Modded Hybrid Cars Get Up to 250 MPG

artemis67 writes "Politicians and automakers say a car that can both reduce greenhouse gases and free America from its reliance on foreign oil is years or even decades away. Ron Gremban says such a car is parked in his garage. It looks like a typical Toyota Prius hybrid, but in the trunk sits an 80-miles-per-gallon secret -- a stack of 18 brick-sized batteries that boosts the car's high mileage with an extra electrical charge so it can burn even less fuel. Gremban, an electrical engineer and committed environmentalist, spent several months and $3,000 tinkering with his car."

Comments

Re:Of course, that's cheating ...

[qbwiz]

Unfortunately, assuming 36 kWh per gallon of gasoline, and $.12 per kWh of electricity, the equivalent of 1 gallon of gas in electricity costs $4.32. This doesn't take into account relative efficiencies, but electricity is definitely not free.

Re:So like...

[hoka]

You arn't missing anything. I think its a big problem with the car industry and other fanatics in general (and abstractly a problem with marketing really), instead of touting real benefits of a given product they just tout some numbers that make it sound like its the best thing sinced sliced butter or XOR. The current problem with these hybrids is that they are mostly more expensive than pure gas vehicles, and the costs can't be recouped unless you put in some insane driving time on them. Theres also been a lot of talk about how dangerous the batteries are and how costly it will be to get rid of them once they can't hold a charge anymore. From reading TFA it seems like all this guy did was rig in a bunch of extra batteries to gain some extra mileage, which doesn't really do anything worth a damn, since those batteries still have to be charged. I would be more impressed personally if they had come up with something that allows you to charge the batteries while the vehicles in use (such as the brake-chargers that the Honda hybrids used), or some other technology that makes the batteries more bio-safe/longer lasting. I'm moreso looking forward to seeing progress made in Biodiesal before hybrids/pure electrical, since they attack the problem in (what I feel) is a better manner.

Re:That's all good, but..

[k98sven]

The inevitable smart-ass question of "Oh, but that electricity has to come from somewhere!!".

Consider this:
Energy content of gasoline: ~45 MJ/kg
Density of gasoline: 737 kg/m3
1 cubic meter = 264.172051 gallons, equals 2.79 MJ/gallon.

Now 1 kWh is exactly 3.6 MJ. Electricity costs (let's exaggerate) 30 cents per kWh.

What do you pay for gas?

Now add to that the facts that:
1) It is easier to clean up a handfull of power-plants than a millions cars distributed over the whole country.

2) Electricity doesn't have to come from fossil fuel sources

3) Even if it does, power plants still produce energy more efficiently than an automobile engine.

Re:That's all good, but..

[ArbitraryConstant]

"Even if it does, power plants still produce energy more efficiently than an automobile engine."

Everything except natural gas (which is running out and expensive) is stuck below about 35% efficient. Coal power plants a bit more efficient than an engine, but once you factor in transmission losses and storage losses it doesn't really look that good. That, and coal is a very dirty source of power (eg it releases lots of particulates some of them radioactive). The only viable large scale alternative is nuclear, and it's not exactly cheap.

Also, the transmission infrastructure can't take a significant number of people doing this.

Re:So like...

[dr_dank]

Let's force the US to allow the importing of the smartcar.

Smartcars do well in Europe since most cars are very small (Citroens, Fiat Pandas, and the like) and there are fewer of them. Not many cars will be much bigger than yours, save for the occasional Mercedes or tractor-trailer.

The US is far different. Even in times of record high gas prices, SUVs are still selling since many people have the idea that size=safety. Just like the cold war arms race, no one wants a wimpy car that doesn't stand a chance against an encounter with an Escalade.

Even compared to other new non hybrids.....

[Original Buddha]

...it's not worth it. You can get a non hybrid Civic for $14k that gets 32/38 milage. The hybrid Civic runs $6k more but gets 10mpg more. How many years does it take you to break even on the gas costs?

Re:Even compared to other new non hybrids.....

[Alex P Keaton in da]

Um- How much money do you save recycling aluminum? How much do you get paid to drive to the city facility to get rid of old paint and batteries instead of throwing them out? How much do you save by (Name any act that is helpful to the enviornment)?
Doing the right thing isn't always about saving money....
I usually plow snow in the winter as a second job (Find me another second job where you make $50 and hour to drive around in a truck smoking cigarettes and listening to music) but I almost never drive my plow truck in the summer. Is at a big, comfy F350 dually crew cab? Yes. Can I afford to gas it and drive it to work everyday? Yes. Do I? No. I sometimes ride my bike, sometimes carpool and sometimes drive my car. But my big, comfy (I am 6'4" so a F350 is nice for me) truck at home all winter. Why? Because I feel a responsibility for the Earth

Re:Even compared to other new non hybrids.....

