Talk:Plug-in hybrid/Archive 1

message: Please see Hybrid What?. --D0li0 10:50, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A similar article named Petroleum electric hybrid vehicle appears to exist with substantial content, I'm wondering if we should consider trying to merge the two... --D0li0 23:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  For the intro section, what do you see as useful that is PHEV-specific? The Ronning reference might be good for a history section, once it's verified with the actual SAE paper in hand. Motorized bicycle: no. The battery consipracy idea would, I think need its own page and some documentation - it's too speculative to be material to definition of a PHEV, IMHO. Wish I could be more positive. Jack Rosebro 23:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I need to look more closely at the Petroleum electric hybrid vehicle article, but at first glance it appeared to be talking about Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.  Perhaps I am mistaken and it more closely paralles the Hybrid Vehicles page and should be considered for merging with that article?  I just hate to see good work going into two seperate articles that are describing the same thing, one should become a redirect if that is in fact the case... --D0li0 23:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hybrid What?

message: A motorized bicycle is a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle that needs to be carefully placed in the article. The problem is this information seems to contradict the first line of this article. This article is totally biased and need a serious look into redevelopping non-pov attributes. CyclePat May 30th 2006
:Perhaps you should take a whack at making the article more NPOV.  Alternatively the article could be split up in to plug-in hybrid car or something like that. Daniel.Cardenas 20:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not understand the point about neutrality as there have been dozens of contributors to this page and as the document has developed over the last year or so it has been growing into a fairly well understood topic.  As far as motorized bicycles go, that is another topic altogether and I believe there is a section in Wikipedia for it.  Plug-in hybrids is a huge growing movement in the US and is commonly understood to mean passenger cars primarily.  There was a major meeting on the topic earlier this month at the DoE to discuss how these passenger vehicles can help reduce US dependence on imported oil.  Major manufacturers of cars and trucks are being asked to consider how to make these vehicles in a cost effective way because of the potential they offer.  That does not take away from the beauty of motorized bicycles - more power to you on that, but it's a different topic.Jeff Ronning 22:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

text: WRHowellJr 18:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you should have attributed that to CyclePat. Daniel.Cardenas 22:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Corrected. Apologize for the oversight. WRHowellJr 15:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV: [[Motorized bicycle]] 

message: I think the NPOV comment made by CyclePat is not sufficiently detailed.  No specific suggestions are offered to make the article more neutral other than to add information about motorized bicycles.
I am a reporter for the National Public Radio affiliate in Austin, Texas (KUT-FM) and have covered PHEV stories.  Austin Mayor Will Wynn (Chairman, Energy Committee, US Conference of Mayors) started the "National Plug-in Partners Campaign" along with the director of Austin's electric utility.  Some credit this campaign with Ford's recent announcement of PHEV development.  This wikipedia article on PHEVs is less tilted in favor of PHEVs than the National Plug-in Partners would like.  I think this strongly indicates that the article is, in fact, balanced.
Motorized bicycles could be a subsection of this article or a different topic entirely.  But the neutrality of this article is not, in my opinion, in legitimate dispute.
: WRHowellJr 18:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you should have attributed that to CyclePat. Daniel.Cardenas 22:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Corrected. Apologize for the oversight. WRHowellJr 15:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Claim Refutation 

message: According to this:  Plug-ins aren't yet viable.  What I was wondering is what it will take to make them work?  Could the system simply not allow the batteries to get up to a full charge or for there to be some kind of advanced cooling system for the batteries?  As much as I want plug-ins to work, wishful thinking isn't going to do it and I would like to see this article make current or future viability seem more realistic.
:There have been several reports of mass produced plug-ins in the works.  The guardian web site had a link that said the next version of the Prius will have plug-in capability with 9 mile range, but then removed this information from the article.  I also saw a link to Ford article that said they are working on one too.  The first ones will have short ranges and perhaps low top speed, but will improve as battery technology improves.
:Look for the new Prius with Li-on battery at the end of next year. http://vtec.net/news/news-item?news_item_id=553701
:Daniel.Cardenas 19:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plug-ins not viable yet? 

message: Although the possibility is fairly remote, General Motors or DaimlerChrysler could potentially effect a marketing coup by producing a markedly more versatile and fuel-efficient hybrid; a PHEV.
Isn't this less than remote, now likely (via unconfirmed info) in the case of GM? (Of course the possibliity of a significantly useful PHEV from GM, rather than Green Window Dressing, ala flex fuel, remains remote.) - Leonard G. 01:15, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you but wikipedia doesn't like to take action on rumors.  Also the unencylopedic comment you are referring to should be removed or changed. Daniel.Cardenas 04:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now appearing slightly less remote, a GM produced Saturn PHEV (What it would look like if they make it.)- Leonard G. 04:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I tossed a similar article into the news section a few weeks ago.  Daniel.Cardenas 14:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: General Motors is now advertising their future Chevrolet Volt via radio ads in the San Francisco Bay Area (December 2007, couched as a future product). As this particular area has a much higher than national proportion of "green" buyers, "early adapters", high income families, and "techies" it would form a natural environment to introduce such a vehicle. Such advertisements may not be heard nationally, but it does definitely indicate that GM is making an investment to prepare a market for this vehicle (hopefully). - Leonard G. (talk) 04:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GM PHEV remote? 

