdle to overcome, but if people are working at finding out how to do it, I wouldn't rule the possibility out.

The question is: Is it the proper effect? There are many more fossil fuel burning power plants than there are other kinds combined in the US. Unless that changes too then EV research is going in the wrong direction.

Another thing that needs to be looked at is how much energy and other forms of environmental damage goes into making the car vs. petrol cars. I don't want a CFL situation, where years after the fact someone says, "Hey, these things are poisoning our drinking water."

I think we agree here. I personally love my gasoline engines, so I couldn't see myself owning an electric car. They're just not for me.

As for the electricity, the vast majority of electric power in Washington is generated from clean renewables. So in most of the country, I agree that electric cars aren't accomplishing much. But here they do help out a bit.

Are they the best solution to energy independence and environmental protection? I doubt it. However I don't think they can be ruled out on the basis of practicality.