Ditching EVs for Hybrids Is Already Paying Off for Automakers

The whole argument of hybrid vs EV strikes me as very point in time despite the phrasing in the discussion as being some sort of pivotal deciding battle for all of history.

The reality is ICE in general, hybrids doubly so, are extraordinarily complex machines with over 100 years of highly funded research invested.

EVs are incredibly simple machines with a limited amount of research applied mostly by a few companies that are very young.

The engineer in me sees the complexity argument as insurmountable. Over time ICE improvements will be flat as diminishing returns set in two decades or more ago. Their complexity isn’t going down, every improvement adds a more complex manufacturing process and complex machine - either in terms of materials or process.

EVs are almost certainly on the other path where their machine becomes simpler in exchange for a more complex science, but the science is effectively the same science that yielded modern computers - solid state, in the end, in a manufacturing process that can scale absurdly. The machines if built with intention will effectively never break or need maintenance beyond a few simple parts. The disposable parts are 100% recyclable.

As t->inf the age of fire is already over, and the age of maxwells equations is starting in earnest. As we put down our distilled flaming dinosaur juice and take up fundamental forces, these discussions will feel anachronistic rapidly. The infrastructure discussions are simply engineering and investment challenges, which will yield, as the complexity of the underlying machine has already doomed the ICE.

The real headline seems to just be "Toyota and Honda still don't know how to sell EVs to Americans, have mostly sort of given up for now, and surprisingly aren't being punished in the market for it."

> Hybrids are also sort of hurting EVs, aided by competitive pricing that is cannibalizing EV sales. Battery-powered cars and light trucks will account for just nine percent of industry deliveries in the U.S. this year. That’s down from the previous forecast of 12.4 percent.

Ah, lies, damned lies, and then statistics. The industry forecast of 12.4% may have been too aggressive (which rectum did that number even come from, by the way? The manufacturers still haven't even committed to 12.4% growth on the supply side, they aren't making EVs that fast), but 9% is still a strong year-over-year growth and a faster growing rate than the hybrids mentioned in the article. The statistic here seems to be that Prius sales aren't shrinking. They aren't growing. They don't seem to be "hurting EVs" they seem to be continuing plain ICE sales. But it's not statistics is an easy math field or anything.

I don't know why hybrids weren't standard issue 10 years ago. Federal fuel efficiency standards should have mandated them, but instead they spent years locked in a political / culture war battle over this.

I would note that "hybrids" in China (where plug-in-hybrids have gone to 16% of market share, up 700bps y/y) is a fundamentally different architecture than hybrids in the west. In China (see Li Auto [1] for example) hybrids are Battery Electric vehicles (ie no gearbox, fully electric motor) with a small gasoline generator and tank to recharge the battery. This is "best of both worlds"... you get the electric motor, which is much more efficient / cheaper than an ICE transmission. Then the gasoline generator is just tuned to maximize efficiency (~44% efficiency to electric, vs the mid-30s on an ICE motor) so the net efficiency of the hybrid is far superior to a Prius-plug-in type structure. These are termed Electric Range Extender Vehicles ("EREV"s), which is type of a Plug-in Hybrid since you can charge by plugging in the battery or by filling in gas.

Really surprised haven't seen these EREVs in the west, although Hyundai is supposed to launch in US in 2026. Could be game-changer when that happens...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Auto

I live in a old building in a city with a lot of old buildings. People mostly park their cars in the streets , with a special zone permit.

I would love to have an EV only car, but there is basically zero charging spot , public or otherwise, made available by the city in the streets (where we park our cars).

As long as cities do not improve their urban environments with A LOT of charging stations everywhere, then pure EV is not practical.

Range anxiety with pure EVs is a real thing for many car buyers. Hybrids take that concern off the table.

I bought a car back in 2003 and replaced it in 2020. I looked at a bunch of options in 2020 because I really wanted an electric vehicle and ultimately opted for a plug-in hybrid. Between the range and infrastructure a fully electric vehicle sounded like a pain to manage.