message: It appears that an entire approach to PHEVs is neglected by this article. This approach is the electric vehicle with an internal combustion generator. This is the approach of the Mitsubishi MIEV concept, which seems to be the most likely to hit the market first, at least in the US. This is an old and tested technology, being used in trains for over 50 years.
:You're right. Actually, the "Battery Electric vehicule" section of the article touches this subject but it is well worth expanding. Actually, one of the EV1 prototypes had this precise configuration (see EV1 article). However, one of the characeristics of today's hybrid drivetrains is that the power of both the ICE and the electric motor can be applied to the wheels together. Not the case with the approach you mention. This and other facts can be part of an interesting discussion in the article. - Vcote, 21 July 2006
::Here is tech paper [] that describes similar approach, with the difference of using continuosly variable transmission (CVT). It states: It is now possible to use this concept ( Charge Depletion HEV ) in a system which is much simpler mechanically and lower in manufacturing cost while providing higher performance and much better fuel efficiency and lower emissions. Two cars designed and constructed with this concept will be described with measured fuel economy, energy efficiency and emissions obtained. The objective of this paper is to describe the design of a medium size car with a mass of 1400 kg, a 6 passenger capability, and good performance with a fuel consumption of less than 3 liter per 100km on gasoline and emissions only slightly above clean electric power. In addition, the manufacturing costs will be comparable to a conventional vehicle and running costs will also be lower by 50% in most countries. Stated fuel consumption is for running on gasoline, while running on batteries consumption is 10-15 kW Hrs per 100km. However, it's a pity not to see Mitsubishi MIEV concept (4 motors) vs "CVT + one motor" concept comparison, as todays AC motors claimed to produce high enough torque (for example).--Skuzmin 10:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electric with generator approach 

message: It appears from reading the news that Toyota and GM are in a race to produce the first wide scale plug-in.  Should this be plugged into the main article somewhere?
Here are two news sources, but there is much more of the same:
* http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aB.YH1WLpQgo - GM
* http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060728/BUSINESS/607280343 - Toyota
Judging from reading the varied news sources the optimistic date for release of plug-in is end of 2007 as a 2008 model.  The pessimistic date is end of 2008 as a 2009 model.  GM is said to show their plug-in prototype in January 2007.
The Prius plug-in will most likely be based on the new corolla platform.  I suspect the delay in the redesign of the corolla has something to do with making it more plug-in friendly. http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=116076
: Of course, this mass-production plug-in race must appear. HybridBoy 22:29, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GM / Toyota in race for first wide scale plug-in 

message: Gerfriedc has entered the below text:
#Costs: Increasing demand will raise prices before parts producers ramp up their production (for example shortage of electric motors is expected), also shortages with some metals in the short run will raise prices. Economy of scale and reengineering will solve this problem with beginning market penetration.
I don't believe this fits in this section.  This section is about what is stopping plug-ins from being successful.  Not what is going to slow them down once they are successful.  What do you think? Daniel.Cardenas 19:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues for wide-scale commercialisation 

message: These are the first four paragraphs of a New York Times article requiring registration:
:SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 13 — The ambitious founders of Google, the popular search engine company, have set up a philanthropy, giving it seed money of about $1 billion and a mandate to tackle poverty, disease and global warming.
:But unlike most charities, this one will be for-profit, allowing it to fund start-up companies, form partnerships with venture capitalists and even lobby Congress. It will also pay taxes.
:One of its maiden projects reflects the philanthropy’s nontraditional approach. According to people briefed on the program, the organization, called Google.org, plans to develop an ultra-fuel-efficient plug-in hybrid car engine that runs on ethanol, electricity and gasoline.
:The philanthropy is consulting with hybrid-engine scientists and automakers, and has arranged for the purchase of a small fleet of cars with plans to convert the engines so that their gas mileage exceeds 100 miles per gallon. The goal of the project is to reduce dependence on oil while alleviating the effects of global warming.
No concrete mention of this at http://www.google.org/ yet, though. 66.159.220.115 02:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google.org to develop plug-in hybrid car engine 

message: Once again, GM has screwed up in chassis design.  The text below looks great, until you see the photos at  and  Look at the angle the driver gets to see the road in front of the car.  The first thing a consumer is going to think is, "what if I can't see a toddler out in front."  What a pathetic and transparent attempt to remain in bed with OPEC.  
Maybe the Saturn Vue, Saturn Aura and Chevrolet Malibu will also eventually be PHEV; maybe at the same time and they can drop the ugly "concept." AnAccount2 21:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Often chassis for concept vehicles aren't practical.  They are designed that way to grab attention and not necessarily to meet the needs of drivers.  I doubt the 2010? production vehicle will have that problem. I agree GM has a problem.  They should come out with a production vehicle today and not make battery excuses, even if it has a 5 mile range and the generator needs to kick in at 35mph. Daniel.Cardenas 21:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hear, hear! AnAccount2 21:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GM's concept "Volt" 

message: This is apparently autoshow news weekend.
Reuters: AUTOSHOW-UPDATE 1-Honda mulling plug-in hybrids for development
"We are studying what kind of conditions would enable a plug-in," [sic] Motoatsu Shiraishi, president of Honda Research and Development, told Reuters.... 
Daimler repeated their 2004 Sprinter van plug-in option. (a/k/a Mercedes-Benz Sprinter)
Toyota made their announcement last summer. They aren't toying with "concept marketing," they probably will start selling their own Prius "conversion" within a year, I'd guess. AnAccount2 21:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Honda, Toyota, Daimler, Renault, etc. 

