Honda Civic Hybrid rant

[corrado33]

Petrol is insanely cheap in the US, which distorts things. In Japan where these cars were developed it is much more expensive. In the UK it is twice as much again.

Point taken. At double the US gas prices ($8.00/gallon) (UK is roughly 2.25x as expensive) a hybrid civic JUST pays for itself in a bit over 5 years at 100,000 miles. That's still longer than MOST people keep cars however. And the UK is almost at the "most expensive" end of the scale, aka worst case scenario. (According to http://www.globalpetrolprices.com/gasoline_prices/ )

[gildasd]

Petrol is insanely cheap in the US, which distorts things. In Japan where these cars were developed it is much more expensive. In the UK it is twice as much again.

Point taken. At double the US gas prices ($8.00/gallon) (UK is roughly 2.25x as expensive) a hybrid civic JUST pays for itself in a bit over 5 years at 100,000 miles. That's still longer than MOST people keep cars however. And the UK is almost at the "most expensive" end of the scale, aka worst case scenario. (According to http://www.globalpetrolprices.com/gasoline_prices/ )

It depends on a case per case basis. I'm at 51.13 Miles per gallon US (61.4 Uk) driving normally.
With the hybrid C4 being give and take a few 100 euros the same price as the non hybrid equivalent...  It's money straight into my pocket.
I drive 35 000Km per year, in diesel costs (averaged at 1.39):
- 2678.75 Euros for the non hybrid (5.5L/100Km).
- 2237.9  Euros for the hybrid (4.6 L/100Km)
That's 438 Euros to spend on something else.
But real life, it's even bigger, because I don't need to go as often to the filling station, get of the motorway to get "normal" priced diesel when on holiday etc.
Plus the car qualifies for a lower tax bracket.
There was an even more frugal version of the C4, but it only came with a stupid clutch-less gear box that had me wanting to punch somebody in the face.
All this for the price of having a "touchy" 1st gear.

Overall, the hybrid, in my case, is about 700 euros positive per year.
It's a no brainer: money for nothing.

[corrado33]

It depends on a case per case basis. I'm at 51.13 Miles per gallon US (61.4 Uk) driving normally.
With the hybrid C4 being give and take a few 100 euros the same price as the non hybrid equivalent...  It's money straight into my pocket.

Agreed, for a hybrid that is priced the same the non-hybrid, it makes sense however, that is not the norm. (Well, I checked honda and toyota, couldn't think of any more hybrids, then gave up.  )

Citroen seems to go against the norm. However, even more off topic, I found a complete price list for all of their cars on one PDF with a bunch of different options. Talk about cool.

Also, fueleconomy.gov has a page called "Will a hybrid save me money?" I check it out, and got results in the 2-5 year range for paying you back on gas savings however, I have no idea where they're getting their prices as they don't match the manufacturer's websites.

[urbis]

In the UK the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV (plug in electric hybrid) is getting quite a lot of publicity, it's a large 4x4 SUV but hybrid and reasonably priced...

I think it's certainly the future, but hybrids don't seem to be so popular over here, which is surprising considering the fuel costs.

[gildasd]

It depends on a case per case basis. I'm at 51.13 Miles per gallon US (61.4 Uk) driving normally.
With the hybrid C4 being give and take a few 100 euros the same price as the non hybrid equivalent...  It's money straight into my pocket.

Agreed, for a hybrid that is priced the same the non-hybrid, it makes sense however, that is not the norm. (Well, I checked honda and toyota, couldn't think of any more hybrids, then gave up.  )

The Honda Toyota method might make sence for then, but as a consumer, it does not.
For the same level of trim as we have, it's 15 000Euros more expensive, uses only 0.4L per 100 less of a MORE expensive fuel.
And goes about 150 Km less on a tank...

It's a statement that you are green...
But if I was going to make a statement by throwing money around , I'd spend a bit more and get a Telsa.
I was really disappointed at the Opel Ampera, it looks really neat, but some of trim seems to be made in plastics that were rejected at the yoghourt factory.

In the UK the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV (plug in electric hybrid) is getting quite a lot of publicity...

This looked great on paper, but in real life it was 2000Euros over our max budget and the layout not really practical.
However I could see this car fitting a lot of lifestyles/needs.

Citroen seems to go against the norm. However, even more off topic, I found a complete price list for all of their cars on one PDF with a bunch of different options. Talk about cool.

Yes, they seem to have hired someone that actually listens to consumers... Shock!
We dropped a couple of brands because we could not get a price/full specs on their websites without registering and actually going to the dealers...
After about 30 minutes of growing frustration/seller inflicted mental torture, I just go "fuck this" and cross them out.
"NO PRICE - NO SALE"...

