Nicholas Kristof has a column in today's NYT discussing plug-in hybrids. He says they cost $3,000 more than regular hybrids, which themselves cost $3,000 more than regular cars.

You do save a lot of gasoline costs with this, especially if you don't drive more than 30 miles per day. But, I don't know. With the extra $6,000 up-front cost, plus the extra electricity bills when you charge up your car, I'm not sure this is a winner. Kristof claims that by charging your car during the off-peak overnight hours your costs fall to the equivalent of 75 cents a gallon. But what would happen if everyone did that?

I'm sure we've discussed plug-in hybrids here at TOD already. Can anybody point to pages here or elsewhere discussing the effect that mass use of the plug-in would have on the electricity grid?

I looked at that in You find you get what you need.  A bit dated and doesn't follow through on all the implications (efficiency of cars is a bit high, doesn't incorporate grid or battery losses, etc.) but it gives a halfway-decent picture.

The average US electric consumption in 2004 was about 450 GW, and the daily peaks are considerably more than the wee-hours minimae.  If we made mass use of plug-ins and boosted average consumption by 100 GW with charging scheduled to level the load curve, we'd replace peaking plants with more efficient base-load plants and get better utilization out of the transmission infrastructure.

I will need a new vehicle in about a year, and I plan to buy a plug-in hybrid.  Why?  The main reason is that I remember the gas lines in the 70's, and we had a reminder of that during the gas panic here in Atlanta during Katrina.  

I predict that the coming increases in the volatility of gas prices will lead to times when it will be difficult to get gas, period!  With a plug-in hybrid, I will be able to get to work, etc no matter what the gas price and volatility.  I expect that this will be more important the as time goes on...

Because here in Georgia, most of our power is produced by coal and nuclear, I am also expecting the difference between the price of power and gas to grow, and grow and grow.  In the short term, I don't expect that I will save any money.  But, because we can burn just about anything to produce electricity, I am predicting that electricity will be the cheapest replacement for liquid fuels.  In addition, if electric (partially and fully) cars can be used to help with the peak production of electricity here in Georgia, we might be able to idle a few more natural gas fired peaking plants.  Which would help the reserve situation and therefore help with the natural gas price volatility.

Speaking of batteries, I searched this blog and didn't see anything about Firefly Energy's new lead-acid batteries.  I'm a chemical engineer who has spent a fair amount of time with lead-acid batteries and I can testify that this company has made some extremely important advances.  Not only do they have the technology, but also they have the backing of Caterpillar with some great management, $$$, and marketing channels to make a HUGE splash on the hybrid market!  I am excited!!!  Will this be the solution to all of our problems - Heck No!  But at this point, every little bit will help.

http://www.fireflyenergy.com

Check it out!

Yeap but the problem is that we are still to see plug-ins commercially available. AFAIK there is a whole subculture of converting Prius-es to plug-in hybrids; but

  1. this doesn't give you a fully functional plug-in hybrid - not enough batterries
  2. the total cost will be too north of my budget line

So for now I'm left waiting for such a baby to appear on the market. I think we can do something useful here at TOD if we start writing to car manufacturers that plug-ins have and will have their customers. Counterintuitively, these guys seem to represent the most conservative industry on Earth. They needed 5 years to pickup hybrids (yet on a limited scale), now they seem to be needing 5 more just to put a little more batteries and a power outlet.
Do you have a link which gets past their flash-disabled-browsers-need-not-apply intro screen?
This is what happens when the web designers try to get too cute...

It appears that every page is a java creation of the home page - long story short - I couldn't get past the intro page....

Do you have a backup copy of IE for such things?

I don't have IE at all.  Not only don't I have a license for it, I won't let it (or the rest of Windoze) in the house.

I was at the library and took a look at their page there.  The contact page is the only non-animated page I could find; I told them that their choice of style made them unfindable with Google (I tried) and asked them if they had a non-Flash version for people who don't want it.  We'll see what happens.

As for the energy difference, let me put it this way: In the climate I live in it is very hot, and one's air conditioner is the largest power draw in the house. However, the AC takes about 5kw when on, and over the course of a summer day the whole house may use 80kwhr. My car uses over 120kw when accelerating. So, in one hour my car can use more power than my whole house does in a day. Now one begins to see the scale of the problem (anyone want to build nuke plants?).
Furthermore, I just want to point out that "plug in" hybrids shouldn't have to "plug in". I've already advocated using inductive charging several times before, I hope Toyota impliments it like GM did. (I know there's and eff. loss, but i doubt it's much, and it's worth it for the convience, though not if it adds another $3000 to the car).
-Stop the Iran war-
How much time do you spend accelerating?

(BOTE:  Not much.  If you use 120 kW [160 HP] for an hour, burning fuel at 0.5 lbm/hp-hr, you'd burn 80 pounds of fuel.  That's about 13 gallons.  If you were averaging 60 MPH, you'd be getting less than 5 MPG.)

Furthermore, I just want to point out that "plug in" hybrids shouldn't have to "plug in". I've already advocated using inductive charging several times before, I hope Toyota impliments it like GM did.

But you do have to plug in the EV1 - you take the charging paddle and plug it into a socket on the car.  What I see as the real advantage to induction connectors is that there are no exposed metal contacts to keep clean.  The EV1 design envisioned outdoor charging stations added to existing lots, so high weather resistance was very important.

You proposed the 'charging mat', right?  (Which would be placed on garage floor and transfer energy to parked car with no user intervention.)  AFAIK, large air gaps mean low efficiency or low power density, or both.

Not to say that the charging process shouldn't be made as simple as is feasible, but I think the EV1 connector was pretty good: very low maintenance, quick and easy to use correctly, hard to use incorrectly.

Personally I prefer metal contact connectors, but I think most people would rather pay more for the more convenient option.  I make a WAG that induction charging would be at most $250 extra verus metal contact connectors.