Realistic societal energy use conversion timeframe?

[Gurm]

180k is the "life of the car"?

That's... sad. Just sad.

[Gurm]

Just did a little research. The Prius wasn't even sold here until 2001, putting the OLDEST well under the "life of the car". There are virtually none available used.

The "common model" - or what you see in production now and are likely to see used in another few years - was introduced in 2004. We have NO idea what the lifespan of this car is.

And I don't care WHAT they claim about mileage versus age. NiMH batteries that are older than a few years are mostly worthless. I've never had one that kept its charge after a few years.

Yeah, I know - you're going to tell me about different catalysts, blah blah blah. The proof is in the pudding. When 2011 hits and we've got 10-year-old Priuses on the road, we'll see - and I'll be happy if I'm wrong. When 2014 hits and we've got 10-year-old common-distribution models, then we'll REALLY see.

[Brian Ellis]

180k is the "life of the car"?

That's... sad. Just sad.

Really! What an example of misinterpretation! Where does it say that? It says that it is tested to 180 k, not that 180 k is the life of the car. It goes on to say that Canadian taxi drivers have exceeded 200 k and at least one is on record at having passed 300 k. This kind of distortion of facts is inadmissible and it is that which is sad, just sad.

[Brian Ellis]

Just did a little research. The Prius wasn't even sold here until 2001, putting the OLDEST well under the "life of the car". There are virtually none available used.

The "common model" - or what you see in production now and are likely to see used in another few years - was introduced in 2004. We have NO idea what the lifespan of this car is.

And I don't care WHAT they claim about mileage versus age. NiMH batteries that are older than a few years are mostly worthless. I've never had one that kept its charge after a few years.

Yeah, I know - you're going to tell me about different catalysts, blah blah blah. The proof is in the pudding. When 2011 hits and we've got 10-year-old Priuses on the road, we'll see - and I'll be happy if I'm wrong. When 2014 hits and we've got 10-year-old common-distribution models, then we'll REALLY see.

The Honda Insight and the Prius batteries were of the same make.

We have no idea what the lifetime of the latest BMW or Volvo is, either. For all we know, some new technology or materials may make the body welds spring apart, or that a new alloy in the cyliner block may be subject to unforeseen wear, or that the latest shockers will fail after 80 k, causing the cars to suddenly veer off the road. All cars are a gamble.

We have 9 years of production Insights + 5 years of prototype and pre-production models. Honda would know by now whether to give their batteries an 8 year guarantee, as is the case here, or not. You can bet your bottom dollar that an 8 year guarantee means at least 10, probably 12, years expected lifetime. Battery lifetime studies are easily calculated by mathematical extrapolation of real-life data, anyway. I'm afraid that your views may be summed up in two words: unsubstantiated prejudice.

[Claymonkey]

Brian - I appreciate where you're coming from, but while not as harsh in my wording I have the same concerns as Gurm. I honestly hope you're right and the batteries WILL last that long, but if we've made those kind of advancements in NIMH batteries why haven't they moved into the consumer market yet? It makes economic sense that they wouldn't give an 8 year guarantee on a battery if it wouldn't last for 10-12. However, I'm not sure it's as severe in the rest of the world, but we in the US have sadly gotten used to cheap/disposable consumer goods and it has left us gun shy.

I have a blender/mixer that is as old as I am and it still does a better job than anything that I can buy at the store that isn't restaurant grade. Until I bought my Subaru Forester I had a 1988 Corolla that just wouldn't die as long as I did basic maintenance.. and even when I didn't if I then did some basic repair it was back up and running again. A TV my grandparent's bought was expected to last 20-30 years and it was worthwhile to repair it.. now you buy whatever is $200-300 and if it dies you go buy a new TV.

You can blame it on instant gratification society but the industries building this stuff LIKES you buying new stuff on a regular basis. Does the car industry want a car that lasts a quarter million miles? Heck until gas got expensive the auto industry here wanted you to buy a truck/SUV because the profit margin was greater.