message: I believe that the following video of Sherry Boschert, president of the San Francisco Electric Vehicle Association disussing Plug-in Hybrids is useful to the article and should be included in the external links section.
*Sherry Boschert, president of the San Francisco Electric Vehicle Association, speaks about Plug-in Hybrids —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Uschris (talk • contribs) 22:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great idea.  Sherry does a great presentation in this video, and her question and answer session is worthwhile as well.  I went ahead and added the link. Fbagatelleblack 22:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to video presentation on of  

message: *PG&E Unveils Hybrid Car That Can Power Your House -- CBS5.com 
*PG&E says hybrids could help power grid -- Central Vally Business Times
*PG&E sees plug-in hybrids as potential profit centers -- News.com
*PG&E Unveils Prototype Hybrid Car -- ABC
*PG&E Unveils High-Powered Hybrid -- KTVU
James S. 02:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PG&E endorses plug-in Prius 

message: :DRAFT - DEFINITION - PHEV for Wikipedia article on "Plug-in hybrid vehicle"
:This section is intended to replace the present introductory language in the article.
:Original Draft date: March 29, 2007
A plug-in hybrid electrical vehicle (PHEV) is any vehicle powered by a combination of internal combustion engine and electric motor whose storage batteries or capacitors can be recharged by connecting the vehicle by plug to an external electrical power source. Plug-in hybrids typically have characteristics of both conventional hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) and of battery electric vehicles (BEV).
A plug-in hybrid may be capable of Charge-depleting, Charge-sustaining, and Blended modes of opperation.  They may drive for an extended range in all-electric mode, either only at low speeds or at all speeds, with the internal combustion engine used secondarily for power-assist, and/or for longer range travel.  Although there is no technically mandated minimum all-electric range (AER), future state and/or federal legislation may address this for policy purposes.
While the term "PHEV" most commonly  refers to passenger vehicles, plug-in hybrid technology has been implemented or proposed in delivery vans, trucks, buses, military vehicles, and other medium to heavy-duty vehicles for on- or off-road use. Plug-in hybrid passenger vehicles are presently not in mass production, although some manufacturers have indicated that they are developing PHEVs Prototypes have been built to demonstrate the technology and to encourage its widespread adaptation. Conversions of production model hybrids may be possible through conversion kits or conversion services pending commercial production.
Some PHEVs are adaptations of Toyota Prius hybrid cars. These prototypes retain the Prius's "idle-off" capability and regenerative braking, among other characteristics, while adding extended electric-only drive capability, and electrical grid-charging. Some of these vehicles have demonstrated fuel economy exceeding 100 miles per gallon of gasoline (plus electricity) in day-to-day driving with electric recharging each night.
Plug-in hybrids have been identified as having significant potential as alternative fuel vehicles.Cost-Benefit Analysis of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Technology. Simpson, A. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Report CP-540-40485 http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy07osti/40485.pdf   If their battery packs are charged from renewable energy such as solar, wind and/or hydropower, and if their engines can use fuels such as biodiesel or ethanol, then they can operate on minimal amounts of Even “pure” biodiesel and ethanol typically contain some fossil fuel-based additives, hence the reference to “minimal” fossil fuel rather than “no fossil fuel.” fossil fuel during engine operation.
:I trimmed this way down and replaced the existing intro with it. 75.35.74.5 14:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Re: "commonly called "grid-connected hybrids" or "gas-optional hybrids" (GO-HEVs)": please provide documentation. I have many, many PHEV articles and papers archived. The term "gas-optional hybrid" (GO-HEV) is waning in usage, probably because of its misleading nature: even with E95 ethanol, there is still some gas in the tank. "Grid-connected" hybrids is STARTING to get a little more common, but it's not yet there. A quick Google search confirms my observations: Plug-in hybrid 754,000, PHEV 242,000, GO-HEV 1,410, gas-optional hybrid 1,410, grid-connected hybrid 1,180. --Jack Rosebro 16:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough, I am not personally attached to gas-optional, rather perhaps combustion-optional...  I sorta like grid-connected or gridable as it implies plugging into the grid.  Just didn't want to toss our other nicknames that people have been using, such folks can always add them back into the article if they so choose. --D0li0 22:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: As for the 1999 SAE technical paper, what's the title and the significance, please? There have been many PHEV technical papers in the eight years since. --Jack Rosebro 16:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure what the title nor significance is, I just happen to agree very much with the two terms "energy hybrids" and "true hybrids".  Energy Hybrid is quite simply one of the most clear and concise way to describe these PHEVs, I take energy to mean energy source or Fuel, Plug-in Fuel specifically.  True Hybrids seems ironic as it takes on the tone of mild-, full-, partial-, hybrid and many of the other truly meaningless descriptors since none yet are True energy hybrids. --D0li0 22:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  While I can sympathize with your preference for "energy hybrids" or "true hybrids", they aren't in common usage, and aren't technically based. Other cultural terms like strong hybrid, mild hbrid, etc. have the same problem. And as this is a defining section, we have to stick to comman usage. --Jack Rosebro 22:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  That sounds reasonable, perhaps they can be used elsewhere in the article but not in this intro paragraph and definitions section. --D0li0 07:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Add BEV and HEV makes sense so the links will be there. And I'm sure the section will be condensed into less (but bigger) paragraphs; here, it's just a data dump. I think I'll adjust that now, come to think of it. --Jack Rosebro 22:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've updated the links to be less ambiguous. --D0li0 07:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the work yourself, and for the tip! Jack Rosebro 11:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro & Definition - Draft