Most of my driving is electric because it's around town, but I can go a long distance without any stress or delay. One day I hope I won't feel the need to burn fuel.

The main question is, how the hell did Toyota foresee this? They didn't go all gung-ho on the EV hype train and stuck to their word, even when the others rushed in headfirst.

Is this "Hybrid Hype" a realization, or is it a knee-jerk reaction to China now gaining more ground on the EV vehicles + Elon's latest antics?

Hybrids just seem like double the complexity. Maybe there are synergies that I don't know about.

I wish we had higher gas taxes (we could lower other taxes to compensate).

Four reasons I prefer my 100% EV over a hybrid:

- EVs never need oil changes. Hybrids still do.

- I really like charging up in the privacy of my own garage. Hybrids have to refuel at a gas station.

- EVs have no cat converter to steal. Hybrids have that threat risk.

- EVs don't have radiators, water pumps, or transmissions. Hybrids do, meaning more maintenance later.

Here is another one from this website submitted by ChumpGPT that scared the HN Musk/Tesla fans.

https://jalopnik.com/half-of-teslas-q2-profit-came-from-your...

People who are truly concerned about the environment walk, ride bikes and take public transort. Tesla owners on the other hand use the environment as a "justification" for purchasing a battery-powered computer on wheels that the owner cannot control whilst it performs surveillance and phones home to the mothership.

It may be EV and infrastructure are just not really there. In Italy outside of cities you have to use a car, no questions. You take a state road or extra-urban and battery range easily drop to 250km at most. There are many charge stations, but often they don't work, or are placed far from needed. Here many have no way to charge at home. And EV prices are far higher than ICE ones, which are insane theirself.

I would love to see longer range PHEVs or series hybrids. Something that could go 50 miles on battery power and any distance on gas would capture most of the cost/greenhouse gas savings of electric and avoid any range / charging problems.

At 40 cents/kWh at a level 3 charger, electric mode isn’t actually winning in cost vs an efficient hybrid using gasoline.

The jaw-dropper in this story isn't hybrids, it's the section about hydrogen. Toyota is staying the course, now joined by BMW. The writer concludes:

I really hope someone can figure out how to make hydrogen work on a consumer scale because it’s a really neat piece of technology that could make a big difference as we move further away from fossil fuels.

Yes, hydrogen vehicles seem like a great idea in theory but practically speaking it's been a disaster. There's no mention of the dumpster fire in California, the only U.S. state where hydrogen has a foothold. From "Shell Closes Its Hydrogen Stations In California" this February:

There are 54 publicly available hydrogen refueling stations in the Golden State, with a varying number of them regularly listed as “offline” at any given time. As of presstime, for instance, 19 of California’s stations were not open for business. Sometimes as many as half of them are unavailable.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/a46791348/shell-closes-hydroge...

I can't find the article now, but the LA Times or WSJ interviewed hydrogen car owners in California and getting towed seems to be a regular occurrence when refueling stations are out of order.

Toyota not onboard for full EV?

the same Toyota that was lobbying against full EV companies for years?

the same Toyota that only has Hybrids and has invested all their R&D into Hydrogen?

say it ain't so

Prediction: In 2035, when used Teslas and other long-range EVs are going for ~$5k, these hybrids will be almost worthless.

Anyone have any idea of the batteries of hybrids vs full on EVs? Are they similar, the same?

Sorry but these articles praising hybrids never mention two important things...

1) Hybrid demand is partly driven by the manufactures who need to meet government fuel economy standards.

2) People don't plug in their hybrids, thus the vehicles are not actually meeting those standards in the real world...

>The analysis of the new datasets presents strong evidence that real-world electric drive share is far below the utility factor label rating. Specifically, the analysis finds that real-world electric drive share may be 26%–56% lower and real-world fuel consumption may be 42%–67% higher than assumed within EPA’s labeling program for light duty vehicles.

https://theicct.org/publication/real-world-phev-us-dec22/?ut...

No bias here!

There are an incredible amount of links in this article. It’s like a linkfarm.