Quote:
Originally Posted by donauker
I generally take both Bob Lutz's and Martin Eberhard's reference of a REEV as a fully functional electric vehicle that has an autonomous range of some reasonable value certainly greater then zero prior to needing a "Range Extender". I don't think anyone could reasonably say that either of these gentlemen where implying that a zero mile EV range would qualify a vehicle for a REEV label.
Any HEV to which someone adds a battery charger will qualify for the PHEV title. This does not mean the vehicle will have any true EV capability. The PHEV Prius conversions have very limited all electric performance and no cabin heat capability without running the ICE. The only commercial series hybrids I am familiar with also only have limited all electric performance.
A RE-EV is first and foremost an EV. It has the exact same performance specs and amenities that the BEV has without any use of an ICE or other RE up to its designated 40 or 50 mile range. If I drive less than 40 miles a day (which is most days for me) there is absolutely no difference to me or the environment if I am driving a REEV or a 200 mile range BEV.
|
In addressing the thing about hybrids just adding a plug and being called a PHEV, the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 and IEEE defines a PHEV as one having at least a 4kWh battery, meaning it should be able to travel at least 10 miles on EV range alone.
That's why I said "serial PHEV-40" would be the best discription. You know off the bat it's a serial hybrid and you know off the bat that it has 40 miles EV range, and that's just from the English meaning of the word. What if Toyota makes a Prius PHEV-40 WITH the capabilities you mentioned? Well it wouldn't qualify as a REEV according to the current definition, and then the GM Volt will sound like MORE of an EV than the Prius. That's why I feel that it's a marketing term, it's a term to give GM a better position in the market. Remember the EV-1 got 55-75 miles on lead acid batteries 10 years ago. In many ways the Volt is to make up for axing the EV-1 and only the RE-EV term (with emphasis on the EV part) will help it do that. They have also outright said they went with the E-REV term so "E-REVolution" can be used in marketing.
What fires me up is there are people with the gall to say the it would be INCORRECT to call the Volt a PHEV or hybrid and I quote from an article on the GM-VOLT site: "Calling a car a hybrid signifies that it’s driveshaft can be turned both by an electric motor and a combustion engine." That isn't true as series hybrids DON'T have a driveshaft that can be turned by the combustion engine. The people have been so caught up their enthusiasm for the Volt they forgot we have been calling it a series PHEV or that there were series hybrids before the Volt.
Link:
GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Concept Site » Blog Archive » GM Calls the Volt an E-REV
As I mentioned, there is a practical purpose for the term since reporters have called the Volt a "hybrid," which really shortchanges the vehicle. I'm not going to strongly go against the term, as it's already gaining acceptance, but I'm not going to pretend it doesn't have another motive behind it. I just hope I don't see an increase in people who say "F* you the Volt is an electric car, it's not a hybrid" when I refer to it as a plug-in hybrid (as I have experienced in the past).