Confused about PHEV, Hybrids, etc...

[gnuarm]

That's the part that makes no sense to me.  You don't need to undergo training wheels for a BEV.  None of this is rocket science.  Also, most PHEVs don't use level 3 charging, only level 1 and 2 which take time.  People don't want to wait around for that, so not much use of public charging.  They will mostly either just charge at home, or not charge at all and run off gasoline.  This is why a PHEV is not at all like a BEV.  It has many of the disadvantages of an ICE vehicle and few of the advantages of a BEV.  It is it's own animal, which takes getting used to, in ways that are different from BEVs.

Well, you live in a country that is just over 100km across, whereas I'm in a country where a holiday is easily 500-600km so I think perspectives vary.  You do need to consider fast charging if you live in the UK.  A PHEV eliminates that hassle.  You can do shorter journeys, like your commute on electricity alone but longer trips require little or no planning, as long as you have petrol you can just... go.

You don't know me.  I live in many places.  My BEV is, at this moment, in the parking lot at BWI near Baltimore, MD.  I live in a country that is 3,000 miles wide as much as an island, which is NOT a country, but is 100 miles long.  As soon as I land in Maryland, I will have to drive 125 miles back to my place in Virginia and a few days later drive 125 miles to Lynchburg where they are assembling my product for shipment, then back.  Then a few days later, 125 miles back to the airport. 

So you know nothing of my "perspective". 

You also don't understand a word I wrote.

At the time I bought my PHEV the only other EV option in my price range was the BMW i3 94Ah which had roughly 100 mile all electric range.  I would not have made much impact to my overall electric usage (maybe gone from 80% to 100% electric) but had the inconvenience of a short range EV with slow fast charging (~38kW max for the i3) making road tripping a pain.  Keep in mind we own a single car, so we don't have the option to own a short range EV and a diesel car or something like some families do.

Now, today, there are many better options, if you can buy them, like the VW ID.3 which have 100kW+ fast charging and 300km+ range so the 'hassle' factor drops to close to zero if you have home charging.

I would argue that anyone buying a brand new PHEV (with a few limited exceptions) is making a mistake but used PHEVs are bloody good bargains.

You are free to buy what you wish.  The comments you are responding to, and rather inappropriately, were about how PHEVs are NOT "bridge" vehicles or "training wheels" for BEVs in any way.  I don't think I've ever said what anyone should or should not buy.  I'm only pointing out that PHEVs are not a useful component of our transition to BEVs.  They are orthogonal to the matter. 

[gnuarm]

The best way to think of a PHEV is like a battery-electric vehicle that can run on petrol when the battery is flat.  That is why I say it is like training wheels.  You get slowly more used to electric mobility.  Working out how to schedule your charging times, finding public chargers, optimising efficiency for EV driving.

  That's the part that makes no sense to me.  You don't need to undergo training wheels for a BEV.  None of this is rocket science.  Also, most PHEVs don't use level 3 charging, only level 1 and 2 which take time.  People don't want to wait around for that, so not much use of public charging.  They will mostly either just charge at home, or not charge at all and run off gasoline.  This is why a PHEV is not at all like a BEV.  It has many of the disadvantages of an ICE vehicle and few of the advantages of a BEV.  It is it's own animal, which takes getting used to, in ways that are different from BEVs.

That seems to be majorly discounting the flexibility that the PHEV offers. If you're in a situation where charging is easy and convenient and you're driving the typical short amount per day, it gives you a lot of the benefits of the BEV. If you're in a situation where charging isn't easy or where you have a particularly long day of driving, it's still able to accomplish that without any fuss or inconvenience relative to a normal ICE car.

It allows someone to buy a PHEV, expecting to own it 7-10 years, without knowing in advance their exact parking/charging/garaging situation.

Flexibility has value, especially in this case. Our daily drivers right now are a BEV and an ICE. When it comes time to replace the ICE, we're almost surely going to replace it with a used PHEV, for the flexibility reasons listed above.

