Comments on: Crossing Diesels with Plug-In Hybrids: Good or Bad Idea?

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:41:59 +0000

True, the financial cost is less to produce, but the amount needed to create is more. The financial aspect is not one to be ignored, though. I don't see any politicians running to cut the tax structure right now.

The emissions for diesels is a problem, because the cost to putting in the clean filters is high, not to mention the replacement costs.

Biodiesel makes a lot of things better, but even there the case is not clear cut. I happen to fall on your side of things there, although the availability is a big issue for most.

They do have more power.

By: Eideard

Eideard — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:32:24 +0000

Wrong - lots of places.

At the refinery, the cost of producing diesel is less than gasoline.

The only reasons for higher cost, state-by-state, is taxes.

Look at today's clean diesel and emissions are NOT a significant problem. And the happiest diesel drivers in my extended family are those who have convenient access to biodiesel.

The critters not only run cleaner and cheaper, they have more power.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 15:47:07 +0000

There are two things. Diesel vs gas pros aren't as clear cut as you make them out to be. The emissions are a real problem, plus the added energy to use diesel instead of gasoline makes it a questionable move for most environmentalists. Add in the higher cost of diesel (for now), plus the much higher initial cost to purchase a diesel and you end up with a lot of cons.

Mating a diesel to an electric motor makes sense in that you're increasing your fuel efficiency, but by how much, really? Yes, you might go from 50 mpg to 60 mpg in a Prius, but is that really worth the several thousand more?

When you talk about plug-ins however, the added cost is smaller proportionately to the overall cost. (What's a couple thousand more to a car that's going to cost over 40 grand, right?)

By: waltinseattle

waltinseattle — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 19:26:15 +0000

Mr Wallace has touch most of my points. I would only now address the ownership of batteries as perhaps a separate proposition from ownership of the vehicle they are used in. A system of leasing them, charged, from a station much as we pick up propane , acetylene and other gases in special canisters which belong to the station, not the customer. This insures expert maineneance care and allows best alocation of monies ( like saving the car buyer from the tremendous burden that is yet, and for the forseeable future, high enough to turn many off on the idea of going electric. A lease system will spread the burden.

I for the life of me cant understand why so many hybrids sem determined to hold on outmoded power trains!!!

By: Bob Wallace

Bob Wallace — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 03:08:05 +0000

Use the diesel to drive a generator. Make it a genset. Like the Volt.

That way the diesel can run at a fixed RPM, can be optimized for a fixed RPM. That should be even less polluting. (And remember, we have had low sulfur diesel in the US for only a short time. That's where some of the opposition to diesels comes from.)

Power the wheels with electricity. Electric motors have enormous torque. (Look at what the Tesla can do on a quarter mile track.)

Use in hub motors. That makes for easier regenerative braking. It eliminates the weight of the drive train and it increases efficiency by about 10%.

Design the battery space large enough to hold a 25kWh pack (or whatever the standard EV pack turns out to be). Design the car to allow battery swaps. When the price of batteries comes down the car could be reborn as a "100 mile range" plug in, with extended range from the genset if needed.

By: Darb Dabney

Darb Dabney — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 01:05:39 +0000

Seems to me that most locomotive engines are diesel-electric hybrids in some sense (although not of the plug-in variety). Getting that sort of power train into a small, lightweight package seems attractive, if it doesn't end up costing more than either hybird or diesel vehicles.