Toyota set to test new plug-in hybrid vehicle

Apparently taking a cue from drivers that have already modded their Priuses for plug-in capabilities, Toyota's now gone and created a plug-in version of the Prius itself, and it's set to soon test the vehicle on public roads. Dubbed the Toyota Plug-in HV, the vehicle can be charged simply by plugging it into a standard electrical socket, although you won't get much farther than 8 miles on a single charge (the gasoline engine will kick in after the batts have been exhausted). While Toyota says that a commercialized version will "depend largely on advances in battery technology," the company is planning to test the vehicle in its current state in Japan shortly, with tests in the US and Europe apparently also in the works.

[Via PhysOrg, photo courtesy of Reuters]

[brad @ Jul 25th 2007 4:02PM]

hmm 8 miles doesnt seem very good at all, but then again for short trips around town but whats the charge time on that? If its 6 hours to get 8miles thats not so good

[Castle @ Jul 25th 2007 8:56PM]

Well it is a prototype test-bed concept that is only being tested.

But its good thing to hear that work is being done on NiMH batteries instead of waiting for the Li-On batteries to be safe enough for cars(GMs Volt doesn't expect anything until the next-decade).

[AndyM @ Jul 26th 2007 9:51AM]

It turns out that Toyota could EASILY make a plugin hybrid that could go over a hundred miles on a charge... Unfortunately, the patent holder (Cobasys) of NiMH batteries refuses to allow them to produce "propulsion sized" batteries. Cobasys just happens to be involved with an oil company as well. I learned this from the link below (The Cobasys info is a page length or two down):

http://www.electrifyingtimes.com/goodtoyota-badtoyota.html

I was so ticked after reading all of this. Do some more digging around the web to learn more. You'll soon see that it is evident that Cobasys is being a license bully and is stifling innovation.

[Kai @ Jul 25th 2007 4:02PM]

what are u gonna do with 8 extra miles?...

[Rob @ Jul 25th 2007 4:28PM]

My point exactly.
I'm all for introducing and developing this "OLD" technology we should've invested in a long time ago. But, with this numbers, you'd never win any support.

I bet you the car manufacturers are playing the same silly game, orchestrated with the oil companies, to give us some bs that says "see we've tried it again, and concluded that only oil powered engines are the answer to our needs."

Make sure to watch that movie "Who Killed the Electric Car" and you'd get a clue who the car manufacturers answer to. That's why they're finances, except for a couple of them, are in the red all over.

[dj-kenpo @ Jul 25th 2007 5:06PM]

rob: that was a great movie. the best part of "who killed the electric car" was watching the cover up over the better batteries they produced and then seeing the oil companies buy the batteries, then say "there's no good batteries". sorry.

well ya, cuz you bought and buried them.

conspiracy theory is more fun when a conspiracy is involved.... :(

[Castle @ Jul 25th 2007 9:00PM]

For the first 8 miles its an electric vehicle; for the rest of your driving its a fuel-sipping hybrid.

Whats the problem? Besides, its a prototype, I'm sure anything that hits production would get better range. It isn't a bad first step.

[Morgan @ Jul 25th 2007 10:08PM]

@Rob "I bet you the car manufacturers are playing the same silly game... That's why they're [sic] finances, except for a couple of them, are in the red all over."

That's a sweet conspiracy, I can really see the upside for the auto industry there. "Do something illegal and irrational, something that will lose us money now and in the long-run, and something that would be impossible to cover up? Sign us up!" Makes just a barrel-load of rational, sane, common sense.

[siriusfox @ Jul 25th 2007 10:26PM]

Nothing. It's all hype. The electric car was killed because at 1% penetration it would have destroyed the power grid in the US. Literally, every day it would go way over capacity. An no one had, or has the money to upgrade the infrastructure.

The hybrid is good because it takes the advantages of electric (idk what they are, but people love them), and puts them in a self contained unit. Thus giving the thing that everyone loves about electric, and the practicality of gas. I doubt that these cars will get big, or if they do, you can expect legislation to get rid of them to prevent power outages.

[Chris @ Jul 25th 2007 11:12PM]

What in the world are you talking about. The electrical grid ha tons of excess capacity, particularly at night. So much in fact that companies will pump water up mountains to reservoirs just so they can drain them during the day when demand is greater. Using plug-in cars, which can be set to only charge at nighttime, will help stabilize the demand on the electric grid. As electric rates increase for nighttime electricity, which is currently significantly cheaper, more companies will build windmills which in many areas run just as well if not better at nighttime. Seriously your statement is just really ignorant.

