Search Results

This paper evaluates the impact of energy management strategy on the cost benefits of a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) by taking into account the impact of PHEV energy management on battery life and petroleum displacement over the life of the vehicle. Using Battery in the Loop (BIL), a real battery is subjected to transient power demands by a virtual vehicle. The vehicle energy management strategy is varied, resulting in different battery utilization scenarios. Battery life, which varies with battery utilization, is estimated for the different energy management scenarios. The same representative drive cycle is used over the different energy management strategies to isolate the impact of energy management on battery utilization. PHEV gasoline savings, in comparison to a charge sustaining hybrid, are calculated for each of the energy management strategies, for a fixed distance of 40 miles.

In recent years, vehicle manufacturers have made great progress in developing and demonstrating commercially available and prototyped hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs). These vehicles include commercially available gasoline hybrid cars (Toyota Prius and Honda Insight) and Partnership for the Next Generation Vehicle (PNGV) diesel hybrid prototypes (Ford Prodigy, GM Precept, and DaimlerChrysler ESX3). In this paper, we discuss tested and claimed fuel benefits and performance of these commercial and prototyped HEVs relative to conventional vehicles (CVs) that are otherwise similar to these HEVs, except for hybridization. We also describe a reverse-engineering approach to de-hybridize or “conventionalize” these five existing commercial and prototyped HEVs. Because these commercial and prototyped HEVs represent a variety of technological choices, configurations, and development stages, this analysis gives us in-depth knowledge about how each of these vehicles achieves high efficiency.

The effects of hybridization on heavy-duty vehicles are not well understood. Heavy vehicles represent a broader range of applications than light-duty vehicles, resulting in a wide variety of chassis and engine combinations, as well as diverse driving conditions. Thus, the strategies, incremental costs, and energy/emission benefits associated with hybridizing heavy vehicles could differ significantly from those for passenger cars. Using a modal energy and emissions model, we quantify the potential energy savings of hybridizing commercial Class 3-7 heavy vehicles, analyze hybrid configuration scenarios, and estimate the associated investment cost and payback time.

A methodology for evaluating life cycle cost of electric vehicles (EVs) to their buyers is presented. The methodology is based on an analysis of conventional vehicle costs, costs of drivetrain and auxiliary components unique to EVs, and battery costs. The conventional vehicle's costs are allocated to such subsystems as body, chassis, and powertrain. In electric vehicles, an electric drive is substituted for the conventional powertrain. The current status of the electric drive components and battery costs is evaluated. Battery costs are estimated by evaluating the material requirements and production costs at different production levels; battery costs are also collected from other sources. Costs of auxiliary components, such as those for heating and cooling the passenger compartment, are also estimated. Here, the methodology is applied to two vehicle types: subcompact car and minivan.