Slashdot Mirror
Hybrid Cars Don't Live Up to Mileage Claims
Omega1045 writes "Wired News is running a great little article about how hybrid cars (specifically Honda and Toyota models) do not come anywhere close to living up to their fuel efficiency claims. The article highlights that the EPA tests are more to blame than the car manufactures. Consumer reports has shown that the mileage for these cars can be as low as 60% of the claims. The article also links to a blog authored by hybrid enthusiast Pete Blackshaw detailing his failures getting any real answers on why his Honda Civic Hybrid isn't getting better fuel mileage. It looks like these cars are more hype than help in the battle against pollution and foreign fuel reliance."
Personally, I'm interested in hybrids but not for fuel efficiency reasons. I'd like to see auto makers combine the output from different energy sources into all-wheel acceleration of a normal car. I remember seeing something on the news a few years ago about Ford experimenting with that on an Explorer, trying to jazz up the acceleration of a bigger vehicle. I don't know what became of that testing, if anything. But it would be extremely cool to see that technology in a small, sporty car.
It has to do with the way the milage per gallon is calculated. It's not the same as really driving.
Let's go Hurricanes!!! 2006 Stanley Cup Champions!!!
I get 32MPG out of my 1.8T Jetta (5-speed stick) on the highway. But I've read all over the place that the zippy little turbo belches all kinds of nasties when fully engaged.
What I'd be more interested in is the air and environment impact of charging batteries vs. providing high torgue. Not to mention what one does with batteries that can no longer hold a charge. Land fills?
Let's not look at just the MPG's on this. Let's look at the over-all impact of the vehicle throughout it's lifespan. Even if it doesn't immediately effect your bottom-line... it could effect your quality of life in 25 years.
cheers,
Levendis47
--==[ AOL YIM ICQ : Levendis47 : levendis47@yahoo.com ]==--
I am laughing, cause my TDI (Diesel) actually gets 40-50mpg, is thousands less then a hybrid and diesel is now way cheaper then gasoline.
This isn't informative, it's a half-truth. So what if you can't create more energy? A huge amount of the energy that burning gas (exploding gas fumes, really) liberates is wasted in heat out the engine, heat out the gas pipe, and heat due to friction on the brake pads. Offhandedly dismissing the impact that reclaiming some of that wasted energy can have is ignorant. It's like looking at a river and thinking "Well, we can't make this water create any additional power". Build a dam and create a manmade lake, and you can generate billions of kilowatt hours per year.
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Baby
We can make it here
You can drink the exhaust (h20)
You can tell OPEC to rotate.
Many a long talk since then I have had with the man in the moon; he had my confidence on the voyage. Joshua Slocum
Honda has a new Diesel powered car that isn't a hybrid, and is getting 76 MPG (U.S. gallons) in real-world testing by the FIA. It's also breaking speed records for its class in the FIA testing (with the exact same cars used for the fuel efficiency test). I'm curious as to why diesel powered cars aren't more popular in the US, they can be much more efficient, and with recent advances in catalytic converters, and technology, these new diesel engines run very clean and very quietly.
There's no batteries to worry about, and you get a fullsize (well... not subcompact like most hybrids anyway, hehe) car with a full trunk to use.
-Jesse
Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
Diesel cars with similar fuel effiecncy, but definitely not the cleaniness, have been around for ages.
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Bio is also over 3$ a gallon. Thats over 43$ a tank of gas!
Err, gas in the US is gettin there (and in Hawaii it's already there)...
Considering we should be slapping a Gulf War tax on every gallon of gasoline sold, perhaps homegrown fuel would be less of a 'sacrifice'..
(frankly we should put a war tax on gasoline and subsidize biofuels, removing agricultural subsidies that are alleviated by increased pricing due to legitimate demand and giving 3rd world agribiz better access to our markets... but that's another rant..)
But if I can get double the mileage out of a diesel then it's effectively two tanks in your car. Given the gas prices currently, 2 tanks on any sedan will likely be more than $43.
If you think about it, city driving involves less aerodynamic drag, so it should require less energy to accomplish. Motorcycles (driven sanely) regularly do better in town than on the highway, largely because their aerodynamics are crap. Hybrids are typically designed with lots of efficient features (as you point out) and hence do OK on the highway -- but where they really shine is in city conditions, where they use less fuel per mile [and a regular car would use more fuel per mile].
I have about 35k miles on my Honda Insight, and I am getting the mileage as advertised. It is rated, if memory serves, to get between 62 and 68 mpg. I am averaging about 63. Granted, because most of my miles are highway miles, you could argue that I should be getting 68, but I cannot exactly complain with 63.