[Chris @ Jul 25th 2007 11:14PM]

Whoops, forgot my accompanying link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped_storage

[Andrew @ Jul 25th 2007 4:18PM]

I believe this is the same vehicle that my lab just (today) publicly announced it is going to test:

http://www.today.uci.edu/news/release_detail.asp?key=1644

There's lots of info in that article about other vehicle studies at my lab as well.

[Castle @ Jul 25th 2007 8:57PM]

congratulations to your lab . . .

[Eric @ Jul 25th 2007 4:27PM]

This article has the right idea, but they are doing something wrong. The lithium ion battery maker A123 is starting production on a extra battery pack that fits into the spare wheel well of existing Prius. This battery pack allows the Prius to travel 40 read that "forty" miles before the gas engine kicks in. This module is expected to be priced at $9,500 and available early next year ('08). There should also be a $3,325 tax credit for the module to help lower the price.

[dj-kenpo @ Jul 25th 2007 5:08PM]

any specs on the batter? it would be interesting to tie together $800 worth of $30 ebay laptop batteries to possibly get less miles, but far, far cheaper...

[Castle @ Jul 25th 2007 9:04PM]

The A123 battery is still a few years off. A lot of their technology is licensed from MIT. There are other companies that are also very far into Li-on battery technology for cars (Sanyo, Matsushita, etc.) Toyota has said that when Li-On is safe enough and can charge rapidly enough then they will use it.

It seems to me that these prototypes are preparing themselves for these next-generation of batteries. But you have to have the system in place first.

[Eric @ Jul 26th 2007 9:59AM]

How can you say the A123 battery is a few years off, these batteries are currently in every Dewalt power tools battery pack on store shelves. I have talk there product data sheet (sorry dj-kenpo no detailed specs on the batteries) for the "booster" battery I described earlier, and it says "will be marketed nationwide by certified installers early next year", I have already been in two Prius with this addition.

The technology is here and NOW!

[James @ Jul 30th 2007 8:57AM]

Yeah, but remember how pissed off you were when you had to replace your iPod battery after 3 years? Now multiply that out to ten grand...

Seriously, that's the Achilles' Heel nobody talks about with electric and even hybrid cars -- every rechargeable battery technology runs out of puff sooner or later, then you have to toss all the (highly toxic!) batteries and buy a new load. I don't have firm numbers about exactly how long the chemistries in common use today will last, but I will be amazed if you don't have to replace the whole lot at least twice over the life of the car.

[Eric @ Jul 30th 2007 9:36AM]

The A123 batteries are said to last 10 years, most people don't even keep there car for 10 years. A123's nanophosphate has less heat and run away issues, thus more safe than traditional lithium-ion batteries.

[Don @ Jul 25th 2007 4:31PM]

Actually, for just a test vehicle, 8 miles per charge is pretty good. Assuming this range is based on the existing Prius battery pack, it is not surprising that it is a relatively short range. With its initial design parameters, having a huge range on battery power alone was probably not a high priority. I would assume it would be pretty easy to modestly increase this range. It is important to remember that a significant percentage of trips are of short duration. For example, the 8 mile range would almost let me get to and from work (on those days when it is not great biking weather).

What is interesting about these plug-in hybrids is that it is a technology that could be used now (without waiting for the inevitable advances in battery technology. While they do not offer exceptional range, when the batteries do drain it is not a disaster, your plug-in hybrid just kicks over the IC engine.

[HomoSapien @ Jul 25th 2007 4:40PM]

Haven't they heard about AQUYGEN ?
Or was that IQ GEN? whatever

Get lost homo erectus!

[Daniel @ Jul 25th 2007 4:44PM]

Am I missing something? Plug-in power is created by burning the same fuel. Are efficiencies at power plants that much greater than IC engines to make this worthwhile?

[Rex @ Jul 25th 2007 5:04PM]

Power plants are more efficient than internal combustion engines because they are always running at peak efficiency, plus the pollution is able to be contained easier at a plant than on every automobile since large and heavy solutions are practical.

[Eric @ Jul 25th 2007 5:10PM]

IC engines at best are around 38% efficient, I think coal plants are around the same, but the main advantage of Plug-in-Hybrids and the power industry is aware of this and want plug-ins to become a reality because they help balance the load through out the day. Hybrids plugged into the grid can act as spinning reserve and actually put power back onto the grid and get paid for it. This can also remove the need for fossil fuel spinning reserve.