My fear would be that they would know that the batteries won't last that long but expect an advancement in the next couple years that may or may not come. With normal 'maintenance' the consumer would bring the car in for service and the battery would just be replaced. Mind you I think this sound STUPID from a financial standpoint but the auto industry is scared scared scared and might do something stupid just to stay in the market now in hopes of a better tomorrow. I admit I might just be seeing conspiracy theories around every corner but then I wanted to have this discussion to get the facts. I have NO facts to back up this paragraph but it didn't take that many jumps in logic either.

Buying a car IS a gamble and when the right car comes along that gives me the utility I need AND amazing gas mileage I'll buy it. I live in the city so there is NO way I'd buy a truck. However, I lug weird and awkward stuff around on a regular basis. I also tend to drive up to Maine about 20 times a year to be with my family. The all wheel drive and storage capacity of the Forester works for me. I just happen to get around 30mpg/hwy AND it's takes up less space in street parking than most sedans I drive. When Subaru starts getting into the hybrid market.. THEN I'll think about buying one. Not that I will only buy a Subaru but at that point enough other companies will be making the kind of car model that will turn my head. When I bought the Forester the salesman told me that Subaru builds a lot of the parts for OTHER companies hybrids but wouldn't get into the industry itself until the battery technology could actually handle the needs of an all wheel drive vehicle. I'll gamble with my car... but I like to hedge my bets. I made enough stupid bets when I was 20-25 thank you.

[Gurm]

You can blame it on instant gratification society but the industries building this stuff LIKES you buying new stuff on a regular basis. Does the car industry want a car that lasts a quarter million miles? Heck until gas got expensive the auto industry here wanted you to buy a truck/SUV because the profit margin was greater.

You've hit the nail on the head. Car companies are only going "green" because they HAVE to, because the public EXPECTS them to, and because the government is FORCING them to.

My fear would be that they would know that the batteries won't last that long but expect an advancement in the next couple years that may or may not come. With normal 'maintenance' the consumer would bring the car in for service and the battery would just be replaced. Mind you I think this sound STUPID from a financial standpoint but the auto industry is scared scared scared and might do something stupid just to stay in the market now in hopes of a better tomorrow. I admit I might just be seeing conspiracy theories around every corner but then I wanted to have this discussion to get the facts. I have NO facts to back up this paragraph but it didn't take that many jumps in logic either.

No jumps in logic. Volvo, BMW, and Mercedes offer 5 year, 60k warranties on EVERYTHING on the car. Bumper-to-bumper. Too much wind noise? They'll add insulation to the doors. Radio sounds lousy? New pre-amps and speakers. AC doesn't blow cold? Here's an all-new unit. Funny noise when turning? Let's replace your power steering system with a newer, better model.

Compare this to Kia. Kia offers a "bumper-to-bumper" warranty for 2 or 3 years, but a friend had a BRAND NEW one that made horrid noises over bumps. I told him, after taking a peek, that he should go to the dealership and get a new rear shock mount. The dealership - and TWO OTHERS - told him that shock mounts weren't covered, that it wasn't mechanically failing (just horrible sounding), and offered to cut him a BREAK on the work, but not to do it under warranty.

The auto industry has been loss-leading for a while. They offer you the economical model that COSTS them money, in order to be able to sell some giganto-tanks that net them huge profits. It REALLY wouldn't surprise me if this were the same.

And I really do share your concern. If there are better catalysts out there, if there REALLY IS a NiMH battery that lasts longer than a year under heavy use... why can't I buy one? (Because I can't - not for any amount of money!) I fail to believe that they came out with a better NiMH ... what was Brian saying? 13 YEARS AGO? And that NONE of that technology has filtered down to the consumer!