[jcr]

You realize that if gas gets that high (and I don't doubt that it will!) that our entire economy will collapse, right?

Nonsense. If fuel prices keep rising, then we'll steam crude oil out of tar sands and shale. Canada has about as much oil as Saudi Arabia, it's just more expensive to extract.

It's nothing more than an engineering problem. When the cost of energy from oil exceeds the cost of other sources over time, we'll start using those other sources.

-jcr

Re:Even compared to other new non hybrids.....

[Listen Up]

When talking about the economic behaviors of population groups it's pretty much all about money. Very few people are going to spend oodles of extra cash simply so they can get kudos from some group of whacko environmentalists; the benefit has to be more immediate, tangible, and proven to actually work.

Hybrid cars aren't any of these things. They're a waste of resources, a waste of tax dollars (subsidies!), and worst of all - they aren't that much more efficient than an economy sedan. Big whoop."

Using the word 'whacko' immediately discredits your post. Your feelings/opinions are clearly defined. Using the term 'big whoop' seriously questions your age and/or maturity.

My wife's Honda Insight has a lifetime fuel economy of 61 MPG for over 120,000 miles. What economy sedan gets that fuel economy? None. My wife also reduced her fuel costs per month from $240 to $80. But, the main reason she bought it is because she cares about the environment. The Honda Insight is also an SULEV. The fuel cost savings were a great benefit. If it was safe to do so, both her and I would ride our bikes to work, but we cannot. If it was all about the money, she would have considered buying a VW TDI with similar fuel economy. There are absolute and definable benefits to owning and driving a Hybrid.

That's great. But what you have to understand is that your feelings are just that - your feelings. No one else is obligated to feel the same way you do about "the Earth", and most people are going to make the rational economic choice rather than the irrational one.

If you want people to join you in saving the planet, you're going to have to show them how it personally benefits them, most likely by putting cash back in their wallets. Telling them it'll "help the ecology" or some such ephemeral rot isn't going to impress them.

That is also false. Hybrids were beginning to become popular before the recent gas cost increases. And they will continue to remain popular even after Iraqi/Alaskan/etc. oil starts flowing into the US in the near future. In this case, your feelings/opinions are not based on fact. And what you believe is 'rational' and 'irrational' is completely subjective. Your views have already been clearly defined. It does not mean anyone else shares your feelings/opinions nor does it make them any more vaild.

To share a point, EVERYWHERE my wife and I drive in her Honda Insight, we get a ton of questions a praise from complete strangers everywhere we stop. Roughly 99% of them were in the process of saving to buy one, talking to a Toyota dealership for a Prius (which currently has a 6 month waiting list from the factory), or are planning on owning one in the next 1-2 years.

Also, not everyone in the world is selfish. There are people who believe in doing what is right, not just what benefits only them.

Re:Even compared to other new non hybrids.....

[mrchaotica]

My wife's Honda Insight has a lifetime fuel economy of 61 MPG for over 120,000 miles. What economy sedan gets that fuel economy? None. My wife also reduced her fuel costs per month from $240 to $80. But, the main reason she bought it is because she cares about the environment. The Honda Insight is also an SULEV. The fuel cost savings were a great benefit. If it was safe to do so, both her and I would ride our bikes to work, but we cannot. If it was all about the money, she would have considered buying a VW TDI with similar fuel economy. There are absolute and definable benefits to owning and driving a Hybrid.

I think Insights are really cool too, but mostly because of their shape and light weight. I wish they would make a non-hybrid version (a modern CRX!). That said, I've got some thoughts for you:

1. I realize that you didn't get the Insight solely for milage or to save money, but you should still realize that even considering the fuel savings a 30MPG, $10K (or less) Hyundai Accent is cheaper over that 120K miles.
2. The TDI may have poor emissions (mostly particulates and NOx), but if you ran it on biodiesel it would have ZERO net CO2 emissions (i.e. it wouldn't contribute to global warming).
3. You're considering the efficiency and emissions during the life of the car, but have you considered those things before and after the life of the car? Those batteries take a lot of materials, energy, and pollution to make (probably enough to offset the fuel savings already), and you still need to worry about disposing of them!

Re:Even compared to other new non hybrids.....