[IanB]

Point taken. At double the US gas prices ($8.00/gallon) (UK is roughly 2.25x as expensive) a hybrid civic JUST pays for itself in a bit over 5 years at 100,000 miles. That's still longer than MOST people keep cars however. And the UK is almost at the "most expensive" end of the scale, aka worst case scenario. (According to http://www.globalpetrolprices.com/gasoline_prices/ )

There is some government distortion of the market going on here though. I believe the net (wholesale) price of gasoline in the UK and Europe generally is lower than in the US. Petrol is extremely expensive in the UK mainly because of the punitive tax rate on retail sales, and this tax is there to raise revenues. On the other hand, there are free public charging stations for electric vehicles in the UK at present, mainly because only a tiny fraction of cars on the road are electric and making use of them.

However: if the situation were reversed in the future and most vehicles were electric and not running on petrol or diesel, then the tax situation would follow. There would be an equivalent heavy tax on electricity for vehicles in order to make up for the lost revenue from petrol or diesel sales (expect to see laws requiring vehicles only to be charged from licensed charging stations and making it illegal to charge road vehicles from home electricity supplies). Since everyone would be running electric cars there would no longer be any need to provide a financial incentive to own such vehicles and subsidies would disappear.

So when making running cost comparisons between different technologies, one should really remove taxes and subsidies from the numbers since these are really an artificial market distortion. The underlying base costs are what give the long term view.

[dannyf]

Folks here typically drive 10k miles pet year. At 30 miles per gallon, that's 330 gallons of gasoline, which retails at $4 per gallon. Total fuel cost is $1500.

assuming hybrid gas mileage of 50 miles per gallon, its fuel cost would be10k / 50 * 4, or 800 USD.

for a saving of 700 USD per year, you pay 6000 USD up front for your hybrid. Everything else being equal, it takes you 9 years to break even, longer if you factor in the time value of money.

with those numbers, it is hard to make a case for hybrid.

buying hybrid is essentially betting on fuel prices to rise.

[Galaxyrise]

with those numbers, it is hard to make a case for hybrid.

Or the buyer has an atypical usage pattern, or cost wasn't the driving factor in the buying decision.

[dannyf]

-Or the buyer has an atypical usage pattern, or  .. -

sure. That's why for any valid analysis, there are countless exceptions which only reinforce the validity of the analysis.

[gildasd]

Isn't the oil industry heavily subsidized in the USA?
Making a wasteful driver a welfare queen of sorts?

[tom66]

Hybrids aren't good for the environment. They're only less bad, and arguably worse, because they are a poor argument against pure BEV, which is becoming more attractive day by day and has the potential to be zero carbon, eventually. Petrol/diesel can never been carbon free. Biodiesel/petrol no good, unless produced by algae, due to food crop shortage.

[dannyf]

-Isn't the oil industry heavily subsidized in the USA?-

yes, the oil industry is just slightly less subsidies than the green industry.

[Someone]

However: if the situation were reversed in the future and most vehicles were electric and not running on petrol or diesel, then the tax situation would follow. There would be an equivalent heavy tax on electricity for vehicles in order to make up for the lost revenue from petrol or diesel sales (expect to see laws requiring vehicles only to be charged from licensed charging stations and making it illegal to charge road vehicles from home electricity supplies). Since everyone would be running electric cars there would no longer be any need to provide a financial incentive to own such vehicles and subsidies would disappear.

So when making running cost comparisons between different technologies, one should really remove taxes and subsidies from the numbers since these are really an artificial market distortion. The underlying base costs are what give the long term view.

Australian Government offers huge incentives in the mid to late 2000's for people to convert their cars to LPG fuel, which had little to no excise (tax) on it. After convincing people to make the switch with promised savings (and the rebate) they pull a swifty and push the excise right up. It really happens!

[dannyf]

That's already happened, diesel vs heating oil by governmental forces, and diesel vs gasoline by mkt forces.

[casinada]

So where is the energy to charge the electric vehicle come from? How far can you go before it needs to get recharged?
Hybrid is still a better choice as it generates it's own electricity?
The choices of vehicle of these technologies are very limited.
I will never buy into those technologies
Fuel Cell, maybe as long as is not more expensive than a regular car, has good autonomy and it doesn't cost more to generate Hydrogen than to refine oil.

[SgtRock]

Greetings EEVBees:

--As IanB's fine post pointed out, wholesale prices in the UK and other European countries are lower than the US. But some folks continue to try to obscure this fact by saying that prices are higher, rather than the truth, that taxes are higher. The tax per gal or liter is disclosed by the govs on the side of the gas pump. US fuel taxes are lower than in Europe but the Corporate Income Tax in the US is 35%, higher than all of them, confiscating the wealth of "mom and pop" shareholders before they even see it as well as nearly anyone who has retirement plan which depends on a diversified portfolio. And then, charge them Capitol Gains taxes as well.

