HYBRID BATTERY LIFE
Created June 29, 2006, at 11:39 am by Anonymous
I am interested in buying a gas-hybrid automobile. A neighbor of mine told me the other day that the battery in a hybrid vehicle needs to be replaced within five years, and that it accounts for three-quarters of the price of the car!
Is this accurate? If so, it certainly sounds like a deal-breaker to me...
advertisement
Free Email Newsletter Sign-up
All the latest news in a free and engaging bundle. Totally free!
LOL!!!! Your neighbor is talking out of his exhaust pipe.
Do a search and you'll find lots of info about hybrid batteries.
Think a little about your neighbor's statement and it makes absolutely no sense at all.... 5 years? Then why are they warrantied for 8 - 10 years? 75% of the cost of the car? Then how is it that hybrids don't cost almost twice as much as a non-hybrid version?
The batteries are built and designed to last the lifetime of the car.... and if you ever did wear one out and it was out of warranty, there will be much cheaper replacements available (and they'll probably be much better than the originals). Battery technology will advance a lot in a decade.
"A neighbor of mine told me the other day that the battery in a hybrid vehicle needs to be replaced within five years"
Your neighbor is either a Republican or has not done his research...you will not need to replace the battery.
The whole concept of hybrids being much more environmental I am not going to argue with but how do they dispose of the batteries once they are done in cars without doing as much or more harm? With all the people who have and are going to have hybrids, that is an important question. Exactly what happens to the batteries after they are used in the car?
Ross,
While we certainly can't guarantee what EVERYONE will do with their old batteries, here are the key points that set my mind at ease regarding this:
1. Modern Hybrids use NiMH or (will use) Li-Ion batteries. Neither of these is classified as a hazardous material anyway. This is a big improvement over the old Lead-Acid (PbA) or Nickel-Cadmium (NiCd) batteries.
2. We already have a huge problem with disposal of the hazardous PbA batteries used in the millions of Internal Combustion Engines and recycling programs have done a great job of limiting the number of these that end up in landfills.
3. The cost of the battery pack makes it easy to offer a significant return deposit, similiar to soda can returns, should this ever become a problem.
4. The cost of the battery pack will make recycling quite feasible economically.
In summary, while you point out a potentially real problem, I don't see it as being difficult to overcome and clearly, the benefits of better fuel consumption outweigh even the worst-case problems hybrid battery disposal might cause.
How To Design Electric Motor For Hybrid Vehicle
As a hybrid owner I hear all kinds of anti-hybrid arguments. My niece sent me a column from the Oregonian (newspaper) from Sunday April 8, 2007. The bottom line on this argument is that the cradle to the grave costs of hybrids shows them to be energy guzzlers. I think the cradle to grave arguent is faulty in that they figured the Hummer to last 300K miles while the Prius would be dead in 100K. How they came up with 100K as the life of a hybrid doesn't appear in the article. The study was by CNW Marketing Reserach from Bandon, OR.
The part that is most concerning from this article is the nickel mining in Sudbury, Ontario which is so high in energy use and carbon emissioins and acid rain. I like my hybrid, but I don't appreciate the idea of simply displacing the emissions somewhere else in the world so maybe those of us who can afford the technology get cleaner air (temporarily I suspect) where we are.
DN
dnord,
It's great that people think about the big picture, however, one must be careful not to be "pennywise and pound foolish". Remember that emissions (or other environmental impacts) from the obtainment and processing of petroleum is for consumable materials while emissions from mining nickle or other battery ingredients is for durable materials. The big difference between consumables is that the harmful effects must be repeated for every mile driven, while durable effects are felt once for every vehicle on the road but with proper material recycling but, once the need is met, the need for more will diminish to a small sustaining amount. In other words with oil, we do damage drilling and processing, then burn the product. With Nickel, we do damage mining and processing but then keep the product around for generations to use many times over.
In the case of the Ontario nickel mine, I've heard from other sources (some more reliable than others) that it certainly needs to be cleaned up, however, it is one of many and it pales in comparison with any of the many oil refineries and vehicle emissions today, even if we were to extrapolate to additional battery manufacturing needs to handle a huge increase in batteries for a 100% transition to hybrids and battery-electric vehicles.
Remember, that we shouldn't kill something new, just because it isn't perfect if it is better than the current alternative. The battery-electric vehicle is significantly better than the Internal Combustion Engine from all standpoints.