message: Notes from Greg:
# It is assumed that the text will be footnoted and will have various internal and external links as is typical in a Wikipedia article. Once the draft language is commented on and finalized, I would like to add such details with your help. 
# The bar graph at the top of the current Wikipedia article will be removed. In its place will be a better graphic or none at all. Please comment on this. Do we need a new graphic or not? If you think we need one, please suggest the graphic you recommend.
Notes from D0li0 01:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Re: "commonly called "grid-connected hybrids" or "gas-optional hybrids" (GO-HEVs)": please provide documentation. I have many, many PHEV articles and papers archived. The term "gas-optional hybrid" (GO-HEV) is waning in usage, probably because of its misleading nature: even with E95 ethanol, there is still some gas in the tank. "Grid-connected" hybrids is STARTING to get a little more common, but it's not yet there. A quick Google search confirms my observations: Plug-in hybrid 754,000, PHEV 242,000, GO-HEV 1,410, gas-optional hybrid 1,410, grid-connected hybrid 1,180. --Jack Rosebro 16:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fair enough, I am not personally attached to gas-optional, rather perhaps combustion-optional...  I sorta like grid-connected or gridable as it implies plugging into the grid.  Just didn't want to toss our other nicknames that people have been using, such folks can always add them back into the article if they so choose. --D0li0 22:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

text: As for the 1999 SAE technical paper, what's the title and the significance, please? There have been many PHEV technical papers in the eight years since. --Jack Rosebro 16:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure what the title nor significance is, I just happen to agree very much with the two terms "energy hybrids" and "true hybrids".  Energy Hybrid is quite simply one of the most clear and concise way to describe these PHEVs, I take energy to mean energy source or Fuel, Plug-in Fuel specifically.  True Hybrids seems ironic as it takes on the tone of mild-, full-, partial-, hybrid and many of the other truly meaningless descriptors since none yet are True energy hybrids. --D0li0 22:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  While I can sympathize with your preference for "energy hybrids" or "true hybrids", they aren't in common usage, and aren't technically based. Other cultural terms like strong hybrid, mild hbrid, etc. have the same problem. And as this is a defining section, we have to stick to comman usage. --Jack Rosebro 22:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  That sounds reasonable, perhaps they can be used elsewhere in the article but not in this intro paragraph and definitions section. --D0li0 07:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Add BEV and HEV makes sense so the links will be there. And I'm sure the section will be condensed into less (but bigger) paragraphs; here, it's just a data dump. I think I'll adjust that now, come to think of it. --Jack Rosebro 22:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've updated the links to be less ambiguous. --D0li0 07:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the work yourself, and for the tip! Jack Rosebro 11:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Section Notes

message: Can we get links to actual patent numbers in the patent protection section, please? James S. 18:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patent protection section 

message: Are there any politicians who specifically refer to plug-in hybrids in their campaign platforms? James S. 08:20, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Bush´s photo in the article, as President. --HybridBoy 13:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a campaigm platform. Jack Rosebro 15:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politicians? 

message: This section was removed from the articel, thought I think that there are parts which should remain included somehow in the article. —The preceding and following unsigned comment was added by D0li0 (talk • contribs) 11:47, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about a couple of see-also links to genset trailer, and baset trailer? BenB4 05:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I suppose, except that pusher trailers consume gas, while baset trailers do not, so I adjusted the links in the article. I still think the see-also solution is lacking something.  This paragraph pointed out that the ideal PHEV is built like the chevy volt, which is primarily a BEV with the additional confidence of having unlimited range via traditional fuels. A BEV with range extending capabilities which are easily added by such trailers.  As opposed to the Toyota Hybrid Synergy Drive and other similar PHEV solutions which could be, but are not currently built to run primarily as a BEV.  I happen to have tricked my Prius into running like a BEV for somewhat longer than it's supposed to, but It would be far better as a simple electric S-10 with a genset in the bed... I suppose I'll have to sit down and rewrite such a paragraph someday and see how that goes over, I mostly wanted to have the removed paragraph available for that here on the talk page in the future... --D0li0 11:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, they are battery trailers. They can be re-placed by other trailers, when the batteries are discharged. A similar system is the Battery Range Extender Module. They are in the spare tire well and the removable battery could be replaced when discharged (for example, in a shop). The idea of renting is good, because the user has no worry about sizes, standards and maintenance... and they could be offered by battery makers or other companies  --Nopetro 13:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  They are battery trailers? What are? Are you trying to say there are or that they exist, do you have links to such devices?  I'm aware that BREMs exist as I've built one for my Prius, but they are hardly the kind of thing you would want to swap out simply because they are discharged.  Perhaps if they were on a trailer you might consider swapping one out, but again I'm not aware of any that exist or are in the works.  Battery swapping is a topic that is often discussed with regards to EV's and may actually be done in industrial settings such as a warehouse with fork lifts.     If you are passionate about this topic I would start with such a Battery swapping article or whatever the term is that's used if the practice is actually used in real life.  I don't have the time nor inclination to do that research at this time.  Perhaps someday once BEVs and PHEVs are common place and companies are willing to offer battery leasing contracts and swapping service stations, but that's all speculation at this point.  --D0li0 16:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battery electric vehicle and battery trailer 