--See below a couple of articles which put the subsidy question in perspective. Beware those who attack the source of articles instead of the facts provided.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2012/04/25/the-surprising-reason-that-oil-subsidies-persist-even-liberals-love-them/

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324432404579051123500813210

--So far left out of this discussion, is the cost of production, transmission, and conversion of the electricity used to power EVs, and pollution caused by this. And since EVs use public roads which are paid for by government, an infrastructure cost per mile driven, should be added to the actual cost of the EV sector, as well as an equivalent per mile driven fraction for all of the pollution caused.

"Before I came here I was confused about this subject. Having listened to your lecture I am still confused. But on a higher level."
Enrico Fermi 1901 - 1954

Best Regards
Clear Ether

[SirNick]

with those numbers, it is hard to make a case for hybrid.

True, if you live in a country with really low petrol prices and don't care about the environment or the pollution you are spewing out everywhere you drive then yes, it is hard to make the case for hybrids. America is not very typical though because fuel prices are ridiculously low, there isn't much cost to polluting (in most countries cars that pollute pay a lot more tax) and many people don't seem to care about their health or the future.

The weight, cost, and complexity of hybrids negates a lot of the "savings" you get from using a little less gasoline.  As already mentioned, the material overhead and maintenance (to include charging) isn't consequence-free, either.  So moving everyone over to a half-baked gas AND battery consumer and claiming that this is somehow better for the environment is definitely questionable.  Not to mention the (personal) environmental suitability of a car in colder climates, where what might otherwise be waste heat is put to good use.

All that notwithstanding, by far the worst consequence of driving a hybrid is the affect on one's attitude that it seems to have.

[gildasd]

Efficiency.

At best a modern ICE engine is getting 25% across it whole driving range.
You would be amazed how prehistoric the "most modern" cars engines are. Lots of fancy electronics but from a general construction point of view, your wiz bang motor is crap compared to a WW2 aero engine or submarine powepack.
An optimized tractor at best - even a Nissan GT-R...
A Prius is just a tiny bit better (in fact the same as my not grand green claims filled C4).

Ship engines, generators and mixed cycle turbines get at least 45% and 56% (piston) and 70% (mixed cycle turbines) efficiency at best...
In fact battling the laws of thermodynamics, not pissing energy away.
Meaning that even with distribution costs and charging inefficiencies you still about twice what you get in your car.

Furthermore, if coal (or another hydrocarbon) it gets delivered by the boat, train or pipeline load, many magnitudes more efficient than being lugged around a puny little fuel truck...
So Ok, the source is important, but how you transport and burn the stuff is also relevant.

Anyhow, if we talking about saving fuel to lessen our dependance on not so decent supplier and the frankly disastrous way some sources are exploited, cars should be not the focus right now.
Much bigger gains could be made on freight trucks...
These should be diesel electric with no gearboxes, drive-lines, differentials and above all engines working within a constant speed with a governor.
That would bring them to a least end of WW1 sub specs...

[dannyf]

-As IanB's fine post pointed out, wholesale prices in the UK and other European countries are lower than the US. But some folks continue to try to obscure this fact by saying that prices are higher, rather than the truth, that taxes are higher. -

a few suggestions for you.

a. unless you buy your fuels or electricity or vehicles wholesale, co.paring wholesale prices makes no sense

b. I think the prices paid by a consumer drives his consumption, not the composition of such prices.

--See below a couple of articles which put the subsidy question in perspective. .-

forget about those articles. What's your position here.

- those who attack the source of articles instead of the facts provided-

in a discussion, try your best to focus on the other sides positions, not their intensions. It makes the conversations a lot more constructive.

[dannyf]

-Anyhow, if we talking about saving fuel to lessen our dependance on not so decent supplier and...-

too complicated. If you want to reduce fuel consumption, increase its process. I would suggest a fuel tax of 50 euros per litter for you nice folks in Europe, to make many of your dreams (or nightmares depending on who you are) come true.

[gildasd]

-Anyhow, if we talking about saving fuel to lessen our dependance on not so decent supplier and...-

too complicated. If you want to reduce fuel consumption, increase its process. I would suggest a fuel tax of 50 euros per litter for you nice folks in Europe, to make many of your dreams (or nightmares depending on who you are) come true.

As always, solutions are complex, in the shades of grey and cannot be solved with a Fox soundbite, political dogmatism or a one size fits all approach.

[Someone]

The reason EVs get lower taxes at the moment is that they pollute a lot less than even the best ICE cars. Even if all your electricity is from coal they still produce less CO2 over their lifetime, including manufacture.

Not for the Australians living with the wonder of Hazelwood power station:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazelwood_Power_Station
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/electric-cars-make-more-emissions-unless-greenpowered-20121203-2ar3x.html

[dannyf]

Hazelwood: it depends on how you define pollution.

[gildasd]

Hazelwood: it depends on how you define pollution.

A sort of:
"If you can still see the Sun at midday on a clear day - it's not pollution."
Kind of definition?

[dannyf]

By that definition, a broken nuclear power plant, with its invisible radioactive emission, would be the cleanest. And the desert, with its sandstorms, would be the worst polluter.

.

your definition is so funny, in a very sad way.