[Bill @ Jul 25th 2007 7:41PM]

No road taxes on alternative fuels (CNG, electricity, home-made biodiesel) is another big plus.

[Castle @ Jul 25th 2007 9:11PM]

Plug-in power will be coming from the electric grid.

For the US, only 3% of our electric power comes from petroleum fuels, most ~50% comes from coal, 20% from nuclear power, 19% from natural gas, and 6.5% from hydroelectric.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sources_of_Electricity_in_the_US_2005_New.png

A 2001 DOE estimate calculates a battery powered EV at 7 cents/kWh can be driven 43 miles for a dollar and at $1.25/gallon a gasoline vehicle will go 18 miles. Of course, US electric prices aren't 7 cents per kw/hr anymore, but gas isn't $1.25/gallon either. The economics are much better today then six years ago.

Also, huge power generators that cost tens of millions of dollars are vastly more efficient then the internal combustion engine in your car.

[James @ Jul 30th 2007 9:02AM]

Let's don't forget that the cheapest, cleanest (I could argue), most efficient form of power is nuclear energy (you greenies love Europe so much, take a look at their power infrastructure), which until Doc Brown gives us the Mister Fusion is going to remain in the realm of power plants only.

[roc ingersol @ Jul 25th 2007 4:55PM]

I remember looking into hybrids initially and being really disappointed.
I expected the Prius to look more like GM's state goal with their new EFlex platform: the car runs on electricity and can use any modular source or store.

Batteries, small turbine diesel engine, more traditional ICE, fuel cell, whatever makes sense given the task, environment, etc.

Why would you go through the trouble of building a hybrid just have a battery sometimes drive the same old crazy transmission, with all of the old mechanical systems? And why would you keep grafting capability into that goofy frankenstein?

blech.

I look forward to something truly new. I honestly haven't seen enough from GM to know if their platform even meets the lofty goals. But at least they've publicly stated the correct way forward.

[kellogz @ Jul 25th 2007 5:08PM]

Dont understand why hybrid auto makers have not utilized the laws of physics when it comes to extending battery charges and limiting the use of the engine. Could they not take advantage of the cars inertia and motion to "rotate" or turn additional alternators which constantly charge the batteries?

Perpetual motion of course could not occur but it would extend the batteries stored energy thus reducing the frequency that the gas engine has to take over.

[roc ingersol @ Jul 25th 2007 5:24PM]

Tapping inertia to charge the batteries would increase rolling resistance, robbing you of more energy by inhibiting forward motion than you would get back as charge in your batteries. (Due the 2nd law, you necessarily get back less than you steal from yourself, and in reality you'll get back much, much less.)

Unless you -want- to stop (as with regenerative braking) it would be a bad idea.

[kellogz @ Jul 25th 2007 9:37PM]

Dont think the resistance or power needed to turn additional alternators would have and impact on forward motion. You can turn a alternator by hand easily. So what are we talking about, taking away 1/5th of a horsepower?

If the additional alternators were built into the drivetrain where the rotation of the wheels turned these alternators by way of belt or chain, you would get constant charging while in motion.

I do agree with you about putting less back in compared to what you have taken.

[firebat45 @ Jul 25th 2007 10:20PM]

If it doesn't take much effort to turn it, it doesn't produce much energy. Ever hooked a meter up to an alternator as you turned it by hand? What you're suggesting is basically an electrically powered vehicle that gathers energy from its own movement, which according to non-Steornian physics, is wasteful. Any alternator you hook in for 100% of the time would have a negative effect on battery life. Regenerative braking, however, works great. The more efficiently the manufacturers can make regenerative braking, the more distance the cars will be able to travel.

[dj-kenpo @ Jul 25th 2007 5:11PM]

there's those new PAINT ON SOLAR CELLS, it would be cool to paint the entire car in solar cell paint and then place the 2 wires onto the skin of the car and thus recharge while you drive.

"dad shouldn't you park the car in the shade so it doesn't get hot" not today timmy, not today, today we're living in the future. "you suck dad."

[Zenerdiode @ Jul 25th 2007 5:22PM]

kellogz

actually, they already do. it's called regenerative braking. Regen takes the inertia (kinetic energy) and converts into juice for the batteries. I am not sure if GM does this, but I do know for sure Honda and Toyota have it in their systems.

