The irreconcilable EV dichotomy?
Madness or genius?Sure, the Toyota FT-EV II electric car is odd, but is it practical? Is it cost-effective compared to other electric vehicles or even gasoline vehicles?
For instance, how many Americans can afford a two-seat $90,000 electric Roadster just for commuting? Even $45,000 is still far too expensive.
And that's the genius of a vehicle like the FT-EV. It's EV practicality. Why buy more than you need? If kept simple and on task, costs can more easily be contained for EVs, especially EVs built for average commuters.
Of course, is the American auto consumer driven by practicality?
Still, Honda has shown similar ideas, as has Mitsubishi. Nissan's Leaf isn't quite so economically focused, but it's definitely closer to the FT-EV side of the dichotomy growing between cheap EVs and luxurious EVs, as is the revolutionary Better Place idea.
One the other hand, one week luxury vehicle maker Audi is slamming the Chevy Volt, the next week they are announcing plans for the Audi E-Tron, a luxury electric vehicle. The Volt doesn't make sense, but the E-Tron does?
Then again, everyone is building a luxury EV or luxury plug-in hybrid these days, at least a few of them. Isn't this really more about marketing at this time? Besides, are luxury EVs and luxury plug-in hybrid vehicles really the path to cost-effective evonomics? Or, are cost-effective evonomics dependent upon a more practical, efficient realization of the automobile, such as the Leaf or the FT-EV II?
Can Americans really have their EV cake and eat it to, or is a revolution in America's auto culture required to really move America's auto industry, and auto consumer, forward?
Labels: electric cars, plug-in hybrid vehicles, toyota ft-ev ii
posted by Dahcredyns at
9:03 AM
9 Comments:
Today, Nissan announced the Glider, which seems to also revolve around practical commuting and cost-effectiveness.
Still, I like the 4 seats provided by the FT. It's not a comfortable 4 seat vehicle, but in emergencies, it would be great.
I think the seating in any short haul EV has to be at least passibly comfortable for a short haul trip.
If done right, I'd bet the seats pictured in this concept could still be far more comfortable than the chair most sit in from 8 - 5 m - f.
The one thing I really like about this vehicle is the way the doors open - like mini-van doors they allow full access to the vehicle when parked next to another.
Now those seats are another story. I guess they would be o.k. for a trip to the corner store for a 6 pack of chilled beverage but not for a 200 mile trip. But then again how many individuals would consider this vehicle for a such a trip?
For get my seat comment o.k. LOL
Tom G.
well, that's kind of the point of this vehicle. it only offers 60 miles of range.
it's purely about commuting, going to the store and the daily grind. that's it. for other commutes, you'll have another vehicle, rent a vehicle, or take some other form of transportation.
if you can charge every night, 50 miles of range is enough for most average commutes to and from.
the focus or leaf might offer 100 miles of range, but that still isn't enough to take a real trip in the way most americans are accustomed. ultimately, the leaf and focus electric vehicles are still just commuting vehicles.
a vehicle like the FT-EV accepts the limitations of EVs.
doubling the range, as the focus or leaf do, in a bigger, more normal package, really only means you charge every other night versus every night.
it really, however, doesn't change the potential of EVs. consequently, you're paying more money for very little more than a conventional feeling and a little less range anxiety.
i'd rather take 60 miles of range and a $12,000 sticker price versus 100 miles of range and a $30,000 sticker price for instance.
if you could offer such a vehicle at econo car pricing and cheap electric charging, i think you'd start converting many commuters to think differently.
A diesel/natural gas bi-fuel engined vehicle can do anything that current vehicles do. Diesel/natural gas bi-fuel engines get similar thermal efficiency to gasoline hybrids of the same power range, but they generate their efficiency over the entire driving spectrum, both city and highway.
The new clean diesel engines are squeaky clean to run---and natural gas is already used on forklifts and other heavy equipment meant to run in warehouses, mines, tunels and other enclosed places where air quality is critical.
Diesel/natural gas bi-fuels, running B100 biofuel and natural gas can be driven unlimited mileage---and never need to use a drop of petroleum.
Diesel engines are routinely driven 500,000 miles or more by OTR trucks. Diesel/natural gas bi-fuel vehicles would never need expensinve battery
" it's purely about commuting, going to the store and the daily grind."
how much of most cars annual mileage is home-to-work-to-home commuting?
for most folks who cannot affound multiple cars with best-of-breed for each task - they make compromises - that result in some very different choices for different people with different occupations and lifestyles.
for instance, cars that are used to commute but also to go over hill and dale to gramdmas house with a flock of kids may be very different from the cars that commute and on weekends go hangliding, etc..
many folks that make higher incomes will simply get an econobox "beater" and save their real car and keep it in the garage Monday-Friday.
that's where these smaller cars come in - if they turn out to be more and more affordable.
Sorta like your daily work clothes and your wedding/funeral clothing gear.
never underestimate young folks though who will only have money for an econobox of some kind... because most of them know that a Subaru is a much more functional car than a pure EV with weird seats.
larry-
you're on to something with your last point.
studies show that as gas prices go up, interest in plug-ins could go down, unless there are huge cuts in costs.
higher energy prices just don't lead to more interest in fuel efficiency, but in spending less money up front for vehicles.
the point of this post was pointing out that cost-effective EVs might have to come in a package that is much smaller and 'less' than what we're conditioned to desire.
on the other hand, to think luxury plug-ins are going to lead to scalability, in my opinion, is not supported by reality. perhaps, luxury plug-in vehicles will lead to some huge technological breakthroughs, but they will not lead to scalability.
wetdog-
i've advocated for natural gas a number of times on this site. in south america, many petro cars are being converted into natural gas/gasoline bi-fueled cars.
still, i think the battery has a role to play in the future. however, it's going to take time for that future to achieve cost-effectiveness.
in the interim, we should still advance battery technologies, but we should also be exploring other 'interim' solutions that reduce foreign oil dependency while reducing co2 emissions.
clean diesel, natural gas, etc. could all play an important role in creating great change in america, and we could get rolling today.
while i'm an advocate of battery technologies, i do get annoyed by the battery as the only solution crowd.
in my opinion we should be doing everything possible today to create a new american energy paradigm that - at least as a first goal - is independent of foreign oil.
Post a Comment
<< Home