Bang for buck: Forget EV range and today’s plug-in tax credits according to study

According to a new Carnegie Melon study, conventional hybrid cars and small battery plug-in hybrids offer the most cost-effective bang for the buck, despite federal tax credits that penalized such plug-in vehicles.

Foreign oil dependence will have to be cost-effective

Think hybrids and small battery plug-in hybrids for now

Several years ago GM invited myself and several other bloggers — many critical of GM’s clean vehicle efforts — to be part of the Chevy Volt concept debut, and in the following months and years, the Volt’s evolution from concept to real world vehicle. The battery lab, the design center, the wind tunnel, etc. — thanks to GM I witnessed the Volt go through the paces.

And, for a while, I bought into the Volt. Hook, line and sinker. In fact, just hours after the Volt concept debut, it was Bob Lutz that sold me when he suggested that the Volt would only cost a few thousand more than a Toyota Prius.

But, as the Volt moved towards reality, numerous studies began to suggest that plug-ins were going to be much more expensive than originally assumed. And slowly, GM also started hinting that the Volt would also cost quite a bit more than a Prius.

As this realization began to unfold, I started to become a little critical of the Volt and the plug-in movement. The movement just started to feel counterproductive to my focus upon foreign oil independence.

Without question, both the Volt and plug-ins are worthy of development. But in no way is, or was, the Volt or other plug-ins an excuse not to become more serious about conventional hybrid cars, for instance.

Furthermore, every single auto sales forecast produced in the last several years demonstrates quite clearly that hybrids will outsell plug-ins for decades.

Yet, instead of taking on the Prius, numerous automakers tried to leapfrog the Prius — at least in terms of hype and marketing. Or even worse, they used the development of their plug-ins as an excuse not to take on the Prius.

So what? The Prius is just a bridge technology, right?

Well, what’s the point of plug-ins? Foreign oil independence? Reduced CO2 emissions? Cleaner air?

In order to truly affect these issues, many tens of millions of new hybrids and/or plug-ins need to be produced and sold, and that will only happen when these vehicles become cost-effective. And for years now study after study after study hasn’t just questioned the cost-effectiveness of plug-in vehicles, but the willingness of consumers to move towards them.

Even worse, studies, such as the latest by Carnegie Melon, but also many others, suggest that if one were serious about using batteries to address foreign oil dependence, CO2 emissions and other forms of vehicular pollution, then conventional, plug-less hybrid cars and small battery plug-in hybrids — with only about 12 miles of EV range — clearly offer the most reliable bang for the buck.

Yet, in many plug-in advocacy circles, such vehicles are mocked. Likewise, federal plug-in tax credits are biased against cost-effectiveness. Why? Would it really be so bad if small battery plug-in hybrids provided the most cost-effective and timely path to foreign oil independence and battery electrics?

Yes, if a few unexpected breakthroughs drive battery prices significantly lower and gas prices rise significantly higher, then pure EVs will eventually make cost-effective sense. But, it could easily be decades before such conditions become reality. And a lot can happen between now and then  — just ask anyone involved with Solyndra, for example. Unfortunately, the world is full of uncertainty. Deal with it.

So, why not use federal plug-in tax credits to achieve the most bang for the buck as quickly as possible?

For instance, I’ve argued for a lithium tax credit. Thus, any lithium hybrid that is capable of driving in EV mode, even less than a mile, would qualify. Consequently, all automakers would be on a level playing field as Toyota still uses NiMH. Moreover, if a battery breakthrough was achieved, then all such hybrids could be converted into plug-in hybrids.

Considering the legacy effect — some 250 million vehicles on US roads — is one of the biggest barriers to foreign oil independence, then it becomes obvious we need to act NOW. At 13 million new vehicle sales per year, it takes decades to replace the current fleet.

And, in my opinion, only a fool would believe the US can remain safely dependent upon foreign oil, particularly OPEC oil, for a few more decades. Nevertheless, the only way that reality can be avoided is by acting NOW.

So why not focus on more cost-effective solutions that are also upgradeable?

Plug-ins will make mainstream sense, eventually. But there is a lot more cost-effective good that can be accomplished in the interim. The longer we wait to take serious action today, the further down the road we’re kicking the can.

Besides, if a greater interim focus on hybrids and small battery plug-in hybrids ends US foreign oil dependence, or at least OPEC dependence, faster and more cost-effectively than focusing only larger battery plug-ins, what’s the harm? Lost pork? Missed political kickbacks?

We can do better and we can do it now.