I'm unclear about your post.  I have said nothing disparaging of the value of driving a PHEV.  I'm simply pointing out that they are completely unrelated to the process of converting to BEVs.  The two are not related.

[nctnico]

Our daily drivers right now are a BEV and an ICE. When it comes time to replace the ICE, we're almost surely going to replace it with a used PHEV, for the flexibility reasons listed above.

Same here.  I don't understand how combining the features of a BEV and ICE/hybrid into a long-range PHEV make it somehow worse than a separate BEV and ICE.

The battery pack will be extra weight you drag around making the ICE more inefficient. IMHO having a PHEV with relatively large batteries makes most sense if a significant part of what you are driving can be done using the batteries AND if you have a cheap source for charging. Otherwise it is not worth having the larger batteries. If you care about cost then it certainly is good to fill in a spreadsheet to calculate optimal TCO.

[sokoloff]

I'm simply pointing out that [PHEVs] are completely unrelated to the process of converting to BEVs.  The two are not related.

In order for EVs to be bought, they have to be considered. In order for them to be considered, they have to have awareness.

I know many people who now have a BEV as a result of them or a friend having bought a PHEV (Volts in this case) and realizing “hey, that plug-in thing is pretty cool!”

I can’t help but see that chain of human awareness to consideration to purchase as being part of the adoption path from pure ICE to BEVs.

[Cerebus]

Our daily drivers right now are a BEV and an ICE. When it comes time to replace the ICE, we're almost surely going to replace it with a used PHEV, for the flexibility reasons listed above.

Same here.  I don't understand how combining the features of a BEV and ICE/hybrid into a long-range PHEV make it somehow worse than a separate BEV and ICE.

Well, if you're thinking like an engineer then the combination allows you to take advantage of the best qualities of both, at the cost of some increased complexity. Of course if you've caught religion, then you'll battle for your corner while disparaging the other corner and burn any heretics who think there might be a middle ground between the two. It doesn't matter whether the religion in question is mainstream "Petrolhead" or mainstream "BEV" or a small spinoff sect like Tesla drivers, they all hate heretics.

[bdunham7]

I'm simply pointing out that they are completely unrelated to the process of converting to BEVs.  The two are not related.

And we're pointing out that you are simply completely wrong on that matter and you've made no credible arguments to support your opinion.  If I drive to work and back in a PHEV and the commute is entirely within it's EV range (the ICE never starts), how does that differ driving a BEV on the same trip?

[bdunham7]

The battery pack will be extra weight you drag around making the ICE more inefficient. IMHO having a PHEV with relatively large batteries makes most sense if a significant part of what you are driving can be done using the batteries AND if you have a cheap source for charging. Otherwise it is not worth having the larger batteries. If you care about cost then it certainly is good to fill in a spreadsheet to calculate optimal TCO.

I think that the ability to recapture braking energy will outweigh any weight concerns in almost all but the most extreme corner cases, even compared to a smaller battery. (small batteries have limited regen absorption capability) PHEVs are typically a bit on the expensive side, so I won't make any cost arguments, but in my view the ideal use case is when your daily driving can be done with all or mostly battery power and the ICE is reserved for longer trips.  There are quite a few Chevy Volt owners that have been doing this for years and many of them get by with very low gasoline usage.  There are quite a few PHEVs now with 25-40 mile EV ranges.

[Cerebus]

I think that the ability to recapture braking energy will outweigh any weight concerns in almost all but the most extreme corner cases, even compared to a smaller battery.