EX-Ev1
Hope I got your moniker right. Thanks for the thoughtful response and engaging in the discussion. I am thinking about what you said about one time versus daily issues. That makes some sense. I am also wondering how to compare one thing to another when they are, to me, so different.
I am trying to think of the total impact of our decisions. I use "our" as in public policy decisions already made and coming that encourage drivers to buy hybrids. I am wanting to know the answers to the pollution and full energy costs so we might make the best (policy) decisions that don't simply displace energy use and pollution production costs from my pocket and my community to another part of the globe. I find it easy not to ask the tough questions and to make my decisions based on the easy answers like MPG and tail pipe emissions.
Dnord
It is definitely difficult to compare things that are very different. One method that helps is to define the critical parameters and look at their relationships.
For example: look at some amount of pollutants generated per mile driven between Electric Vehicles (EV's) and Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles.
This isn't easy and these numbers can be hard to get a hold of, expecially when comparing an infant industry such as hybrids or EV's with a mature industry such as ICE where all the parameters are well understood.
I haven't made these comparisons as I tend to focus on the expendible parts initially and just glance at the non-expendible.
If you're going to do more study, I recommend looking at Lithium rather than nickel though since this appears to be a more suitable long-term battery chemistry than nickel.
Hello there, I have here an article which I lifted from the net which tells about the capacity of a hybrid car battery...Hope this might help...
[COLOR=DeepSkyBlue][COLOR=Blue]LiMnO2 hybrid battery cells deliver longer life, higher capacity
By Paul O'Shea
Courtesy of eeProductCenter
(08/23/2007 3:34 PM EDT)
[/COLOR][/COLOR]
Fair Lawn, N.J. — Maxell Corporation of America has introduced its next-generation of lithium manganese dioxide (LiMnO2) cylindrical hybrid battery cells with longer life and higher capacity for automatic meter readers, security devices and RF applications. These advanced hybrid cells will operate for more than 10 years and offer about nine percent higher capacity compared to similar cells currently available.
The CR17450 and CR17335 cells, designed to industry standard sizes, are laser sealed and exhibit a low self-discharge making them suitable for long-term extended life applications of 10+ years. The wide operational temperature range of -40° to +80°C with an improved heatproof temperature of +90°C to 100° C and internal minute short-circuit prevention are said to make these cells intrinsically safe.
The CR17450 offers a typical capacity of 2600 mAh, while the CR17335 provides a typical capacity of 1750 mAh. The cells offer a voltage rating of 3.0 volts and feature a stable sloping discharge curve at various depths of discharge, allowing for accurate prediction of end of life.
The CR17450 measures 17 mm in diameter and 45 mm in length and weighs 22g. The CR17335 also has a diameter of 17 mm with a 33.5-mm length and weighs 16g.
The CR17450 and CR17335 cells will be displayed for the first time at the AMRA 2007 (Automatic Meter Reader Association) show in Reno, Nev., October 1-3, 2007. Maxell will also attend the AISI Security Show in Las Vegas, Nev., September 24-26.
As a hybrid car owner, I am well satisfied with its performance as well as with its auto parts like my honda civic tail light and of course, its battery and its other accessories...
Pricing: Samples are priced in the $5.00 range with a delivery of 60 to 90 days.
Product information: CR17450 and CR17335
Maxell Corporation of America, maxell.com
Don't go insulting Republicans, you ignorant fool!!! The batteries on hybrid cars DO NOT last the lifetime of the car. At best, they will last 7 or 8 years, and they will cost you about $5,000 to replace. It is not 75% of the car price, but it is more than the money you'd save on gas (for most people) if that's the reason you're buying it. Go get an education before you start insulting what you don't know!
Considering that there are plenty of documented Priuses floating around with 200k+ on the original battery pack (at least one with 349k), I would question your baseless assumption that "at best" the batteries will last 7-8 years, and "NOT" the lifetime of the car.
The inadvertent irony of your final sentence is that if you had done your research, you would have known this already.
