Honda uninterested in plug-in hybrids
Honda is upping its production of gas-electric hybrid cars, but has no immediate plans to develop the kind of hybrid that would recharge from an electrical outlet, the company announced Tuesday.
Honda CEO Takeo Fukui also publicly criticized General Motors for its pursuit of the Chevy Volt at a press conference on Tuesday in Japan.
If that kind of high-performance battery power is possible then carmakers would be better served making a completely electric vehicle from an environmental standpoint, said Fukui, according to the The Wall Street Journal (subscription required).
Honda is scheduled to release several environmentally friendly vehicles at the 2007 Tokyo auto show this week. Among them may be a hybrid sports car and a diesel-engine car that gets 60 mpg.
GM has been touring its Chevy Volt, a plug-in hybrid electric car that it plans to make available to consumers by 2010, across the U.S. since its debut at the Detroit auto show. The Volt could possibly run off lithium-ion battery power alone for about 40 miles, according to GM.
Many critics have raised questions as to whether that battery type, more commonly used in laptops, could be cost effective and energy efficient for car use. GM has said it's developing the necessary technology to make a lithium-ion battery hybrid successful and plans to test out the Volt as soon as spring 2008.
The news follows statements made Monday by Toyota that it's taking its time to develop a plug-in hybrid to address questions of cost, efficiency and consumer interest.
In a software-driven world, it's easy to forget about the nuts and bolts. Whether it's cars, robots, personal gadgetry or industrial machines, Candace Lombardi examines the moving parts that keep our world rotating. A journalist who divides her time between the United States and the United Kingdom, Lombardi has written about technology for the sites of The New York Times, CNET, USA Today, MSN, ZDNet, Silicon.com, and GameSpot. E-mail her at candacelombardi@gmail.com. She is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not a current employee of CNET. 
a third generation li ion battery, thus Honda can't build a plug-in, thus plug-ins are inferior. This is NOT going over with the auto electrification crowd. The Honda exec is being viewed as 1) either a total fool, or 2) a liar
singing the company song. Tell people a technology is on the way that's better than our crappy hybrid models and you lose auto executive job real fast. Both Toyota and Honda are being
viewed as dysfunctional companies with respect to the electrification of the automobile. They all behave as if they just returned from a long vacation on Mars.
Of course, Honda has to create something that serves its self interest. Would you buy a type writer or harmonica for your t-bone steak? Would you go buy an ice to dump into your baby crib? You know why you wouldn?t? Because it these don?t serve your self interest. Would you go out and buy industrial grade meat cutter for your chopped salad? Like wise, Honda isn?t interested in making plug-in vehicle. Is this okay, if Honda doesn?t? Do these companies (Honda, Toyota, or others) have to do all things your way? Why don?t you go out and buy a type writer for your dinner?
Lithium ion batteries aren?t available at a quantity where it can be used for a car. If it was, there would be one. Honda executives aren?t view as fool? that?s how the biker rider views the company. And for this bike rider, all of sudden a hybrid is crap now. When a plug-in automobile becomes available this bike peddler will now say claim that lithium battery plugs-ins is crap? why doesn?t Honda make xyz available? will say that Honda is either liar or fools. Honda is an exemplary automobile company that introduced the first hybrid to the market and has one of most fuel efficient engines in the world.
You know how much lithium-ion batteries cost? The notebook batteries can power notebook computer for on average of 3 hours.. at max. these batteries cost $100. Now, this is just a notebook computer. Imagine, powering the whole car?
The fact is, Hybrid isn?t all the efficient anyway? let alone all electric vehicle.
There are people who belongs to?I want it now!? crowd, impatient and demanding people. They just want things now.
Son: ?Mommy, Mommy, can you get me some candy??
Mother: ?No son, you can?t, we are about to have a dinner.?
Son: ?No MOMMY! I WANT IT NOW!?
You see these kids in grocery stores, undisciplined and spoiled brats.
cells? What would you plug that in for?
Also plug in cars won't do much good for the environment. The
vast majority of that power they get when they plug will come
from coal fired power plants. The worst polluters in the world
so until the US decides to get with the program and nix these
and switch to something else plug in cars won't do any good
because instead of more CO2 coming from your exhaust pipe, it
will just come from the power plant instead. And also raise your
own power consumption at the same time.
Until the U.S. catches up newkyalerly with progressive nations like France and Lithuania, plug-ins are out.
Same goes for Fuel Cells.. Same problem. It take too much electricity to create hydrogen fuel.
Coal plants average in the efficiency range of the mid 40% range; some getting as high as 48%. Cars, at best are 25-30%, and they lose their efficiency quickly as your rpms vary from the ideal 3000. Draining a battery faster by accelerating faster effects their efficiency much less than a gas engine, thereby making it even better to use even dirty coal than relatively cleaner oil.
This is the reason heavy construction equipment, say mining trucks, and diesel locomotives are actually diesel electric hybrids. They have been for decades. The efficiencies on those large scales have been too great to ignore, even when oil was less than $10 a barrel.
So, considering that coal isn't going anywhere anytime soon; as much as I wish it would, it's still a great idea to get those plug-in hybrids on the market!
Also, it's better for the US to burn coal, which we have lots of, than to buy oil, which we buy primarily from countries that don't like us.