On that note I was quite surprised by my PHEV when I took a trip to the coast from London recently. Used up pretty much all the battery capacity getting out of the East End and onto the main roads (Dual carriageway and motorway) and the petrol engine kicks in. Stuck it into Eco mode, which takes advantage of coasting to minimise fuel use and regen on any downhill runs to charge the battery (and uses satnav data to plan it all to boot).  Came off the motorway some 60 odd miles later and the battery was back at over 95% capacity. Watching the gauges on some of the downhill sections of motorway I could see it charging at over 20 kW for several minutes on several occasions while still maintaining 60-70 mph - I was quite taken aback. The strangest thing was watching the "estimated combined range remaining" gauge continuously climbing on the whole outbound journey as it both recalculated based on motorway driving versus the city driving it had been doing for a few days previously and on the fact that it was actively recharging itself from regeneration. Got about 80 mpg on the way out (Full fat British gallons, not US gallonettes).

Edit: On a seperate note, I've used 2 litres of petrol since 27th July, covering 127 miles of purely local city driving which shows quite how often my PHEV finds itself operating effectively as a BEV.

[nctnico]

The battery pack will be extra weight you drag around making the ICE more inefficient. IMHO having a PHEV with relatively large batteries makes most sense if a significant part of what you are driving can be done using the batteries AND if you have a cheap source for charging. Otherwise it is not worth having the larger batteries. If you care about cost then it certainly is good to fill in a spreadsheet to calculate optimal TCO.

I think that the ability to recapture braking energy will outweigh any weight concerns in almost all but the most extreme corner cases, even compared to a smaller battery. (small batteries have limited regen absorption capability) PHEVs are typically a bit on the expensive side, so I won't make any cost arguments, but in my view the ideal use case is when your daily driving can be done with all or mostly battery power and the ICE is reserved for longer trips.  There are quite a few Chevy Volt owners that have been doing this for years and many of them get by with very low gasoline usage.  There are quite a few PHEVs now with 25-40 mile EV ranges.

Well, I was reacting to 'long range PHEVs'. In my mind you start to get into ranges around 160miles (say 100km to 200km) which would require a much larger battery pack. Ofcourse with cheaper / high energy per weight batteries in the future, the equation changes but we aren't there yet. Feature creep is the enemy of any good product.

[gnuarm]

I'm simply pointing out that [PHEVs] are completely unrelated to the process of converting to BEVs.  The two are not related.

In order for EVs to be bought, they have to be considered. In order for them to be considered, they have to have awareness.

I know many people who now have a BEV as a result of them or a friend having bought a PHEV (Volts in this case) and realizing “hey, that plug-in thing is pretty cool!”

I can’t help but see that chain of human awareness to consideration to purchase as being part of the adoption path from pure ICE to BEVs.

Interesting concept, but what makes you think there are and will continue to be more PHEVs than BEVs?  I believe the same process will be triggered by neighbors seeing new BEVs in driveways, but much moreso. 

I can't see someone buying a PHEV, actually having much impact on the sales of BEVs when the two are so different.  You don't put gas in a BEV... at all. 

Besides, at this point, you would be hard pressed to find someone who is not aware of BEVs. 

PHEVs are not useful to promotion of BEVs and mostly won't hinder it since they are so different.  Bottom line is, BEVs are happening, and there's not much that will have any real impact on it.  So lead, follow, or get out of the way!

[gnuarm]

Our daily drivers right now are a BEV and an ICE. When it comes time to replace the ICE, we're almost surely going to replace it with a used PHEV, for the flexibility reasons listed above.

Same here.  I don't understand how combining the features of a BEV and ICE/hybrid into a long-range PHEV make it somehow worse than a separate BEV and ICE.

Well, if you're thinking like an engineer then the combination allows you to take advantage of the best qualities of both, at the cost of some increased complexity. Of course if you've caught religion, then you'll battle for your corner while disparaging the other corner and burn any heretics who think there might be a middle ground between the two. It doesn't matter whether the religion in question is mainstream "Petrolhead" or mainstream "BEV" or a small spinoff sect like Tesla drivers, they all hate heretics.

So the "best" qualities include higher pollution of ICE, higher fuel costs of ICE, the regular maintenance of ICE, and the highest complication of any of the three. 