Just check out this page - has all the info you want...
http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Reliability.htm
I feel badly when I see people arguing over details that I see as secondary. To me it is simple. The big picture is that the auto industry, which is at the present mostly consumer driven, needs us (the consumer) to pressure them to make cars that burn less fossil fuels or no fossil fules at all. I know that there are other factors involved in their decisions and can I influence that beyond my purchasing power??? ... perhaps, but that is another issue all together. If we all debate the viability about what we all know to be a hard core reality; that the earth isnt going to be able to sustain our way of life indefinatley, then I feel that there isnt a serious or shall I say URGENT enough emphasis put on the most important issue here. The issue here isnt one of egocentricity - ie how much $$$ will I save or how long will the car battery last?? or what ever ... the issue is that We need to do anything and everything in our power as individuals and collectively to change the way in which we deal with our planet. If that means that we buy hybrids now and then later HHO cars when that technology becomes more readily available, or what ever we chose that is a step in the direction of green, THEN I suggest that we all do it ... we just do it. To argue about the effectiveness of batteries and the cost ratio of the hybrid to a regular car to me is absurd. It is people like this that cause the problem that we are facing to perpetuate. INACTION only further adds to the problem. Justifying that inaction blinds oneself of their ethical obligation to take appropriate action as a steward of this planet. Most people at this point are aware enough of the reality of the condition of the earth to know that we are in serious trouble and to do nothiing should simply not be an option. Out of sight, out of mind is too dangerous. Maybe the hybrid technology isnt perfect. Maybe it will never be, but it is sure a lot better than doing nothing and it is sure worth the extra $3000 if that means that I am doing at least something within my small alotted scope of power to help CHANGE the way we live in the world.
I am totally on board with you. I don't understand these pointless arguments some people have over how much will it cost to replace the batteries. They need to look at the big picture and start doing something about the way we live, and consume the earth. Arguing and bickering will only lead to a standstill that will never allow us to move in the right direction. Your post is very good and to the point.
Dean,
I really like your approach, however, remember, mankind is generally motivated by ignorance, ego, and greed. This is especially true when we're living in such cushy times. It will be hard to get people to think about tomorrow when they're only interested in continuing to enjoy today. They will cry and complain when things get worse but they won't want to do anything real about it if it will cause them to lose some of their luxuries today.
You might want to read "Who Moved My Cheese" by Spencer Johnson
Can't agree more. (Just don't drag the whole darn Republican/Democrat issue into this discussion because it causes, should I say, some defensive reactions from certain sectors.) "Hybrid" as it's name implies, is a stepping stone to the next generation of alternaive fuel vehicle. I work in the oil industry and no matter what anyone else ells you or projects, everyone in the upper echelons of our business knows we only have about (optimistically) 50 to 75 years of oil left at current consumption levels. That's at our CURRENT consumption level, folks, not a consumption level that includies the projected leap taken by the "rise of the rest" i.e., India, China, Malaysia, etc. That oil is like a modest cash settlement left to us by our parents: we can spend it on some wild times in Vegas, or invest it in something that will provide us with a comfortable and safe retirement. In other words, I have no problem using that oil energy to mine nickel for batteries, produce silicon for solar panels, or turbines for wind generators; I think it's a horrific waste to see it frittered on vain crap like Hummers and Yukons. I'm just afraid that we're going to be like the 13th (?) century Easter Island natives that cut down the last of their treesto use as rollers for their god-statues. Those trees were the only material they had to build boats with, and the loss left them with no way to fish and consequently no way to feed themselves. Our remaining oil reserves are the trees on our "island". We need to put just a tad bit more thought into how we use up the last of it.
Wow Geodrone!
You and I line up directly. I love the Easter Island analogy! You might enjoy my heretical rant on today's lead article "Why Americans Get Mileage All Wrong" (http://www.hybridcars.com/decision/why-americans-get-mileage-all-wrong-0...).
Unfortunately, this is a political issue to too many. I live in a red state and of all my buddies I hang out with, I'm the only Democrat. They are all Republicans. They are all college degreed and professionally certified types, educated and experienced, one could argue.
I just bought my second hybrid. One of the guys refers to it as a gaybrid. Another lavishes criticism on it, largely based on the anti-hybrid propaganda that's readily available on the internet. Yet another simply makes fun of the color. You see they hate tree-huggers and they associate (perhaps unconsciously) hybrids with tree-huggers. Of course they are wrong; it's more complicated than that.
It shouldn't be a political issue; it should just be about finding a better way. But unfortunately, in my experience, it is political. Like we need more obstacles to progress....