:)
Currently there are two better alternatives to hybrids: advanced internal combustion technology and electric cars (soon to be a reallity on the streets of eastern asia and europe, if not america). Why combine the internal combustion engine with an electric motor when alone, either one of them could do a far better job? There is no reason, other than this ridiculous hybrid fad. Seriously get over it, and stop driving a huge truck/SUV/van when you dont live on a farm/dont go off-roading/ dont have 5 kids.
Hybrids give significant boosts in efficiency today and could help shave our petroleum usage by 1/3 or more while newer technologies are developed and perfected.
The Mitsubishi i-EV looks to have a 160Km (~99Mi) range which would make it potentially practical as a dedicated commuter car but you need to push the range well over 200Mi in order for anyone besides a serious EV enthusiast to consider an electric as their only car.
Hybrids have the same (usually better) range as a gas-only car which means you could easily have one as your only car.
Reasonably speaking most people should be able to drive the distances these electric cars are built for. But either way its the city planners fault for allowing urban sprawl, thats the real problem not the distance these vehicles get.
http://www.gm-volt.com
I'm truly baffled why GM is the only car company that's aggressively going in this obviously superior direction.
kicking and screaming to electric or plug-in technology. They
have too much investment in the service and parts department
infrastructure. Electric cars have far fewer parts and much less
maintenance (profit) than todays cars. Also think of the loss of
jobs in the service departments etc.
No carburetors, fuel injectors, catalytic converters, pistons,
valves, radiators, emission controls, exhaust systems... It's a
nobrainer they are not going to be excited by plug-in hybrids. It
moves them away from the gravy train of the last hundred years.
Mike
Yes, but then there are batteries, different parts of an electric motor, completely new possibilities of car layouts, etc. The only people that wouldnt want this are companies that supply things such as spark plugs, catalytic convertors etc (if the company itself doesnt make them). The jobs lost from a lack of an internal combustion engine will be made up for by this being new technology, or at least a new and advanced application of it. As far is plug in hybrids they are ****, just all hybrids.
making a completely electric vehicle from an environmental
standpoint, said *****", that is precisely what Tesla makes. In
short, Honda is agreeing with Telsa's position.
I should point out that while many people are interested in the
Telsa Roadster, it's not a very economical car for anyone who's
not fabulously wealthy. It is a Lotus Elise (a $45,000 car) with an
electric motor. In short, you pay a $55,000 premium for a motor
and get slightly better 0-60 times.
It's also not clear that the battery pack is economical. Even if
electricity were free*, a battery pack that lasts 100,000 miles
and costs $10,000 still works out to $.10 per mile. At $3.00 per
gallon, that's the same price per mile as most sedans--and they
don't cost $100,000.
While you can presently make an economic case that hybrids are
basically a wash when it comes to cost, the same cannot be said
for raw electric cars. They are expensive, heavy and untested.
This isn't to say that I fundamentally oppose electric cars, I
don't. I think that this is an evolving technology that isn't at
present ready for the average Joe. Sure, the same guys who buy
Lamborghinis and Bentleys may buy the Tesla, but companies
will have to produce much cheaper electric cars to make their
way into the average guy's garage.
2) The global warming myth has finally been fully debunked, so that's no longer a consideration.
3) We have enough oil in Alaska and in shale to last the US for another 500 years and we can now extract it, again, with virtually no damage to the environment.
So I ask you, what's the point?
2) And! It's a special Martian blend that produces no emissions
upon combustion!
3) And! And! We can send away for it via the U.S. post!
So, really, what's the point? HA HA HA HA! NEO CONS FOR TEH
WIN!!
Tesla is proving that electric cars are viable. The price of the batteries would plummet if GM (or Honda or Toyota) decided to mass produce them, the car would be affordable, and GM would have to figure out how to make money when their service & parts income dried up.
If we want to see electric cars in the mainstream the issue is a new business model for the big automakers.
Anyone compare the price of gas to the price of electricity for a mile of driving the car?
- by ThefutureConan June 6, 2008 4:49 PM PDT
- I completely agree with theBike45. Plug-ins are all about transitioning to the future; trying out new technology now to advance more quickly. Plus, ***** is missing the point from the consumer standpoint - MONEY. It costs much less per mile with today's electricity prices than does gasoline. And, the notion that consumers would not be willing to charge their car overnight is obsurd (not that this is one of *****'s main points, but is discussed every time the subject of pulg-ins is brought up). I plug in all kinds of things when I get home from work; whats one more, especially one that I know will prevent me from going to the gas station? Also, regarding the environment, it makes sense that it would not improve greenhouse gas emissions (although I would really like to see a study on that, I would think coal power plants and transmission lines are pretty efficient) by a significant amount. However, again - missing the point. Part of the transition to the future is to develop green energy in ALL sectors, include power plants. Wind, solar, nuclear, etc will become more prevalent, thus negating the argument that plug-ins won't reduce green house gas. (And, not everybody gets their electricity from coal anyway). I think if GM can pull it off (the Chevy Volt I mean), they have a good shot at reviving the company and becoming a leader in the transition to the future of transportation. It almost sounds like Honda is giving up on this most likely avenue to (in my opinion) the transition to completely green transportation
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(27 Comments)