[anthony_dipierro]

The free market won't do it, but those are real costs that a "rational" person would pay (unless it is voluntary, thus allowing freeloaders).

The free market would work perfectly fine for garbage disposal costs. The problem is we don't have a free market, we have a government run system which charges people based on things fairly unrelated to their costs.

But you're right, most people are too short-sighted to do it unless you give them an economic incentive.

Well, most people are too short-signed to do it even if you do give them an economic incentive. Most people aren't going to recycle just because they save $1/month in garbage hauling fees. So their time must not be worth the savings.

Anyway, going back to the hybrid vs. all-gas car question, I don't think there's a clear winner with regard to which is better for the environment and society. Sure, you don't directly pollute quite as much, and you don't create quite as much CO2. But people had to spend quite a bit more time and energy to create the product, and the environmental impact of the disposal is a bit more. Even if we assume that environmental pollution is everything - and it isn't (we could have a much cleaner environment if got rid of all cars, went back to farming, etc.) - I don't think there's even a clear-cut winner for that. Battery production and disposal has a big impact on the environment, as well as all the other production and disposal of the extra features of the car. In the end which is more important environmentally probably comes down to how much you drive the car. But if you're a big environmentalist you probably don't drive that much anyway.

Besides all that, environmental impact is not the only factor in impact on society. When you add in the intangibles like more free time the auto workers had to spend with their family instead of building you a hybrid, I think the true cost is fairly well represented by the sticker cost. This is especially true because gasoline is already taxed. That's another factor there, too. By using more gas you're contributing more to society monetarily.

If you really want to spend $6000 bettering the environment, I've gotta believe there are a lot better ways to do it than buying a hybrid car. Buy and plant 100 trees. Or donate the money to an environmental group. The possibilities are endless.

Re:We care about the children too

[DigiShaman]

It doesn't just piss you off, it really really pisses me off...and I live in Texas.

I wish I could just purchase a car without all of that extra safety shit and roll the dice on whether or not I survive. In return, I get a car with a huge discount. But noooooooo, the Big Government wont give me that option. So I must pay the "safety tax"

Re:So like...

[dal20402]

SUVs don't need to be justified.

I'd appreciate it if you would justify to me why you're wearing out the roads faster, the ones I pay for with my tax dollars. Until there are higher registration fees for heavier vehicles, SUV drivers are getting subsidized by the rest of us.

And that doesn't even touch the global warming issue.

Re:So like...

[Ihlosi]

I don't care if it bothers other people. They have no right to be in my busines, and neither does the government which you probably wish would regulate SUVs. Let me drive what I want and I wil let you drive what you want. I'm not complaining, why are you?

Because you are polluting the air that I breathe, because it's people with your attitude who are impacting the climate I have to live in, and so forth. Your right to do as you please ends, for one thing, where you start hurting others.

Reminds me of the old Texas saying (I realize Bush doesn't adhere to this so piss off): Leave me the hell alone and I'll leave you the hell alone.

Good. Great. I'm all for it. Now could you please move to another planet (or show me one I can relocate to, preferably one that has all the amenities of our little blue ball of dirt, like breathabe atmosphere, ecosystem, close to 1g of gravity, magnetic field to help keep the solar wind out, preferable somewhere close by that the move doesn't take half a millenium).

What, you can't ? Geee.

Re:So like...

[Bertie]

Sitting here in Europe as I am, cars like the Ford Crown Victoria baffle me. I've been in the back of one a few times since they're often used as taxis, and my impression was "hang on, this car's three-quarters of a mile long and I've got no legroom". It's like the Tardis in reverse. And the luggage capacity wasn't all that great either, due to some spectacularly bad design of the trunk/boot/whatever, with all sorts of things encroaching on the space. I don't really understand why anyone would buy one of these giant, unwieldy slugs when something as small as a Honda Civic is spacious enough that my sister, who's 5'6", was able to get up and walk into the passenger seat from the back row.

And of course, size=safety is a total fallacy. Size=weight=bigger bang when you hit something. And in a car like the Crown Victoria, which seems to have been completely unaffected by the last 30 years or so of progress in car design, I wouldn't be too confident that it'll crumple in a passenger-friendly way if I stuck it in a wall. Most fairly small cars are incredibly safe these days - check out the Euro-NCAP tests to see how our silly little European econoboxes cope with being flung at walls and stuff, and all whilst getting hybrid-style fuel ecnonomy out of their diesel engines.

Not having a go at you personally, you understand, I just don't see the point of these cramped, inefficient, slow, thirsty behemoths in this day and age.