Hybrids were an idea from 20 years ago before BEVs were practical.  BEVs are a much better solution today and will continue to improve over the next 20 years at least.  There is so little down side to BEVs that it's a slam dunk!  What downsides they have, will be highly mitigated over the next few years as every automaker produces millions.  Well, every automaker who plans to stay in business.

[gnuarm]

I'm simply pointing out that they are completely unrelated to the process of converting to BEVs.  The two are not related.

And we're pointing out that you are simply completely wrong on that matter and you've made no credible arguments to support your opinion.  If I drive to work and back in a PHEV and the commute is entirely within it's EV range (the ICE never starts), how does that differ driving a BEV on the same trip?

That's not the issue.  You driving a PHEV does nothing to impact the adoption of BEVs.  Isn't that what I said? 

How do you think your driving a PHEV is impacting the adoption of BEVs?

[tom66]

I wouldn't have considered a BEV if I hadn't driven a PHEV beforehand.  Sorry, you're just wrong about this.   I frequent a UK focused EV forum and every poster I've seen who has traded in their PHEV has *either* got a BEV or a newer PHEV, but the majority are getting BEVs.  It's clearly working.  Once you drive electric, you never want to go back.
 
And as for public charging, I make use of 3kW public chargers all the time.  Go to the supermarket, 45 minutes shopping and the car has gained all the range it used for the drive there.  OK it's "nothing" on the grand scale of things (6-7 miles added range) but it changes your view of how you use a vehicle.  And the supermarket doesn't charge for electricity so it makes it a very cheap drive indeed.

@nctnico:  plugs on hybrids only make sense if the battery is a usable capacity IMO.  So a 1.6kWh Prius battery is not really worth charging, especially because the car can only use about 800Wh of that.

[Cerebus]

Our daily drivers right now are a BEV and an ICE. When it comes time to replace the ICE, we're almost surely going to replace it with a used PHEV, for the flexibility reasons listed above.

Same here.  I don't understand how combining the features of a BEV and ICE/hybrid into a long-range PHEV make it somehow worse than a separate BEV and ICE.

Well, if you're thinking like an engineer then the combination allows you to take advantage of the best qualities of both, at the cost of some increased complexity. Of course if you've caught religion, then you'll battle for your corner while disparaging the other corner and burn any heretics who think there might be a middle ground between the two. It doesn't matter whether the religion in question is mainstream "Petrolhead" or mainstream "BEV" or a small spinoff sect like Tesla drivers, they all hate heretics.

So the "best" qualities include higher pollution of ICE, higher fuel costs of ICE, the regular maintenance of ICE, and the highest complication of any of the three. 

Hybrids were an idea from 20 years ago before BEVs were practical.  BEVs are a much better solution today and will continue to improve over the next 20 years at least.  There is so little down side to BEVs that it's a slam dunk!  What downsides they have, will be highly mitigated over the next few years as every automaker produces millions.  Well, every automaker who plans to stay in business.

There's little point arguing with a religious zealot. You pick what suits your belief system and quietly ignore the rest. Your reply is no different to a petrol zealot answering with "So the 'best' qualities include running out of battery and waiting ages to charge it".

[tszaboo]

I wouldn't have considered a BEV if I hadn't driven a PHEV beforehand.  Sorry, you're just wrong about this.   I frequent a UK focused EV forum and every poster I've seen who has traded in their PHEV has *either* got a BEV or a newer PHEV, but the majority are getting BEVs.  It's clearly working.  Once you drive electric, you never want to go back.
 
And as for public charging, I make use of 3kW public chargers all the time.  Go to the supermarket, 45 minutes shopping and the car has gained all the range it used for the drive there.  OK it's "nothing" on the grand scale of things (6-7 miles added range) but it changes your view of how you use a vehicle.  And the supermarket doesn't charge for electricity so it makes it a very cheap drive indeed.

@nctnico:  plugs on hybrids only make sense if the battery is a usable capacity IMO.  So a 1.6kWh Prius battery is not really worth charging, especially because the car can only use about 800Wh of that.