message: The bullet items in the 2006-present section need to be converted to paragraph (at least two sentences each) and reference citation format. James S. 22:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: the intro's whitespace needs to be removed ... intro consolidated J. D. Redding 03:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, if you look at WP:LEAD, an article of more than 30 kB is supposed to have three or four paragraphs for the intro.  Thank you for your great help otherwise. James S. 03:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversion and Patents sections need to be improved 

message: I think so. James S. 21:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, with the effort you put into the article today who am I to argue?  Great job! You too Jack!  The only sticky point is whether the designation represents miles or kilometers...  One might assume that any vehicles in the states without a m/km were in miles while vehicles from elsewhere would use km by default.  Perhaps we should head that issue off right now by using, especially in the introduction for example, PHEV-20m which would be equal to PHEV-32km?  I imagine that the All-electric range article can go into more details and perhaps describe future regulations as they come into effect. --D0li0 10:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've only ever seen PHEV-x referring to miles, and never with m or km suffixes.  However, Google led me to this report which suggests to me that PHEV(x)km means kilometers and PHEV-(x) means miles. James S. 11:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The only example I saw in that pdf was PHEV30km, but no equivalent PHEV-18, PHEV18, PHEV-18m, or PHEV18m.  I have only ever seen this designation with a dash, which I think improves readability.  How might we treat this if it were any other standard (metric) measurement, I think it would be PHEV-10m (PHEV-16km), I can live with the miles being optional since that's how it's often used but would rather see it there or else enforce mentioning the (km) equivalent after. --D0li0 20:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should we have the PHEV-(miles) designation in the intro? 

message: I've fully integrated all of the news items into the History and other sections.  If you want to add more news quickly, please add links as bullet items to the end of the 2006-present section like this:
* Title -- Source, date
Thanks! James S. 13:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  News is history 

message: Hybrid vehicles were produced in 1899 by Lohner-Porsche.  What were they plugged into?  Corvus cornix 16:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dynamos. James S. 04:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 1899?

message: I was looking at the UC Davis "Team Fate" news page and found all of these:
 http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/upda-070223.html
 http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1860309.htm
 http://www.team-fate.net/media/American_Scientist2007-03FrankJanuary161.pdf
 http://www.edmunds.com/advice/fueleconomy/articles/119753/article.html
 video: http://www.kqed.org/quest/television/view/67
 http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Green_Car_News/DOE_Plug-In_Nation_a_Possibility.S196.A11577.html
The last one cites a "soon-to-be-published Department of Energy study" -- can anyone find it? James S. 04:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The comment about CO2 emissions from grid sources being less than from petroleum for the same number of miles driven in the KQED video should probably figure prominently. James S. 17:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff to add 

message: A plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) is a vehicle powered by an internal combustion engine or hydrogen fuel cell, as well as an electric motor with onboard energy via storage batteries or capacitors that can be recharged by connecting a plug to an electrical power source.
The emphasis by placement order implies that the internal combustion engine (or fuel cell) is the primary motivating energy source.  In local travel, the opposite is true, and arguably local travel would predominate for the vast majority of the population.  These are enhancements to current hybrid vehicles, with the difference primarily being higher capacity batteries that can be recharged via an outlet. I propose a rewording as follows;
A plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) is a hybrid vehicle where higher capacity onboard energy storage can be recharged by connection to an electrical power source.  The electric motor is augmented by a liquid fuel (gasoline, diesel, ethanol) internal combustion engine or by a hydrogen fuel cell. --Skyemoor 13:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A sentence that mentions two things, one after the other, does not  automatically imply that one is more important than the other. Furthermore, it is not necessarily true that electric drive is dominant in blended mode. The proposed sentence is awkward, as well.Jack Rosebro 20:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I've made refinements. --Skyemoor 01:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: First Sentence

message: From the intro:
:Toyota and General Motors have both announced plans to introduce production PHEVs as early as 2009.
The reference only mentions GM.  Has Toyota also announced 2009? 64.9.235.200 21:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  "As early as." References added. Jack Rosebro 23:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toyota and GM in 2009? 

