photo: kennedye
The California Air Resources Board last week handed out $25 million to promote alternative fuels and cars such as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, or PHEVs. Among the recipients was ZEV Research, which scored $150,000 to develop a pilot episode for a television series about teams that convert fossil-fueled luxury and sports cars (along with more mundane transportation) to run on electricity. We can see it now: Pimp My PHEV! California allocated $5 million for PHEV programs, including:
- $561,000 to Tesla Motors to develop a commercial battery-charging station to be installed at hotel chains across the state. Tesla’s electric sports car, the Roadster, is expected to hit the streets in October. The Silicon Valley car company’s proposal for a $961,000 grant to test advanced battery technology for electric cars was a runner-up. (PG&E (PCG), meanwhile gets $175,000 to update an electric charging station at the utility’s Davis facility.)
- $1.1 million to the University of California, Berkeley and UC Irvine to conduct a market analysis of PHEVs and other electric vehicles.
- $344,000 to the Electric Power Research Institute and UC Davis to evaluate the performance of various battery technologies.
- $1.5 million for an adopt-a-PHEV program that will place 10 plug-ins hybrid cars with up to 100 households and businesses for a few weeks at a time. UC Davis’s Plug In Hybrid Electric Vehicle Center will collect data on how the cars perform and evaluate consumer acceptance and use of plug-in hybrids.
CARB is one of the most powerful environmental agencies in the United States – famous (or infamous) for mandating that 10 percent of cars sold in California be zero emission by 2003 and then subsequently backpedaling under pressure from the auto industry. What’s striking is how CARB now – through such funding, modest that it is – apparently aims to build a market and infrastructure for electric vehicles first.
The agency last week also dispensed cash for a number of biofuel initiatives, including the construction of biodiesel refineries, cow power projects and the installation of ethanol pumps at gas stations. The complete list is here.
Green Wombat 
Pimp My Plug-In Hybrid!
Well, when the gov has money and can con the public into believing that spending to “evaluate plug-ins” makes any sense at all,
then I have doubts that democracy is all it’s cracked up to be. Perhaps someone can tell me exactly what the state gov is going to do with that “test info” ? Since the state isn’t in the plug-in hybrid business, and will be testing plug-ins that don’t and won’t ever exist, what’s the purpose? So far I’ve read of at least
four mayors spending upwards of $3 million converting and “testing” gov vehicles. Are these people really so dumb that they don’t know how a plug-in works? This is what’s called pure politics – attempting to look like you’re doing something by spending other people’s money. I’d love to hear these folks justify why they think any info they obtain will either 1) be a surprise or 2) lead to any different actions on their part. In other words, if they find out something surprising (not bloody likely) exactly what are they going to do with that info? Won’t all 6 or 10 “plug-in tests”
yield the same data? The only people benefitting are the aftermarket plug-in conversion companies who are ripping off $12,000 per vehicle to add a few batteries and void the manufacturer’s warranty.
Well these programs also benefit pure electric vehicles… so there I see a point.
>Perhaps someone can tell me exactly what the state gov is going to >do with that “test info” ?
Decide whether to help adoption of electric cars or support hydrogen instead? Figure out if once people will accept a car that can only do 200 miles before it has to be plugged in for the night? I know my wife balked at the idea until I drove it home to her that she never travels 200 miles a day… and then she was still skeptical.. what if we drive to Vegas.. etc etc.
> So far I’ve read of at least
> four mayors spending upwards of $3 million converting and
> “testing” gov vehicles. Are these people really so dumb that they
> don’t know how a plug-in works?
Well that’s just PR.
But hey.. if one of those big wigs has to recharge at the Costco electric only parking spot and a big ass SUV is sitting in the spot (or 2 spots) then maybe they’ll do something about that….
> 1) be a surprise
Would you be surprised if 80% of the people refuse to accept a car that needs to be recharged for 3 hours after 200 miles? (even though they don’t ever drive 200 miles a day) Never underestimate the stupidity of people.. better to test it then be waste money on something people won’t accept.
I’ve heard the.. “it’s not for everyone.. only 95% of the people” arguement for the longest time. It’s not about whether it’s actually good enough.. it’s about if the consumers THINK is good enough.
> 2) lead to any different actions on their part. In other words, if they find out something surprising (not bloody likely) exactly what are they going to do with that info? Won’t all 6 or 10 “plug-in tests”
yield the same data?
Maybe they’ll accept a 2 hour charge up time after 150 miles… maybe 1 hour charge up after 100 miles.. maybe nobody ever charges their plug in hybrids cuz they’re lazy but everyone plugs in their pure electric cars because they’re not stupid… *shrug*
RL
Well these programs also benefit pure electric vehicles… so there I see a point.
>Perhaps someone can tell me exactly what the state gov is going to >do with that “test info” ?
Decide whether to help adoption of electric cars or support hydrogen instead? Figure out if once people will accept a car that can only do 200 miles before it has to be plugged in for the night? I know my wife balked at the idea until I drove it home to her that she never travels 200 miles a day… and then she was still skeptical.. what if we drive to Vegas.. etc etc.
> So far I’ve read of at least
> four mayors spending upwards of $3 million converting and
> “testing” gov vehicles. Are these people really so dumb that they
> don’t know how a plug-in works?
Well that’s just PR.
But hey.. if one of those big wigs has to recharge at the Costco electric only parking spot and a big ass SUV is sitting in the spot (or 2 spots) then maybe they’ll do something about that….
> 1) be a surprise
Would you be surprised if 80% of the people refuse to accept a car that needs to be recharged for 3 hours after 200 miles? (even though they don’t ever drive 200 miles a day) Never underestimate the stupidity of people.. better to test it then be waste money on something people won’t accept.
I’ve heard the.. “it’s not for everyone.. only 95% of the people” arguement for the longest time. It’s not about whether it’s actually good enough.. it’s about if the consumers THINK is good enough.
> 2) lead to any different actions on their part. In other words, if they find out something surprising (not bloody likely) exactly what are they going to do with that info? Won’t all 6 or 10 “plug-in tests”
yield the same data?
Maybe they’ll accept a 2 hour charge up time after 150 miles… maybe 1 hour charge up after 100 miles.. maybe nobody ever charges their plug in hybrids cuz they’re lazy but everyone plugs in their pure electric cars because they’re not stupid… *shrug*
RL
It seems you understand that right now people won’t accept a 200 mile range EV, what is the problem? Let’s get them to drive plug-ins so they can go on that trip to Las Vegas that they will never take. All the while they will be driving pure EV miles all week long.
“Baby steps Bob…Baby steps”
Next well get them to fill up from solar on their roofs.
It’s called a cost-benefit analysis. The government (CARB) is providing money for different initiatives to measure whether proposing or mandating policies related to EV, HEV, PHEV make real world sense. In the grand scheme-of-things, the money CARB alloted is just a drop in the bucket. Our high-tech economy today is by and large the result of similar initiatives initially funded by the US military (eg. the Internet).