[ug @ Jul 25th 2007 5:44PM]

==
Am I missing something? Plug-in power is created by burning the same fuel. Are efficiencies at power plants that much greater than IC engines to make this worthwhile?
==

Yes you are missing something. Internal combustion engines (I.C.E.) are less efficient than just about every power plant technology. Electric motors are very efficient in comparison. If you are concerned about CO2, in areas where power is generated from renewable sources, electric cars are 100% emissions free from power generation to the wheels spinning.

The problem is that parallel hybrids just don't make good plugin conversions! People are looking to the Prius just because that's all there is out there. A serial hybrid uses a more powerful electric motor to power the wheels 100% and the I.C.E. is small and run at a single optimized RPM to charge the batteries. That's what the Chevy Volt is supposed to be. There have been many decades of research to back up the notion that the generator-to-electric-motor approach is one of the best ways to move a vehicle. That's why diesel-electric engines are used to push around ships and trains. Serial hybrids are basically like diesel-electrics with a battery backup to temporarily delay the generator I.C.E. starting up.

[Galley @ Jul 25th 2007 5:46PM]

Make it 40 miles on one charge, and I could probably make it six months without having to fill up.

[anonymous @ Jul 25th 2007 5:59PM]

and this is why the oil companies don't want it to succeed. Fuel consumption would probably drop by 50 or 60 percent thereby causing oil mongers to have to eat steak and lobster they prepared instead of steak and lobster their cook prepares.

[aeo @ Jul 25th 2007 6:41PM]

8 miles will get me round trip to work and back.

[ug @ Jul 25th 2007 7:15PM]

If you only need to go 4 miles to work and 4 miles back then maybe you should just ride a scooter.

[John Doe @ Jul 25th 2007 7:20PM]

So when you need to go further, say 25 miles, I guess he should buy both eh?

PS- And public transit isn't all that great in some cities.

[Aha @ Jul 25th 2007 9:39PM]

Once again, the fault of the auto companies. Good ol' Henry Ford was not only a Nazi sympathizer but also the bane of American public transit. See the extra features on "Who Killed the Electric Car." "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" tells the same story, albeit in a fictionalized version.

[Mark @ Jul 25th 2007 10:00PM]

wow, 8 miles *sarcastic clap*.

[Mr McTowel @ Jul 26th 2007 7:04AM]

I'm with you on this, sarcastic clap! :)

[roach @ Jul 25th 2007 11:09PM]

are all these people retrofitting batteries or simply using their existing battery? Cuz i dont see how NYTIMES gets thousands of dollars to do this. Harbor Freight sells a 120v to 12v charger for 7.95

[kaztm @ Jul 26th 2007 12:21AM]

Oh good, it only took a week for Engadget to act on my tip.

[Susan @ Jul 26th 2007 2:06AM]

How is it that the Tesla Roadster is supposed to get 200+ miles to the charge and Toyota is rocking only 8?
http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php

Am I missing something here?

[Nick @ Jul 26th 2007 2:34AM]

The Tesla motors car utilizes several hundred kilos of lithium-ion batteries, which store a far greater amount of energy than the batteries found in a Prius. It would be impractical to put this many batteries in a car that also uses an internal combustion engine.

For comparison, The Tesla motors battery stores around 56kWh of energy. The Prius battery pack uses older technology (Nickel-metal Hydride) and only stores about 1.3kWh of energy. So, 8 miles is actually fairly reasonable, assuming Toyota keeps the battery pack the same and simply adds a charger. If they wanted to add extra range, it wouldn't be too hard to either:

1) Upgrade to Lithium-Ion
and/or
2) Add more batteries

[Susan @ Jul 26th 2007 2:56AM]

Ah, I see it's the whole I.C.engine/transmission thing versus the direct drive motor.

Lithium-Ion batteries have been available for quite some time now and nickel based batteries need to be conditioned. It's a wonder that Toyota, of all companies, hasn't embraced lithium-Ion. It makes me wonder if they are trying to fail in the same way as GM. Perhaps the Hydrogen impresario has a nice kickback network all set up through the future (Hydrogen) gas stations of the world--infrastructures already there but we'll need bigger tanks.

[Johan S @ Jul 26th 2007 3:27AM]

The world is ripe for a 50 to 100x advance in battery storage capability.

[ridv34 @ Jul 26th 2007 12:02PM]

I've actually seen a lot more Priuses in my neighborhood, which is always a good thing. Before we can move on to an all electric car, we gotta show that there is a strong demand for such vehicles, to the point where auto makers say F the oil companies, I can make more money selling electrics.