message: On NPR's Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me as the "Not My Job" guest (RealAudio) at the end, GM Vice Chairman Robert Lutz said that GM intends to take the PHEV-40 Chevrolet Volt into production. How reliable is this in terms for inclusion in the article? 75.18.208.222 11:54, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its going to be taken into production in 2010.  Not very news worthy since they have already said the same thing since the beginning. Also GM can change their minds several times before then.  Other companies may come out with more interesting products before then. Daniel.Cardenas 15:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lutz says Chevy Volt is going into production 

message: A FAC reviewer asked that the powertrains section have more sources, please. BenB4 09:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I found some for each paragraph/type. 75.35.79.57 00:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Powertrains section needs references 

message: ; Google plugs in to hybrid car development with $10M : Internet search giant Google hopes to speed the development of plug-in hybrid cars by giving away millions of dollars to people and companies that have what appear to be practical ways to get plug-ins to market faster. But the money, announced Monday afternoon at Google headquarters in Mountain Valley, Calif., totals just $1 million so far with another $10 million pledged, which might not be enough to move the needle. 
75.35.79.57 00:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Google puts $10 million up 

message: I wonder if Ford is going to announce a commitment tomorrow. They've been coy about "deep-seated engineering problems" with plug-in vehicles which they don't describe.  BenB4 17:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ford 

message: Congratulations!!!. Also plug-in hybrids are featured vehicles, the power that is recharging the world. ;) --HybridBoy 10:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article 

message: The opening paragraph says PHEVs are sometimes called full hybrids, and "full hybrid" redirects to this PHEV article.
My understanding is that the distinction between a "full hybrid" and "mild hybrid" is that a full hybrid can drive (supply power) with the gasoline engine shut off for at least short periods of time, while mild hybrids cannot - either they supply only supplemental power to the gasoline engine, or supply no electric power, and just cut off the gas engine when coasting, breaking, or stopped. (Marginal source: Mother Earth News). So a PHEV could theoretically be a full hybrid or mild hybrid, and a full hybrid could be either a PHEV or not a PHEV. (And in fact most full hybrids are not PHEVs). While the sentence in question could be viewed as technically true, it implies (to me) that the terms are synonymous, which I don't think is true. -Agyle 20:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and removed it.  Someone put that in a long time ago.  Thanks for checking it. ←BenB4 00:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full hybrid a synonym for PHEV? 

message: The article says "However, some authors argue that PHEVs will soon become standard in the automobile industry," citing a Scientific American article. The article's authors predict HEVs "are likely to become an option
for most models" around 2020, and PHEVs "will probably become the dominant alternative-fuel vehicle" "relatively soon" after that. (See its last paragraph.) The speed of "relatively soon," they say, would depend on oil prices and government policies. Neither prediction suggests that they will be standard, only an option. No basis for the predictions is given; the article is mostly about technical issues, not market share issues. Unless other authors' predictions can be cited, I'd suggest ditching the sentence, as it seems too speculative and without basis, or at least changing it to "However, authors of a 2006 article in Scientific American predict that PHEVs will likely become a common option sometime after 2020," or maybe "by the 2020s." -Agyle 17:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PHEVs soon standard in auto industry? 

message: Current: "However, plug-in hybrids typically use larger battery packs than comparable conventional hybrids, and thus require larger resource flows." Is that a fancy way of saying "require more resources," or is something more meant by "resource flows," having to do with material lifecycle through recycling? I don't think resource flow is a commonly understood term, so if it is intended, perhaps it could be briefly explained or expanded upon in the article? -Agyle 17:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Resource flows?" 

message: Bob Lutz is saying 2010 for GM -- or 2009 for the Saturn VUE plug-in; bad reporting. ←BenB4 19:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, seems like an error by either Lutz or the magazine. -Agyle 19:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "GM Fast Tracks Plug-In Hybrid Development" 

message: I thought we were supposed to be the featured article yesterday.  What happened?  Anybody know?  Thanks. Fbagatelleblack
:Two apparently independent Japanese automobile industry press stories have said that Toyota is going to introduce their PHEV-8 Prius at the Tokyo Auto Show in October, and that certainly fits with their testing schedule that we know about from government filings. So I originally asked for October 26, the first day of the show.  There is no guarantee that the announcement will be made then (they are usually made a few weeks in advance) but there is likely to be some coincident press coverage that day.  The Featured Article director overlooked this request when scheduling it for the 22nd, and agreed on October when asked. ←BenB4 19:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What Happened to "Today's Featured Article" on August 22, 2007

message: Information about recharging points for PHEV (i.e. EDF is installing them in France for Toyota Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle. --HybridBoy 12:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When was the Toyota plug-in announced?  Source?  If there's a good source, but a new "Recharging" section under "Technology". ←BenB4 17:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  See http://www.edf.fr/105819i/Accueil-com/presse/communiques-et-dossiers-de-presse/Noeud-Communiques-et-Dossier-de-presse/EDF-et-Toyota-annoncent-un-partenariat-technologique-en-Europe-relatif-aux-vehicules-hybrides-rechargeables.html HybridBoy 22:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In which section can one put ...? 

message: The Kangoo line is not discontinued, but much improved with Lithium based batteries. I have myself opportunity for a short test drive during the EVER Monaco 2007: Renault Kangoo Plug in Hybrid
They have a complete new engine unit combining serial and paralell hybrid: Electric dominated drive unit. Below 80km/h, the ICE propells a generator, above 80km/h, the ICE has direct mechanical contact to propell the front wheels.  
The consumption according to European driving cycle is:
*14,4 kWh/100km in town
*19,6 kWh/100km out of town
This is so high efficient, that it reduces carbon dioxide even with electric power from lignite. CO2 emissions in city traffic
10.000 cars had been ordered by the French post.
--Pege.founder 09:08, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fantastic news!  Is there a press release or any other source for the French Post purchase?  Thank you. ←BenB4 11:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renault Kangoo Plug-in-Hybrid 

