5 ms·

"Hybrids" of all kinds are usually a dead-end transitional technology. See the fate of "touch-optimized" Symbian and Blackberry OSs. The old timers dislike the

by mtgx 8y ago

"Hybrids" of all kinds are usually a dead-end transitional technology. See the fate of "touch-optimized" Symbian and Blackberry OSs. The old timers dislike them for being "different" and the ones who want the new tech want 100% of it, not just 20% - they want the ideal solution in this new paradigm. As such, hybrid tech is doomed from the start.

perl4ever 8y ago
It seems to me that houses will always run on electricity, but that doesn't mean backup generators will ever become obsolete, because electricity isn't 100% reliable. For the same reason I think the end state of cars in the forseeable future will/should be PHEVs, not BEVs. People who disdain the former in favor of the later are responding to vague, illogical ideas of purity and simplicity, in my opinion.
- tialaramex 8y ago
  Purity and simplicity applies to the vehicle's operating costs which are an entirely pragmatic matter. If you have a BEV the drive train is almost childishly simple, and that means fewer things that can go wrong and the things that do go wrong are mostly simple to replace, which in turn means your maintenance costs are low. All the time you're driving a PHEV you're hauling the ICE power system around, even if you don't use it for days, weeks, months, or indeed ever. That's an ongoing cost drag compared to the equivalent BEV. Anti air-pollution and anti climate-change rules will punish PHEVs. Not at first, because a PHEV is better than ICE, but gradually a PHEV is going to be paying surcharges and subject to access rules that don't apply to BEVs, rather than try to distinguish whether your specific PHEV would be a problem on this specific occasion it's simpler to just say "No, buy a BEV". I think you're exactly wrong about this, lots of people are going to dip their toes in the water with a PHEV, expecting to use ICE mode a lot, then when it comes time to replace it they'll think back to the few times the PHEV "paid for itself" by running in ICE mode, and all the times they were fine on battery, and they'll eye the latest BEV with more range, and they'll say to themselves hell with it, let's buy a BEV, we hate spending 8+ hours at a time in a car anyway so let's just make it impossible rather than unpleasant.
  - perl4ever 8y ago
    The arguments for a BEV over a PHEV strike me as just like the insistence of some that it's a good tradeoff to get rid of your spare tire to save a fraction of a percent in gas. You seem to agree that a PHEV doesn't need to and won't use much gas on average, which means its environmental impact is not a lot greater than a BEV. And something you are ignoring is that a PHEV needs a significantly smaller battery than a BEV, which counterbalances the cost of the engine as well as its environmental impact.

by mtgx 8y ago

perl4ever 8y ago

It seems to me that houses will always run on electricity, but that doesn't mean backup generators will ever become obsolete, because electricity isn't 100% reliable. For the same reason I think the end state of cars in the forseeable future will/should be PHEVs, not BEVs. People who disdain the former in favor of the later are responding to vague, illogical ideas of purity and simplicity, in my opinion.

tialaramex 8y ago
Purity and simplicity applies to the vehicle's operating costs which are an entirely pragmatic matter. If you have a BEV the drive train is almost childishly simple, and that means fewer things that can go wrong and the things that do go wrong are mostly simple to replace, which in turn means your maintenance costs are low. All the time you're driving a PHEV you're hauling the ICE power system around, even if you don't use it for days, weeks, months, or indeed ever. That's an ongoing cost drag compared to the equivalent BEV. Anti air-pollution and anti climate-change rules will punish PHEVs. Not at first, because a PHEV is better than ICE, but gradually a PHEV is going to be paying surcharges and subject to access rules that don't apply to BEVs, rather than try to distinguish whether your specific PHEV would be a problem on this specific occasion it's simpler to just say "No, buy a BEV". I think you're exactly wrong about this, lots of people are going to dip their toes in the water with a PHEV, expecting to use ICE mode a lot, then when it comes time to replace it they'll think back to the few times the PHEV "paid for itself" by running in ICE mode, and all the times they were fine on battery, and they'll eye the latest BEV with more range, and they'll say to themselves hell with it, let's buy a BEV, we hate spending 8+ hours at a time in a car anyway so let's just make it impossible rather than unpleasant.
- perl4ever 8y ago
  The arguments for a BEV over a PHEV strike me as just like the insistence of some that it's a good tradeoff to get rid of your spare tire to save a fraction of a percent in gas. You seem to agree that a PHEV doesn't need to and won't use much gas on average, which means its environmental impact is not a lot greater than a BEV. And something you are ignoring is that a PHEV needs a significantly smaller battery than a BEV, which counterbalances the cost of the engine as well as its environmental impact.