Jt, that isn’t what I’m talking about. I’m not talking about a hybrid that while driving starts an engine to support the EV system, or one that supplements the EV system with a gas motor, which is what are currently on the market.
I’m talking about a vehicle that can be turned off and walked away from and, based on the battery pack charge, turn on a small gas motor to charge the pack up, shutting it down again once the batteries are at full charge, with no intervention by the driver except to have enabled the system originally. And without the driver having to leave the vehicle on. And without enabling the operating systems, leaving the vehicle still protected by its security system.
Right now it’s more efficient to let the ice turn the wheels supplemented by electric motors/batteries. The Fisker Karma worked the way you want, mtnbike, with a fully electric drivetrain and an ice that charged the batteries. If you put it in its higher performance mode it would also start the ice if you accelerated hard. That way the motors could draw on all the power the batteries could provide plus the power coming from the alternator. That’s a good idea as batteries able to give good performance are big, heavy, and need complex cooling system (see what Tesla uses). As batteries get lighter and more capable we’ll likely see hybrids with small engines or fuel cells keeping the batteries charged. Combining fuel cells and batteries lets you have a much smaller fuel cell. We’re likely to see all sorts of mixes of power sources over the next decade+, most not available commercially. When batteries and/or fuel cells get small and cheap enough, we’ll have some truly interesting cars.
Mountainbike, it seems to me that a car like the Volt with remote start could be altered to work that way. I guess that might be useful when away from home, but I’m not sure that leaving it unattended Ina hotel or restaurant lot is a good idea. I wouldn’t do it at home in my garage because I could plug it in and charge it. But maybe there are times when it could work.
Well I for one think Hybrids are here to stay EZGO(think thats the manu)has an electric sort of golf cart with a 170 mile range-its supplimented with a six horsepower Briggs and Stratton engine @Same,good idea-but you would probaly run afoul of anti idle laws in some places-Kevin
Any car that charges it’s battery with an internal combustion engine is at a big disadvantage to those that charge theirs by being plugged into an outlet. We are running our house while the power is out on a generator and making electricity this way in a house by house basis, just like car by car, is woefully inefficient.
If there was an advantage, the Volt and other hybrids would be doing it.
I agree with those who believe we’re going to see all sorts of variants of electric/gas hybrids in the immediate future… we already are. Especially as battery technology advances, and I’m optimistic that now that it’s seen as a viable energy source for automotive use, there will be more technological advances in batteries. I’m also optimistic that as the range of EVs improves, recharging options proliferate, and prices come down due to economies of mass, EVs will eventually displace hybrids. In twenty years, the new car market will probably be mostly EVs with hybrids at the lower price-points.
It’s a purely personal view, but if Tesla had not made the technological leaps they did to enable decent range EVs, and they had not changed the perception of EVs from purely a cult vehicle to a potentially desirable car, I don’t think we’d even be having this discussion. I believe that the major manufacturers are too risk-averse to have made the transition by themselves. It required a new view of EVs and the willingness to take the risks. I personally think we owe Tesla a debt of gratitude. I understand that it was never intended by Tesla to be an altruistic endeavor, and I understand if others disagree.
In order for new technology to take hold, the atmosphere has to be right and factions have to cooperate. It doesn’t hurt that Toyota is a willing partner and incentives galor are made available. Teslar deals in such high end cars, no one is threatened. But, let the technogy become more practical , and the gloves come off and it’s no longer Mr nice guy from competing companies. At that point, you may see Teslar bought out…
VW is selling the eGolf now. It has a range comparable to the Leaf, and is reputed to go over 100 miles on a charge if you work at it. Best of all, it is a Golf with an electric motor for propulsion. Handling and all the systems in the cockpit are the same.
Dag, I know automotive history is littered with exactly the situation you describe, but I hope in Tesla’s case it doesn’t happen. It would be a true shame if monster-size corporate greed were to crush the evolution of EVs. The push by auto dealer groups to get states to mandate their franchise model as a statutory requirement for the sale of automobiles is very much along the lines of what you describe. Sadly, with so many legislators for sale, it might happen in too many states. If state “A” were to mandate it and its neighbor state “B” were to allow a free sales model, state “A” might be unable to compete. That would probably be dealt with by some form of interstate tariffs (taxes or whatever), and that would pile a disaster onto a disaster. It would kill a truly creative idea that should proper or die freely in the marketplace based upon its own merits or shortfalls.