message: Hi Ben and All.  What is the rational for removing the "Hybrid Vehicle" supercategory.  No worries... just curious.Fbagatelleblack 17:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If A is a subcategory of B, and the article is in A, then usually there is no need to add it to B. But this is not always the case and I would be grateful if you would check WP:SUBCAT and see what you think. ←BenB4 20:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing Supercategories 

message: We have the History of plug-in hybrids to catch lesser events.  My opinion is that at this point, we should refrain from adding news items to this main article unless they relate to the introduction or sale of production vehicles and have firm dates or sales figures attached respectively, or represent major technology breakthroughs.  Is that too restrictive? ←BenB4 13:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The value of news changes with time.  Recent news is more valuable than old news.  I would be less restrictive, but quicker to delete, than you suggest.  Daniel.Cardenas 17:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Threshold for including news items 

message: This journalist test-drive of the plug-in Prius is very interesting.  Whether the glitches described are actually significant, or if this is an exercise in reduced expectations, we shall see what they unveil next week. CME94 11:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toyota 

message: I know the redesigned Renault Kangoo plug-in is not available in the U.S., but is it actually in production selling to fleets in Europe? CME94 12:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renault Kangoo 

message: Under the "Operating Cost" sub-section, in regards to:
:*In California, as of 2006, the cost to plug in at night is equivalent to US$0.75 per U.S. gallon (3.8 L) of gasoline 
:*US$1.00 worth of electricity from household power outlet (at 9 US cents per kW·h) is sufficient to drive the same distance as a gallon (3.8 L) of gasoline.
Both of these are sourced to Footnote #1. However, footnote #1 doesn't seem to say any of this. I think the question "how many miles does a PHEV get per Kwh" is very basic and important. Do we have any good, reliable sources? Since energy costs vary widely, the article should just give some basic "Kwh's per mile" examples ie. "the Prius gets 2 miles per Kwh" (or whatever it is). -- 71.191.47.120 04:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks to me, from the page history, like the second of the two statements is just plain unsourced. I added an archive.org link to the earlier version of the first. CME94 11:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operating Cost 

message: Here is some input regarding the environmental cost of manufacturing and operating a Toyota Prius. There may be advantages to PHEV's but, as with any newer technology still in development, there are drawbacks. I recommend such a section, especially since Wikipedia's policy is maintaining an opinion-neutral site.
"...the government realized how unrealistic their EPA tests were, which consisted of highway speeds limited to 55mph and acceleration of only 3.3 mph per second. The new tests which affect all 2008 models give a much more realistic rating with highway speeds of 80mph and acceleration of 8mph per second. This has dropped the Prius’s EPA down by 25 percent to an average of 45mpg."
"...the Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles. 
"The plant is the source of all the nickel found in a Prius’ battery and Toyota purchases 1,000 tons annually. Dubbed the Superstack, the plague-factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist’s nightmare. 
"'The acid rain around Sudbury was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside,' said Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin during an interview with Mail, a British-based newspaper. 
"All of this would be bad enough in and of itself; however, the journey to make a hybrid doesn’t end there. The nickel produced by this disastrous plant is shipped via massive container ship to the largest nickel refinery in Europe. From there, the nickel hops over to China to produce ‘nickel foam.’ From there, it goes to Japan. Finally, the completed batteries are shipped to the United States, finalizing the around-the-world trip required to produce a single Prius battery. 
When you pool together all the combined energy it takes to drive and build a Toyota Prius, the flagship car of energy fanatics, it takes almost 50 percent more energy than a Hummer - the Prius’s arch nemesis." 
"Through a study by CNW Marketing called Dust to Dust, the total combined energy is taken from all the electrical, fuel, transportation, materials (metal, plastic, etc) and hundreds of other factors over the expected lifetime of a vehicle. The Prius costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven over a lifetime of 100,000 miles - the expected lifespan of the Hybrid. 
The Hummer, on the other hand, costs a more fiscal $1.95 per mile to put on the road over an expected lifetime of 300,000 miles. That means the Hummer will last three times longer than a Prius and use less combined energy doing it."
Source: "Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage"; Central Connecticut State University Recorder, 07 March 2007  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.17.72.210 (talk) 15:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt this information.  Test moon rovers?  Not exactly, and the area is no longer a wasteland; see Greater Sudbury#Geography.  Also, if the energy in a Prius really cost $325,000 then the car would cost more. CME94 16:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can't just "doubt the information" simply because you don't like the conclusions that can be drawn from it. --Haizum    μολὼν λαβέ 17:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt it because it is completely wrong, as is your comment about Sudbury above, as you would have seen if you had clicked on Greater Sudbury#Geography. CME94 17:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. So long as the surrounding landscape is pleasing to the eye, a nickel factory is magically carbon neutral. Inco Superstack. --Haizum    μολὼν λαβέ 17:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The amount of carbon isn't the issue; again, on a per-vehicle basis it's dwarfed by expected emissions from gasoline. The problem at Sudbury has been sulphur. But this whole discussion is pointless because the lithium batteries that the three largest announced PHEV manufacturers plan to use don't contain any nickel. And the fourth largest wants to use iron-based batteries which don't contain any nickel either. CME94 17:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why let "facts" and "evidence" get in the way of a good anti-environmental screed? Raul654 17:55, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe Wikipedia should be pro-logic before it is pro/anti-environmental. --Haizum    μολὼν λαβέ 19:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Nevertheless, some discussion of the relative construction and disposal problems and associated costs for the different classes of vehicles would be a valuable addition to the article. I doubt PHEVs currently take advantage of many of the economies of scale that manufacturers of conventional vehicles enjoy. There is some mention in the article of the possibility of reusing batteries but little else. Andplus 16:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Damage of Producing Batteries 