Yeah, that 1.6 KWh battery is also there to drive the engine in a more efficient way, not just breaking.
I've been thinking about replacing my Prius with a PHEV, because I could cover the daily commute with electricity. Too bad this government doesn't think anymore that PHEVs should be supported, instead they add extra tax because of the extra weight, and no matter how I calculate, it wouldn't make financial sense.

[tom66]

The biggest problem with PHEVs is they are impossible to tax and incentivise correctly, at least if you still have regular petrol hybrids.

The UK government gave people incentives to get PHEVs about 10 years ago and a great deal of these were bought but never charged - it became a bit of a scandal.  Thing is, company car drivers were able to expense all of their miles when evidenced with petrol receipts, but home charging was only permitted at 4p/mile, which meant if you didn't have an off-peak tariff and a smart meter, you'd lose money.  Even if you did have an off-peak tariff you were still incentivised to use petrol because the whole cost was guaranteed to be covered so the numerically illiterate would never worry.

This was known for years and indeed certain vehicles like the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV became known as "Taxlanders" as these cars were just being used as inefficient petrol SUVs. 

I know my car was used in this way: prior owner was a leasing company, leased to someone in Salisbury, UK.  The car had used its charging port a total of 25 times, despite being driven over 45,000 miles before I acquired it.  So it was pretty much all petrol usage for that time.  In one sense, really good for the battery lifespan, to sit at 30% all the time...

The secondary issue is if you have low/zero air pollution zones how can you really allow PHEVs into that - there is no way to know externally if the car is running electric or petrol. 

In that sense BEVs are far better because it's *impossible to use them inefficiently*, within reason.

[sokoloff]

4p/mile for electric seems like just plain bad policy all around. Tires alone are probably close to 2p/mile.

It seems to me like "the simplest thing that could possibly work" would have been way better here. Give whatever per-mile rate is decided to be "close enough" for everyone and then let owners optimize for their own costs however they see fit. Aligns incentives.

For Zero emission zones, fine and ticket vehicles discovered to be running their engines in those zones. It doesn't have to be 100.000% perfect to be workable.

[gnuarm]

I wouldn't have considered a BEV if I hadn't driven a PHEV beforehand.  Sorry, you're just wrong about this.

   

Yes, I should have checked and found you are the authoritative source on such information.  The million or so Tesla owners in the US who have never owned anything other than an ICE must all be mistaken.

I frequent a UK focused EV forum and every poster I've seen who has traded in their PHEV has *either* got a BEV or a newer PHEV, but the majority are getting BEVs.  It's clearly working.  Once you drive electric, you never want to go back.

Your logic is failing you.  Please consult any book on logic to see why.

 

And as for public charging, I make use of 3kW public chargers all the time.  Go to the supermarket, 45 minutes shopping and the car has gained all the range it used for the drive there.  OK it's "nothing" on the grand scale of things (6-7 miles added range) but it changes your view of how you use a vehicle.  And the supermarket doesn't charge for electricity so it makes it a very cheap drive indeed.

You can learn many things, from many events including talking to BEV owners.  That doesn't make a PHEV a "bridge" to BEVs.  They are different animals and are not much like owning a BEV.

[tom66]

 

[gnuarm]

Our daily drivers right now are a BEV and an ICE. When it comes time to replace the ICE, we're almost surely going to replace it with a used PHEV, for the flexibility reasons listed above.

Same here.  I don't understand how combining the features of a BEV and ICE/hybrid into a long-range PHEV make it somehow worse than a separate BEV and ICE.

Well, if you're thinking like an engineer then the combination allows you to take advantage of the best qualities of both, at the cost of some increased complexity. Of course if you've caught religion, then you'll battle for your corner while disparaging the other corner and burn any heretics who think there might be a middle ground between the two. It doesn't matter whether the religion in question is mainstream "Petrolhead" or mainstream "BEV" or a small spinoff sect like Tesla drivers, they all hate heretics.