;)
One thing this car has taught me, however, is that I don't think any car will get the mileage as advertised if you do not drive it "correctly." Because the Insight gives me constant feedback about what sort of MPGs I am getting at any given time, I have learned and adopted different driving patterns to maximize MPGs. For example, when coming up to a red light, I tend to coast and slow down gradually, rather than accelerating right up to it, and braking more quickly. Anyone in the passenger seat does not notice the behavior as weird, and at this point I just do it naturally and without thinking. However, when I am in a friend's car with them driving, I do notice that they tend to accelerate right up until the light, and then break fairly quickly. Little behaviors like that affect what sort of MPGs you get, and unless you drive a car that gives you that sort of feedback, many people do not tend to think about such things as having a real effect on their mileage.
I have a friend that just bought a new car, and it is advertised as allegedly getting around 30mpgs... However, as he accelerates quickly on highways, passes other cars frequently, and brakes late at lights - I know he is not getting the mileage he thinks he is... Had he had a display on his dash, like the Insight, that told him his mileage, he might believe me
my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
Biodiesal is a good fuel for replacing some of our oil usage. The other main benifit that you forgot to mention is that it is carbon neutral since any CO2 put into the air from exhaust is balenced by the CO2 taken out of the air by the plants grown to create the biodiesel.
At the moment it is only twice as expensive as diesel here in the US (although what will all the agricultural tarriffs jacking prices up and subsidies bringing them down, it is damn near impossible to calculate the true economic cost of biodiesal). There is the kink that all of our fertilizers are fossil fuel based, so the cost of producing biodiesal will go up as the cost of fossil fuel goes up. The only other alternative is to go to crop cycling and other natural sustainable methods of fertalization, which are also less cost efficient.
However the real killer is that if you sit down and do the back of the envelope calculations, you will find that growing enough biofuel to replace all the world's oil usage would require all the arable land on the entire planet. In other words we would have to bulldoze all the woods, rainforests, plains, and marshes, and replace them with biomass crops. Not only will will destroy most of the natural habitats on the planet, but at this point we also loose the carbon neutral benifit because we are taking other plants out of the carbon cycle to put ours in.
So Biodiesal, like solar, is a good supplement to our enegry needs, but not a sustainable complete replacement.
His main problem is not the car, but the fact that he believed what he was sold from Honda Dealer would all be true.
Surely there were plenty of independent channels he could have turned to, including locals with the same type of car, for real-world independent info before he bought the car.
The recent junk-science story here lamented lack of critical thinking in everyday life: Believe TV advertisers at your own peril.
FWIW, EPA give plenty of caveats on their web site regarding lack of applicability of their mileage-rating model to individual performance, so calling them out for this also doesn't work.
sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
I think that in the US market the typical diesel is still nasty high-sulphur stuff - fuel which the newer cleaner diesel engines used in Europe don't cope with very well.
So for the US market diesel has a bad reputation for pollutants - so probably simply won't appeal to people who would buy hybrid for environmental reasons.
The worst component of diesel exhaust is sulphur. Not only does it cause respitory diseases, it also makes it harder for the catalytic converter to do its work. Pn top of that, sulphur is harmful for the engine.
Diesel fuel in Europe is of much higher quality, with a sulphur content of 50ppm, against a sulphur content of up to 3,400ppm in the States. In my view it is the unwillingness of the US oil companies to do something about their sulphur content that is stopping modern diesel technology from really breaking into the US market.
Let's look at this from a clean air standpoint, since that's the big reason for the push for different car fuel technologies.
Aside from biodiesel, which doesn't seem to be getting any attention from auto manufacturers, our options are HEV, electric, and fuel cell. When weighing the differences among these, the big thing you have to remember is that in all three cases, you're burning fossil fuels to generate the energy that drives your car. That's right - the electricity that runs your electric car has to be generated somewhere, and the electricity that is used to produce the hydrogen that is used in your car also has to be generated somewhere. (From this standpoint, a hydrogen fuel cell isn't an energy source in itself so much as a fancy kind of battery.)
So if we're going to be burning fossil fuels no matter what, it seems that the most important thing to do would be to pick the cleanest fossil fuel to burn. In the case of HEVs, we're burning gasoline. In the case of electric and fuel cell cars, we're getting the electricity from lots of sources, but far and away the biggest source is burning coal.
Last I checked, coal is a hell of a lot dirtier than gasoline, which, contrary to popular belief, is one of the cleaner fossil fuels we have, and probably will be for a long time.
With that in mind I ask if the fuel reformer / fuel cell combo is really cleaner, or is it just cleaner if you only need 10 feet of space surrounding your car to be cleaner and not all the air you breathe day to day.