Same…I don’t see the buying out of Teslar as an attempt to “crush” the EV evolution. I see it as an attempt to control the technology. For example, auto makers, like any other for profit technology, including medicine and computer that have advanced products that could benefit all of us more but are metered out in sequence to maximize the profit of those on the market. The best technology IMHO, always does manage to come to the front if it’s economically feasible…but realistically. In order to make anything affordable, the previous generation of lower tech products “have” to be maxed out in their profit making life.
All existing auto companies cannot afford to “go electric” without maximizing the profits on their gas guzzling trucks and SUVs for example and diversity of contradictory products seems necessary in the automotive world.
The only institution that can afford to leap frog these steps are non profit (half jokingly) military use where defense is a goal over profits. Manhattan project approaches yields more immediate benefits but is less efficient economically in the long run in maintaining employment which is better overall for our capitalistic driven economy. That we can’t afford to have compromised.
No doubt, workable electric cars could have been on the market and selling like hot cakes for limited city and local use decades ago, elven with updated lead acid batteries…they just aren’t long term profit makers.
Teslar is getting a lot of financial" aid" from their partners and govt (that’s us) if you will because it does not have the profit making capability of lower tech products. It’s the nature of the beast. I too applaud their efforts but none of their executives will go poor if the company goes belly up. Their work will continue with others carrying the torch. Buy outs are not always bad things and though we may disagree on the politics of it, the govt bail out of GM etc. was just as much of a temporary buy out as it was a bailout.
In the GM bailout we lost $10 billion of our tax dollars, enabled a bankrupt private company to stay in business without suffering the pain that creates changes in the business model (definitely not the purpose of taxation), and interfered dramatically with the greatest features of the free market system, preventing more efficient manufacturers from taking over market share from the bankrupt business. We’d probably best leave that one out of the discussion. We’ve pretty well debated that one to death, and there are basic philosophies at work in that debate.
As regards Tesla, I would hope that in the case of a buyout the progress would continue, but I lack faith in the willingness of the major manufacturers to take the risks and their willingness to make the investments necessary. My feeling is that if they were willing to be that creative and take the risks, their enormous resources would have made the progress before Tesla ever came along. My feeling is that this kind of technology exploration and progress is not encouraged in large corporations due to the quest to always be profitable in all endeavors. That’s a healthy philosophy from a profitability standpoint, but it doesn’t support the development of truly new technologies well.
Re: Tesla’s founders, these guys were already extremely successful Silicone Valley guys before they began Tesla. They’re all set for life no matter what happens. But if Tesla were to be bought out, I wouldn’t be surprised if they simply walked away from EVs and pursued an entirely different high-tech endeavor. My guess is that it’s the journey into new technology that excites these guys.
@Thesamemountainbike
I appreciate your sentiments. Though I agree we “probably best leave that out of the discussion” , the comment occurs after you still make your points. Something like a spousal disagreement …“II’ll tell you what I think but your thoughts are inappropriate .” Just a “probably best leave that out of the discussion” would have been sufficient as I made no comments nor will I. ;))
As far as what ever happens to Teslar, I have complete confidence in our system and if Teslar decides it can’t go it alone without generating enough profit from their product sales, any worthwhile technology gleaned to that point will and should be supported by companies with greater solvency like Toyota who now has a vested interest in them. There is definitely a balance between supplying worthwhile technology to the masses and doing it profitably. Teslar does not have to “walk away” and their best minds will continue to work to the same end…just under a different name. It happens all the time in the automotive industry.
I sincerely hope that if Tesla or their technology are bought by a behemouth the technology continues to develop. I fear my hopes might be dashed. I hope I’m wrong.
Re: the guys from Tesla, they just don’t seem to me to be the types to work for someone else to keep their technology evolving. Not for any amount. I still think they’d more likely walk away and pursue some high-tech something that we haven’t even dreamed of yet. They seem to me to be pure visionaries, and visionaries don’t usually do well under a corporate structure.
I hope we never have to find out. I hope Tesla stays independent until EVs become commonplace.
If Teslar ever mass produces a $30 k electric car with the performance characteristics of it’s most recent venture, you can bet both you and I will be in line to order one (figuratively speaking) and the automotive world will be set on it’s ear, let alone police traffic monitoring procedures.
I’d love it. It would be a true automotive revolution.
Of course, in my case I’d stick with my Scion and enjoy owning it… unless I stumble onto some money, a new car is outside my budget for the foreseeable future. Should I win the lottery, you can bet I’ll be there in line with you… literally speaking.