US Department of Energy pours $30 million into plug-in hybrids

While some automakers are already promising to have plug-in hybrids on the road by 2010, the US Department of Energy is now pouring some cash into a slightly less ambitious joint effort with Ford, General Motors, and General Electric, which would see plug-ins capable of driving 40 miles on a single charge roll out by 2014. Under the new effort, General Motors will be tasked with improving lithium-Ion battery packs and charging systems, and integrating them into its own research with a test fleet by 2011, while Ford will be aiming to speed up the mass-production of plug-in hybrids, as well as improve its batteries and build prototype vehicles. Rounding things out, General Electric will be partnering with Chrysler to develop a dual-battery system, which promises to let vehicles travel 40 miles on a charge. All of that is still subject to appropriations by Congress, however, and the aforementioned companies would obviously be pouring in a good chunk of change themselves, as a mere $30 million isn't exactly quite enough to shake up the auto sector these days.

[droopy1592 @ Jun 13th 2008 12:12PM]

chump change compared to the incentives big oil gets

[Niki @ Jun 13th 2008 12:31PM]

What a waste of money...

[Sean O @ Jun 13th 2008 12:35PM]

No kidding. They might has well have given them a pat on the back. When is the State Department budget going to contribute to this stuff. I want to see $15 billion, with a "b" given to this kind of research.

[Juice @ Jun 13th 2008 1:03PM]

The Govt needs to outlaw a certain SIZE/MPG vehicle.

[Juice @ Jun 13th 2008 1:05PM]

that way I'll feel safer knowing I won't/shouldn't get T-boned from a F-350 supercab in my Prius.

[happy_penguin @ Jun 13th 2008 1:59PM]

Perhaps you shouldn't drive. The government doesn't need to do anything. It's a free market and the operation of oversized vehicles will be priced out of reach for most consumers. You want to drive a Pious? That's fine. That is your freedom of choice. I prefer mid sized vehicles with more powerful engines. If some clown can afford to drive the F350 more power to him. I'll be watching him so I don't get run over.

[Jason Barlow @ Jun 13th 2008 2:09PM]

Hey droopy pants, tell us all about these incentives to big oil. Do we give them lots of money to develop cars that use more fuel?? Dummy.

[lawyer bird @ Jun 13th 2008 3:22PM]

how about some pointless war values?? maybe 100-150 billion dollars a year?? that might do it

[happy_penguin @ Jun 13th 2008 4:35PM]

Low ranked? You communists!

[Dave Chappelle @ Jun 14th 2008 2:48AM]

Wow, this is so futile, even Australia a country with an economy an eigth of or even less than the US has pledged more. Not only are they giving Holden (US may know as pontiac me finks) 500 million to go Hybrid but they gave Toyota 35 million just to BUILD hybrids in Australia.

You only have to go as far as the 90's and the doco 'who killed the electric car' to know that the US has no interest in the environment or petrol prices.

1 trillion on Iraq and shit all on ANYTHING else. I would absolutely HATE! to live in a country so corrupt and unjust.

[Low Ranked @ Jun 13th 2008 12:13PM]

But how far can you really drive when you're tethered to your house?

[bohsocks @ Jun 13th 2008 12:24PM]

When will society realize that we're meant to use up this world until we can move on the next planet. Haven't you people seen Total Recall?

[Eric M. @ Jun 13th 2008 12:27PM]

"Sorry I can't make it to work today, I forgot to charge my car last night"

[crow610 @ Jun 13th 2008 12:53PM]

2 weeks

[Jagster @ Jun 13th 2008 1:47PM]

It's a plug-in HYBRID. Do you guys even know what that is?

[deyanimay @ Jun 13th 2008 3:51PM]

What if some one stuck a taser in that slot would your car blow up?

[John Stracke @ Jun 13th 2008 12:14PM]

*What*? 40 miles? Why are we paying them to reach a goal that other companies have already hit?

[Matt @ Jun 13th 2008 12:22PM]

Agreed, and the deadline is 6 years in the future while we need it now.

[SimbaDogg @ Jun 13th 2008 5:56PM]

Really...i didn't know there were any publicly available, and legal cars that were plug in hybrids that could be bought by the avg consumer.

[janson0 @ Jun 13th 2008 12:16PM]

Only 40 miles per charge? Does that seem like a ridiculously short distance to anyone else? Or am I missing something...

[Phil Ringsmuth @ Jun 13th 2008 12:23PM]

I'm holding out for a dual-typo update, wherein Engadget will say they corrected it from 40 to 400.

Keeping my fingers crossed...

[Funke, Tobias Dr. @ Jun 13th 2008 12:27PM]

40 miles running off battery until the engine starts running off gas to recharge the battery. That is plenty for most peoples commute and daily activities.