So the "best" qualities include higher pollution of ICE, higher fuel costs of ICE, the regular maintenance of ICE, and the highest complication of any of the three. 

Hybrids were an idea from 20 years ago before BEVs were practical.  BEVs are a much better solution today and will continue to improve over the next 20 years at least.  There is so little down side to BEVs that it's a slam dunk!  What downsides they have, will be highly mitigated over the next few years as every automaker produces millions.  Well, every automaker who plans to stay in business.

There's little point arguing with a religious zealot. You pick what suits your belief system and quietly ignore the rest. Your reply is no different to a petrol zealot answering with "So the 'best' qualities include running out of battery and waiting ages to charge it".

When the facts can no longer be argued, some resort to ad hominem. 

Ok. 

[Cerebus]

The secondary issue is if you have low/zero air pollution zones how can you really allow PHEVs into that - there is no way to know externally if the car is running electric or petrol. 

The latest version of the BMW 330e has geofencing built in, it will automatically switch to electric inside a geofenced "green zone". I don't know how it handles an "out of charge" situation inside or approaching a geofenced zone.

[Cerebus]

When the facts can no longer be argued, some resort to ad hominem. 

When the facts are being ignored one knows one is either talking to someone with a fixed religious-like belief system, a troll, or an idiot. At that point you can't ignore the facts about the person who is failing to follow the argument/discussion and just being rude, sarcastic* or dismissive of anyone and anything that disagrees with them.

* Congratulations by the way, you actually kind of managed some proper sarcasm today rather than merely being rude and dismissive.

[tszaboo]

The biggest problem with PHEVs is they are impossible to tax and incentivise correctly, at least if you still have regular petrol hybrids.

That's the exact right wording of the problem.
Like Germany. People were buying these as company cars, and never plugging it to the wall. Why? Because you still got a petrol card, that allowed you to buy petrol to the company's expense, but you couldn't get the same benefit for electricity. It's just bad policy.
I could use a PHEV maybe 90% in electric mode, yet I'm to be taxed almost as an ICE. And this is happening in the 21 century, where it would take a very minimal effort to be able to send telemetry data to the tax office (let's just ignore the data protection aspects of this). So we are not switching to a superior tech, due to policies  .
And yes, the infamous Outlander. I think most of those were exported from here when the incentives ran out. Talk about being in the right place at the right time.

[Miyuki]

All this tax-free BEV is BS
I know it is meant to support its adoption
But it has no logical reason, it uses the same roads and presents that same danger to the public (it is still 2 ton metal box on wheels)
But with the current BEV position on the market when it is in Luxury or at least the top of the menu
It is just a support for the wealthy portion of the population
And with wider adoption, they will have to increase taxes anyway because there will be only a few ICE to tax and governments need this huge tax revenue

[Cerebus]

All this tax-free BEV is BS
I know it is meant to support its adoption

Unfortunately it seems that the only way governments seem to know how to try and discourage or encourage things these days is either with money (grants or taxes) or criminalisation. Gone are the days when they tried to inform or mould public opinion with things like educational films/adverts. In particular relation to roads related things, in my youth you'd see short road safety films on the state broadcaster (BBC) all the time, in recent years all you get is the semi-annual anti-drink driving campaign in the run up to Christmas, and perhaps once every few years you'll see a road safety advert but they are few and far between.

The UK Highway Code rules changed back in January. Back in the past such a thing would have been attended with lots of publicity to inform the public, on this occasion there was none, zip, nada. The only reason I knew about them was I follow a driving instructor on You Tube (Ashley Neal) who does educational road safety videos and it was his content that drew my attention to the changes. The government made no effort at all, which means that currently UK drivers are driving to two sets of rules depending on whether they've learned about the new rules or not. I can't prove it, but I suspect that this failure is down to my first suggestion, namely that there's no way to use money or criminalisation to incentivise adoption of the new rules so they didn't really know how to do it.