What plugins need is an on the fly charging system. Maybe an inductive hookup in the main street to top off the batteries, or an overhead trolly system like the trollybuses use.

The envirnmental reason from toyota is not accurate from what I have read. And there doesn't seem to need to be a breakthrough in technology since people are doing it already with many different types of batteries. So that leaves one part of the reason toyota said... and that is cost. It always boils down to the almight dollar. Can toyota make money doing it?

You better believe they are trying to figure out a way. This press release from toyota above is just what toyota is saying to the public. Behind the scenes I bet they are working on it.

It will be interesting to see how the Energy CS conversion does and the for-profit venture that Cal Cars is working on.

I predict PHEV available at a reasonable price within 3 - 4 years.

Sourcing from grid power produces less CO2, but more NOx. It also creates emissions of SOx, mercury, etc. Of course, that's based on the national grid mix of 50 coal, 18 natural gas, 20 nuke, 7 hydro, 0.7 solar/wind/geothermal, 4 other. Emissions all depend on what you're using to source electricity to power the plug-in hybrid.

There's also ground-level ozone effects from mobile sources to consider.

As for the "solar Prius" reported on earlier, that design will have a negligible effect on gasoline consumption, if any - saving at most an average of 1 gallon of gasoline per month.

Toyota's citing of an environmental reason for not pursuing a plug-in hybrid seems a trifle disingenuous on the one hand when they're stuffing V-8s into their new pickups with the other. It's all about money, pure and simple.

Let's say we get serious about controlling carbon dioxide emissions in the future. It will be MUCH easier to control these (e.g., through sequestration) at a large coal plant than it will be from 15 million V-8 Toyota pickups. Cheaper, too. Plus there's no reason we HAVE to rely on coal anyway. Except for money in someone's pocket.

These are two separate issues: 1) we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and 2) we need to reduce emissions from our electric utility plants. They should (must) be treated separately. Toyota's saying that they can't do #1 because of #2 is just a stalling tactic. Finger-pointing.

I completely agree with them that battery breakthroughs are still needed, but these seem much nearer at hand than the multitude of breakthroughs needed in hydrogen and fuel cells. So why isn't there a Presidential Battery Initiative?

In the end, I agree with Paul above. The fact that they've even started talking about this publicly means we'll probably be seeing something on the market in the near term. There will be huge profits to the companies that get these on the market first while the others are stuck playing catch-up (hmm, sound familiar?).

"Mr. Williamson's suggestion that PEHV's would be powered on 50% coal. Using the national average doesn't make sense because the amount of power generated by coal varies regionally by a tremendous amount."

I simply pointed out the national grid mix, since most people don't know how it breaks down. You'll notice I also said, "Emissions all depend on what you're using to source electricity to power the plug-in hybrid" - so I'm not clear why you're taking issue with what I said.

With respect to California specifically, the state requires power providers to publish "Power Content Labels" which show the mix of sources of a given company's electricity compared to the "California Power Mix", which "reflects the energy resource mix for electricity consumed in California net of electricity sold to consumers as specific purchases. If your ESP is purchasing power from the Power Exchange or another large exchange, and cannot identify which generator is generating the power it sells you, your ESP will claim an energy resource mix for its electricity product that is identical to the California Power Mix."

http://www.energy.ca.gov/consumer/power_content_label.html#powermix

As of 2004 (the most current data published), the California Power Mix is as follows:
Natural Gas 45
Coal 29
Large hydro 20
Eligible renewables 4
Nuke 2

http://www.energy.ca.gov/2005publications/CEC-300-2005-004/CEC-300-2005-004.PDF

("Eligible renewables" are biomass & waste, geothermal, small hydroelectric, solar, and wind.)

The above PDF file is actually pretty educational and even goes beyond the "California Power Mix" (which is net generation) and includes figures on gross generation, and even explains why the mix changes from year to year because of things like rain or drought.

Either way, to say that "less than 1%" of power in California comes from coal is grossly inaccurate. I'd be interested to see how you arrived at that number.

Toyota knows all this stuff already. It's all of US that need to be educated.

WOw I was just reading my current Kalifornistan PG&E report:
Method This year Last year
Eligable Renewables 13% 4%
>Biomass & waste 5% 0%
>Geothermal 3% 3%
>Small Hydro 4% 1%
>Solar 0% 0%
>Wind 1% <1%
Coal 3% 29%
Large Hydro 18% 20%
Nat. Gas 43% 45%
Nuclear 23% 2%
Other <1% 0%
big changes...and considering this state is proobably the single biggest market for the Prius, the exec is even wronger. 8/

And yeah Plug-Ins plus Solar-Parking lots would be a perfect match.

Whoops - sorry. You said PG&E, right? I missed that.

So, right - it's PG&E's mix you're describing, not California as a whole.

http://www.pge.com/customer_service/bill_inserts/2005/july.html

Another datapoint. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) just announced that it entered into two long-term purchase agreements to buy 81,843 megawatt-hours from facilities that use landfill gas-to-energy (LFGTE) technology.

LADWP has adopted a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) that targets the amount of energy provided from renewable power sources to 20% of its energy sales to retail customers by 2017, with an interim goal of 13% by 2010. The LFGTE contracts are the first in that program.

I work at Toyota HQ in Torrance, and while I agree with much of his statement, that paragraph touting the limitations to PHEVs is rather embarrassing to me.

In regards to coal power plants being more polluting, I agree, but it's not Toyota's responsibility to make public policy about how electricity is generated. More and more renewable utility-scale power plants are being brought online, such Southern California Edison's announcement of the Sterling Systems CSP plant that will be built near Victorville, CA.

Second, no breakthrough in battery technology is needed to make significant improvements to fuel consumption and pollution output of Toyota Hybrid Vehicles. Just offer a plug-in option with, for instance, Valence Saphion batteries instead of Ovonic NiMH. If the first 20 miles of a daily commute are "petroleum free", half of all commuters will never have to fill their tank.

The fact is, we're facing a petroleum crisis. By shifting the locomotive energy burden from petroleum to any number of electrical generating technologies, we can avert, or at least postpone that crisis until developing technologies can mature. Solar and Wind are climbing in economies of scale, and are nearly approaching cost/performance ratios similar to natural gas, nuclear, and coal.

Mr. Miller, let the public policy folks deal with how electricity will be generated. Just give us the option to use less petroleum. That's all we ask.

they would be one or two seaters with no features that had a top speed of 20 mph and acceleration similar to a lethargic dung beetle.

That was invented over 100 years ago, and I've got one. It's called a bicycle. Mine does have features though, including a blinking white light in the front, a nifty two tone bell, and a milk crate boot!

Toyotas response is as dumb as the VP from GM
stating he see's no reason to make a compact hybrid.
GM wishes they had a hybrid on the market now with
show rooms empty and prius orders over a 6 month
back log.
What is up with these guys?
Bob

Toyota is probably waiting to see how the aftermarket works out for plug-in conversions. If a lot of people buy these things then Toyota can see that it would make economic sense to offer them. If they only sell a few hundred to the Hollywood tree-hugger crowd then Toyota will stay out of the market.

I personally don't think they're going to sell very many, probably less than 1000 in the first few years, but we'll see.