[Surur @ Jun 13th 2008 4:31PM]

What you are missing is that in USA the average commute is only 32 miles round trip. 40 miles range would allow most users to run completely on electricity.

[Motoken @ Jun 13th 2008 11:57PM]

yeah average commute is 32 miles long, ONE WAY, you need to drive home dont you? 40 miles is ridiculous short, especially if you live in a city like Orlando where everything is far apart.

people who have moded their cards and have replaced the engine with batteries get like 200 miles on a charge. and the battery they are working on is the size of a computer, well looks more like 3 conventional car batteries put side by side.

[Matt Dearman @ Jun 13th 2008 12:19PM]

40 Miles? Oh lawdy lawd.. Where does I signs up Mr. Corporate Automotive.

I hope this isn't one of their 'well, we tried to roll out electric vehicles, and they just weren't adopted so it's back to petroleum we go' schemes like the EV-1 was. ...This time, they don't even get to use their own money to make a mockery of the electric vehicle market.

How long is it going to take before people start taking diesel electric seriously? WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY!!!!!!!! ROLL IT OUT!!!!!!!!!

Stop messing with all these garbage baby steps!

[michas_pi @ Jun 13th 2008 1:21PM]

Amen to that.

I, too, don't see why people aren't demanding diesel-electric hybrids, or even just diesel vehicles!

[Ignatius @ Jun 13th 2008 1:45PM]

The problem is is that any tiny diesel engine that can recharge the batteries do not pass California's strict standards.

[happy_penguin @ Jun 13th 2008 1:52PM]

Diesel is not the answer. A barrel of oil yields about half as much low sulfur diesel as it does gasoline.

[jason @ Jun 13th 2008 12:22PM]

I really dont like people that say:

"OMG this wont solve anything.. if the energy for the electricity still comes from carbon based fuels... this will not solve anything"


quite frankly i am tired of hearing this bullcrap. People that say stuff like this are narrowminded to the point of disbelief.

Electric cars are a solid way to help drastically cut down carbon emmissions. Yes i know that some power plants are based largely around coal.

Think of it this way. You have 20k cars driving around your city. All of them are their own power supply. To change the fuel they use you have to change 20k engines.

Now if all of them are electric, now to change the way they get the electricity they use, you just have to change 1 thing. the power plant. Even if the power plants are using coal, they still are extremely efficient when compared with a car's engine.

Several areas are switching to Wind power around me. combine that with an electric car and you have a zero emission way to go to work. Nuclear power is a very very good alternative. Not only has modern advances made its environmental impact next to none, it is much more powerful than hydroelectricity, wind power or solar power.


It is MUCH easier to maintain 1 source of power, than several thousand. You can easily modify that source to be efficient, and not harm the environment as much than if you have several thousand carbon emitting vehicles running around.

[Kris @ Jun 13th 2008 12:29PM]

Even though you are correct, I don't remember anyone saying "OMG this wont solve anything.. if the energy for the electricity still comes from carbon based fuels... this will not solve anything" in this thread.

Odd

[jason @ Jun 13th 2008 12:50PM]

Every thread in which there is an electric car typically ends up like that. I originally started writing my comment when there was 0 comments so it wasnt directed at anybody here. just intended to quelch anybody that would think of saying it later.

[RyanTV @ Jun 13th 2008 2:02PM]

This guy is 100% correct. Instead of running our cars off of petroleum, we are now running them off coal. Still terrible for the environment, but i guess at least we American's own the natural resources. Anything that keeps money out of the pockets of greedy Saudi oil princes is an okay idea in my book.

but sorry, i need to go more than 40 miles in a given trip.

[Kingus @ Jun 13th 2008 2:14PM]

http://ohmexcited.googlepages.com/CO2.htm

I the worst case (getting energy from a dirty coal plant) , you get CO2 emissions that rival the prius.

[tekdroid @ Jun 13th 2008 2:17PM]

It is MUCH easier to maintain 1 source of power, than several thousand. You can easily modify that source to be efficient, and not harm the environment as much than if you have several thousand carbon emitting vehicles running around.
-----------
How?

Nuclear is nowhere near close to no environmental impact (not saying anything else is much better). In fact, waste is a big problem, so is radioactivity and so is transmission loss through long distances just to get the power to you by any means (wind, coal, water, solar, nuclear).

Couldn't your argument about "one source" of power also apply to gas / petrol? Improving efficiencies here?

I don't think any of this is the answer. Change of habits are the answer.

The developed world is dying from lack-of-activity-related ilnesses. The infrastructure for bikes and whatnot often leaves lots to be desired, and the pollution and noise levels continue to skyrocket, making said activities even more undesirable. All this plug-in hybrid talk (and action) is a direct result of a small price hike in fuel (I say small because it's not even close to enough to get people re-thinking their wasteful transport choices, and lives in general).