message: Why is this not Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle as that is what the abbreviation stands for...
?
(And person who moved this in April, were you referreing to Google hits?)
Simply south 16:28, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because "Plug in hybrid" is far more common than "Plug in hybrid electric vehicle", and the common name is what we are supposed to use. Raul654 16:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I can only assume that due to the popularity of the PHEV entry there is intense scrutiny of any edits, which is welcome.  However, attempts to censor edits without reasonable justification is malapropos and defeats the spirit of Wikipedia.
My entry on Fisker Automotive has been repeatedly tampered with and the closest resemblance to a decent explanation was that since Fisker wasn't a 'major' automobile producer that a mention of it didn't belong in the introductory paragraphs.  It appears that the BYD Auto edit met a similar fate.  My contention with these removals is that in the realm of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles there are no 'majors,' and that the reader should be presented with the facts, that there are more companies besides Toyota, besides GM and Ford, that are employing significant time and effort towards the success of their own PHEVs.  To negate any company from the equation is misrepresentation of the complete story.
If one insinuates that a smaller company doesn't present the same merit as their larger contemporaries and uses that as justification of removal, I argue that as well.  In the case of Fisker Automotive, one can use a small amount of diligence to see that the company is well-founded and not a 'flash-in-the-pan,' so to speak.  Quantum Technologies is a NASDAQ-traded public company that provides OEM and manufacturing solutions for the automotive industry; in fact, Quantum manufactures vehicles for Ford and GM, not to mention that General Motors has a significant ownership interest in the company.  The namesake of Fisker Automotive, Henrik Fisker, designed vehicles such as the Aston Martin DB9, Aston Martin V8 Vantage, and the BMW Z8 and has since continued his passion for automobile design with Fisker Coachbuild and now in the joint-venture Fisker Automotive.
We shall see within the next few years how the PHEV market will play out, and perhaps plug-in hybrid electric vehicles will be a suitable solution to share the road and potentially replace the ICE vehicle.  Since this a burgeoning industry that many view as a way to mitigate carbon-output and our dependence on foreign oil, it is essential that unbiased facts are presented to the public from the sources that we've come to rely on for trustworthy information, such as Wikipedia.  Any attempt to skew the information without open discussion can inevitably be harmful towards the progress of such worthy goals.  I welcome your feedback. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94gf301 (talk • contribs) 
:Part of the intense scrutiny is because the article is on the main page, where it will be for another five hours or so. Companies like Fisker and Tesla just don't have any sales yet.  There are a lot of similar announcements in History of plug-in hybrids where I put the Fisker announcement you added.  BYD is an established automaker, with several high-volume production lines. CME94 17:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can accept that, but why was the BYD Auto entry stricken from the intro as well, if it's an established automaker, like you say? 94gf301 17:42, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's back; the person who removed it wasn't familiar with the company and apologized for removing it. CME94 17:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough; thanks for the explanation! 94gf301 17:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: As you say "PHEV edits without dialogue is wrong."  This is why many of us are limiting the number of edits which have not been previously discussed today.  I think Fisker deserves a significant mention in this article, and I encourage you to propose edits and additions such that Fisker gets the attention it deserves.  On the other hand, including Fisker in the introductory area on the day that Wikipedia makes this the featured article seems a bit too commercial to several of us who have worked long and hard to get this article into its current form.  That said, I look forward to hearing more about Fisker as their development efforts progress.Fbagatelleblack 17:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PHEV edits without dialogue is wrong. 

message: Goodness!  It was open warfare out there today (today being 10/30/2007, the day that the PHEV article was "Today's Feature Article" on Wikipedia).  Thanks to everyone who fought from the trenches preventing vandalism, etc.! Fbagatelleblack 00:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: We Made It!

message: I read most of the discussion above in the old section about deleting the NiMH section, which we clearly all do not believe is the correct course of action.
I reverted Xchange's edits, for one reason and one reason alone:
:Due to the high costs of alternative technologies, NiMH batteries are the only commercially viable technology for mass market PHEVs.
Given that the ABD models going into production do not use lithium NiMH batteries, that statement is clearly false.  
I will support changes which cite reliable sources, and don't contradict current information. J T Price (talk) 05:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war in the NiMH section 

message: Xchange, I see that you have removed the word "controlling" in the sentence describing Chevron's ownership position at Cobasys.  Thanks for doing so.  However, your edits still imply that 50% ownership of Cobasys plus 19.99% ownership of ECD equals 60% ownership of Cobasys, which is not true.    It would, however, be correct to state that "Chevron's overall influence over Cobasys goes beyond a strict 50/50 ownership split with ECD due to the 19.99% ownership stake Chevron holds in ECD."  ... Or something along those lines.  Please ponder it and offer any alternatives which seem proper to you.  Thanks.  Fbagatelleblack (talk) 20:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perfect!  Nice work.  Fbagatelleblack (talk) 01:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patents Section Edits