What's with the smart a-- Republican comment? I know a lot more Republicans with hybrids than i do Democrats with hybrids. Typical leftest stinkin thinkin.
The only way people are going to see the benefits of going to a hybrid vehicle from a standard vehicle is to show it to them in dollar value. Currently if you add up the cost of a hybrid and compare it's counterparts cost (Prius/Corolla, Civic/Civic HB), the cost of a hybrid is more than a typical car. I have taken into account only a few small items, but it seems these are the most prudent; MSRP (yes I know that is not what I will pay), Average Mileage (Based on EPA Testing), repair cost, and curent fuel cost.
I have used the Prius and Corolla as the subject Matter. The Prius has an MSRP of $21,500. Its fuel cost over five years is $8,157. (Based the american average driving of 15,000m/yr, fuel economy of 46m/g) And an average repair cost of $718 over five years. There is not a tax write off any more because Toyota has exceeded the 60,000 production mark of the vehicle. That brings the total cost of the Prius to $29,065.
The Corolla has an MSRP of $15,250. Its fuel cost is $10,867 over five years (29m/gal). And an average repair cost of $680. The total cost of the Corolla is $26,792. The difference between the two is $2,273.83.
Current fuel cost here in Oregon is right around $4.20/gal which is higher than most of the country. For the hybrid to be a suitable choice for most people, since money is a prime factor in decision making, gas would have to be right around $7.00/gal. If the current market for Light Sweet Crude oil continuesto grow, I wouldn't be surprised if we see that price around Chrsitmas 2009. Hopefully, by them the US Dollar will have regained some stregth to give it more purchasing power.
I am not going to get into a discussion about the cost of a new battery system. Just like most batteries out there, they will need to be replaced. But, according to toyota they have had a failure rate on the batteries of .03, if I read the data correctly. The age of the cars is still to young to support any data on failure rate of the batteries. I would say ten years will tell the tale.
The price of gas has exceeded $7/gal in Europe & Japan for more than a decade. The added cost of the hybrid drivetrain vs. fuel savings requires more than $10/gal to be economical. The simple fact is a smaller more efficient engine/car can save more fuel than the hybrid drivetrain, with lower costs (BTW, do we really need 300 HP sedans?). That's why you're seeing hybrids on larger more expensive vehicles, the relative cost of the hybrid drivetrian is smaller on more expensive cars. The true solution is an all electric vehicle. The complete conversion to electric power is only going to occur when battery power density improves to the point where people can drive 300 miles between charges - like their gas car or consumers won't accept it. In the short-term people will use electric cars as commuter cars (<100 miles per charge) and hybrids - or rent gas cars for trips.
Regarding the Republican remark, I don't know why they're seen as not green. The difference is Republicans believe the free-market will develop solutions as gas gets more expensive. Dems believe the government should subsidize the direction and rate of progress, which hasn't worked in Europe. Europe has much worse emmision standards and terrible particulate pollution from deisel (read lung cancer) and $10/gal gas. Because of their taxes, they sacrifice polution for a few mpg's. Don't worry, oil will become far too expensive long before we overcook the earth. We'll need it for plastics, medicine, heavy transport and lots of other really useful things - not burning it to go to work.
In the meantime, if you want to reduce CO2 emissions and pollution here are a few ideas:
1) Don't buy anything from China, or undeveloped countries, they don't even attempt to do the right thing. They need serious help! We need to put a large import tax on anything from rouge economies to give them and our consumers incentive! But what about Wal-Mart's low low prices? Are they really low? No one talks about the real cost.... Will that be covered in cap & trade? or will China just make everything for the world, while we think we're doing the right thing?
2) Protest the fact that Indonesia puts more CO2 in the air than all of US transprtation every year when they burn their harvested crops and clear land. Add in Brazil and this represents over 20% of all manmade CO2! Outrageous that no one protests.
3) Recycle! One day we'll mine garbage dumps.
4) Promote nuclear & wind energy. Solar panels won't cut it for now. If you covered every roof in America with solar panels it wouldn't represent 10% of our energy use and would cost too much! In 10-15 years maybe.
5) Use wood products. It sequesters carbon and displaces products that would otherwise be made from plastic.
hybrid cars are all the rage, and the batteries do last the life of the car, and all the people who do not agree with me are homo's!
Post a new comment