Watch the ads sometime on TV. "10 year, 100,000 mile warranty!" - but then in small print "powertrain only". Nobody really guarantees anything on the car except what the government FORCES them to guarantee, which right now is the "powertrain" (engine, axles, etc.)

I am simply highly suspicious of magical claims. If someone could really build a battery that would take that abuse, SOMEONE in the consumer sector would have something that came CLOSE. But the best NiMH's out there last a couple hundred charges, or a year, and then start to seriously degrade. LiON's? About a year of normal use.

[Brian Ellis]

I can answer the question why NiMH batteries will last in hybrid cars much longer than in other devices. The short answer is a computer. The longer answer is that NiMH does not like being either fully charged or discharged. In the car, the computer ensures that the charge never exceeds about 80% nor discharges to less than 20% of the weakest cell. Why? Because the energy going into or out of the battery is converted to or from chemical energy. If the battery is fully charged, and there is still a charging current, the energy is not converted into a chemical change, it is converted into heat which destroys the battery capacity over time. If the battery is discharged to zero of the weakest cell, the better cells still discharge through the weakest one with a reverse current, thus destroying it further. A NiMH (not a LI-ion) battery will last indefinitely if it is not maltreated and the computer constantly monitors the state of charge, the temperature, the charging and discharging current demand etc. The NiMH battery in your wireless mouse would last just as long if you had a $500 computer monitoring its charge/discharge, temperature, state of charge etc. It doesn't because you charge it to 100++% and discharge it to 0--%.

[Claymonkey]

Ok that makes sense... but what happens when a car sits for a few months when someone is on vacation? The NIMH I've used tend to lose the charge and have to be charged to be used at ALL after sitting for awhile.

For a regularly used car... not a big deal but for the sometimes driver that is trying to be as economical as possible...

[Brian Ellis]

That is a good point. Honda recommends for my car that it should be used once per month minimum but unofficially the garage told me that there is no problem with 2 months. If someone were to foresee prolonged absences with no one using the car, perhaps a hybrid would not be a good idea.

[Gurm]

That is a good point. Honda recommends for my car that it should be used once per month minimum but unofficially the garage told me that there is no problem with 2 months. If someone were to foresee prolonged absences with no one using the car, perhaps a hybrid would not be a good idea.

I think my point is the deceptiveness. I don't know what a hybrid costs in Cyprus as compared to a similar non-hybrid model, but the Prius - although it carries a premium - is competitively priced here. I think a lot of my problem is the way they advertise and recommend these vehicles.

[Brian Ellis]

When I bought my Civic Hybrid, the list price was CYP 12,500, while the Prius was CYP 16,800 (CYP1=USD2.10 at the time). Deduct from that CYP 700 subsidy (both cars), which I received 10 months later. At the same time, an ordinary Civic 1.8 with roughly similar performance and nearly twice the consumption was, IIRC, CYP 8,900, so the premium was considerable. OTOH, I was offered an exceptional CYP 4,500 for my 9 y-o C-RV, for which I paid CYP 10,500 new in part exchange, so I paid CYP 7,300 (subsidy deducted), taxed, on the road with a full tank.

There has been almost no publicity for either model, probably because they cannot get enough of them. I waited 7 months for delivery and the Prius is similar. There has been little in the way of media articles either. AFAIK, the only other hybrid available here is the monster Lexus 4x4 SUV gas guzzler (does not qualify for the subsidy as its consumption is higher than my old C-RV!). There is no deceptiveness, other than the usual fuel consumption figures in the brochure of all cars!

Talking of consumption, the new EPA figures are pretty well spot-on according to my experience, except when the temperature is >38°C in summer. I took delivery in June and it was several months before I could keep the aircon (always set to the max 28°C) off. My experience is related here, but read the hovers as well as the main article. The figures in the brochure were about half-way between the old and the new EPA figures (the old ones were unrealistic, although I have occasionally obtained under exceptional conditions their highway figure.)