The focus instead is just on saving some $. While these puny market forces exist, puny steps will be taken (such as the above) and the results will be... you guessed it: puny.

(Much like declaring computing products 'green').

[guilt+1 @ Jun 13th 2008 12:22PM]

Utterly pathetic. why not throw in a book of coupons for local businesses as well? $30Million is just weak, thankfully it only has to stretch 40miles.


Waste of everyones time.

[John Allison @ Jun 13th 2008 12:24PM]

Not pours, drips

[Derek @ Jun 13th 2008 12:27PM]

Guys, I believe 40 miles is probably correct, due to the government being involved. You know how efficient they are, don't you?

[Sean O @ Jun 13th 2008 12:36PM]

I know how efficient private contractors are in Iraq.

[Pochi @ Jun 13th 2008 12:28PM]

The headline should read: "Something Useless Happens." Putting 30 million into something that needs about 30 billion is barely worth a mention.

[Najakwa @ Jun 13th 2008 12:45PM]

as my teenage sister would say, BFD.

[SFO Kevin @ Jun 13th 2008 12:50PM]

"US Department of Energy pours $30 million"...

Are you kidding... $30 million is a rounding error for the Government!!!!

Replace pour with drip....

[Jim @ Jun 13th 2008 12:56PM]

http://www.bts.gov/publications/transportation_statistics_annual_report/2003/html/chapter_02/figure_027.html

40 Miles would help alot, covers most peoples commutes, but 30M is laughable, thats like the average signing bonus in the NBA...

[Richard @ Jun 13th 2008 12:56PM]

Ford and other major U.S. company isn't so hurry in this idea of hybirds, since it wil definity hurt the oil company revenue, you know most U.S. car company has big stock funds invest in the Big O, they probably gonna sell all those stock and buy energy stock instead lol.

[roknfunkapotomus @ Jun 13th 2008 12:58PM]

Agreed, a drop in the bucket.

Plus, I don't think plug in hybrids are really that great an answer. I'm waiting to see if the current electric grids can handle everyone charging their cars every night. Plus wont the increase in demand for power from the grid increase the PRICE of electricity? Great, now people wont be able to afford to drive OR power their homes lol.

This seems like another ethanol mistake to me. When are we going to see viable hydrogen cars?

[Kingus @ Jun 13th 2008 2:08PM]

I believe that the grid isn't highly used during the night time. Charging at night would actually be convenient for power companies since they get a chance to make some extra money.

Energy prices probably would rise, but they could always build more power plants (preferably clean) to keep up with demand. This isn't going to happen over night anyways.

If prices did go up significantly then the gov't or utility companies or whoever could offer rebates for those that don't drive cars, so they aren't burdened as much. Just a thought

[Kingus @ Jun 13th 2008 2:13PM]

oh and whats the point of hydrogen cars anyhow? They require energy to break up H20 to form hydrogen, making it essentially a liquid battery, it's not a source of energy.

[TB6387 @ Jun 13th 2008 3:38PM]

If you think about it, power plants are not like a car, more like a train--you can not *easily* change the amount of power they output. IE at night, when demand goes down they are still making the roughly the same amount of power since they have a significant amount of lead time required to turn their output down. In fact if a power plant is producing more power than is demanded, the excess is just wasted. As such, charging cars at night could actually be an optimization of the power already being produced.

I do realize that extra power would have to be created to meet demand if everyone were driving electric cars, just pointing out that power plants do not change output easily.

In regards to the hydrogen car, that would be great however what is going to be the source of hydrogen. One of the best ways to get it is to use hydrolysis of water which requires electricity...back to the same dilemma as before.

[TXGuy @ Jun 13th 2008 1:03PM]

How about they take the 30 million dollars.... and DRILL FOR OUR OWN OIL!!!!!!!!! That way energy problem temporarily solved while alternate technology catches up to the enviro-whackos demands

[tasteslikechicken @ Jun 13th 2008 3:05PM]

There are quite a few companies trying to open up the bakken oil reserves (in North Dakota, could be up to 413 billion barrels, yes billion with a B) http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601170&sid=ayj1uo_gdNI4

[Igor @ Jun 13th 2008 1:06PM]

Electric cars are cool… but think about all the cars we already have… what would we do with them… has anyone ever heard of Stan Meyers? Back in the “90’s” he created a simple device that could be put on ANY gas powered combustion engine car and would make it run on hydrogen… and the hydrogen would be produced from “plain old TAP WATER” well guess what happened to him? Well … some major oil companies offered him ONE BILLION in cash for him to simply stop doing his work he said NO so few years later after he finally completed this device that could make everyday combustion engine cars run on water he was poisoned! Murdered for trying to help the people! Why? Because he was a threat to the oil companies!

Lol… I dunno… im just rambling on …..