I have no reason to suspect that I have been deceived, even after 16 months experience with it. Of course, I have no idea whether one would be deceived in the USA.

[Gurm]

I think the deception is in TCO. People expect that this is like a Camry - still gonna be running 15-20 years from now, relatively trouble-free, without major re-investment ($3000+ battery). And it just isn't.

People like my parents, who own a Prius, are ok with that - they drive 1000+ miles a week commuting from their home north of Orlando down to southern Florida, and for them a Prius was a no-brainer. But they also have resigned themselves to always owning a new car - so every time they come even vaguely close to the bumper-to-bumper warranty period, they trade in, usually advantageously since they are scrupulous about maintenance and care.

Most people won't be so lucky - they'll pay more than USD $25,000 for a Prius, only to discover that after paying it off in 5 years (at 5% interest, so it ends up costing closer to $30,000). They will then discover, if they put a lot of miles on their car (we, for example, put 10k a year on our cars) that they're past the bumper-to-bumper warranty and swiftly closing on the end-of-battery-life. They get a couple more years out of it and now are faced with re-investing another $3000 + labor to replace the battery, OR trying to sell it. I predict that the used market on end-of-batter-life hybrids will NOT be favorable to the seller.

So it's not that the buyer has been deceived in what they were getting RIGHT NOW. They're being deceived in Total Cost of Ownership, plus environmental impact - because producing that battery, and the replacement 100,000 miles out, does more environmental damage than a few more gallons of gas would have.

What we REALLY need is more economical cars. If BMW can produce an inline 6-cylinder rear-wheel-drive vehicle that gets 30mpg AND produces over 200bhp, you'd think other car companies could hit 30mpg with their weaker motors. Heck, EVERY car company gets 35+mpg on their smaller motors in Europe. Why can't they here? Oh yes, because they have no incentive to do so.

[Brian Ellis]

So far, the high cost of battery replacement isn't having much impact on the resale value of hybrids. The Automotive Lease Guide (ALG)—the resale value bible—only recently began assessing hybrids. "We had concerns about battery life," says ALG CEO John Blair. "But our analysts told us that battery life was really a nonissue. They found that the batteries have a 10-year life expectancy, which is quite reasonable."

Still, hybrids don't hold their value as well as their gasoline-powered siblings, batteries aside. For example, a three-year-old Honda Civic is worth about $12,000, retaining about 60 percent of its original sticker price of $20,000, according to Blair. But a hybrid Honda Civic holds only 58 percent of its original sticker price after three years, giving it a used price of $13,630, down from a new price of $23,500.

From the second link below.

The difference between 60% and 58% doesn't seem to me to be enormous. A set of worn tyres could make that difference. Over here, a second hand Prius was offered at 90% (asking price) after 1 year and 15,000 km but the long waiting list may have an influence. I'm darned sure that a brand new one could be sold at 125% the list price!

[Gurm]

From the second link below.

The difference between 60% and 58% doesn't seem to me to be enormous. A set of worn tyres could make that difference. Over here, a second hand Prius was offered at 90% (asking price) after 1 year and 15,000 km but the long waiting list may have an influence. I'm darned sure that a brand new one could be sold at 125% the list price!

Right, but again I'm talking about an 8-year-old resale, not a 1-year. The rarity is going to make a HUGE difference at the 1-4 year mark, since most people think of a 2 year old car as "still new".

Let's see what the prices do once they're out from under the bumper-to-bumper warranty.

[Claymonkey]

Well if you have to spend $3k on a new battery just to sell it that's just silly.. If the purchase price of the car with an old battery is lowered merely by the cost of a new battery... and that is in line with the variation without then not terrible. Say normal civic is $7k at 10 years... and a hybrid civic at 10 with a new battery is $8k (due to the economy of mileage) and the one with the old battery is $5k. That's not terrible but still annoying. Plus lets be honest. Most used cars around that age will need another $500-2000 in repair besides the battery in the first year or two of ownership.