Do Battery-Pack Failures Reduce the Life of Hybrid Cars? A Reader Asks
Tesla Supercharger Coming To Midwest Too, Not Just Coasts
The long-promised announcement from Tesla Motors on expansion of its Supercharger network has been... Read More
- #4LEADERBOARD RANK
- 2904ARTICLES CONTRIBUTED
- 1951COMMENTS POSTED
Add to circle
Also See
-
NASCAR Star Builds Racing Prius In Toyota...
-
Blind Man Drives Prius, With A Little Help From...
-
Toyota Takes You On Safari To Prius Kingdom...
See more video »
Our reader Jonathan P asks:
I have a 1997 Saturn that, remarkably, is still running. It probably has the book value of a large watermelon, so if anything major goes wrong with it, that's the end of that.
If that Saturn were a hybrid, I'm guessing the battery pack would have died about four years ago, give or take. But replacing a battery pack would be a huge expense, no? And the older the car gets, the less incentive there is to incur this huge expense.
So it seems to me that hybrids have a significant built-in obsolescence factor--while at the same time their higher up-front cost means you need to hold on to them longer to recoup the cost.
What, then, is the logic behind buying a hybrid...or an electric, for that matter...over an efficient gasoline or diesel vehicle?
Good question, Jonathan.
It's not about payback, necessarily
First, many of the people who have bought hybrids like the Toyota Prius didn't do so for the "payback," or the money they'll save on gasoline. Instead, they wanted the car to make a public statement about their values. Just like buying a HUMMER, only, ummmm, different.
The broader universe of car buyers who say they want a green car really want to save money. So they may or may not buy a hybrid, since retail buyers routinely overweight the importance of purchase price and ignore the impact of total cost of ownership (maintenance, repairs, gasoline cost) over the lifetime of the car.
Whether a hybrid really save you money depends on your duty cycle: whether you spend a lot of time in stop-and-go urban traffic, where its engine switches off frequently and it can move under electric power alone for short distances, or whether you do hundreds of miles a day on freeways, in which case a clean diesel is a better bet.
Designed to last a lifetime
Second, a hybrid's high-voltage battery pack generally doesn't need to be replaced over the lifetime of the car--or at least the first decade.
The nickel-metal-hydride (and now lithium-ion) battery packs in hybrids are very different to 12-Volt lead-acid starter batteries. They're considered part of the vehicle's pollution control system by regulators, so they must be warrantied for either 8 years//100,000 miles or 10 years/150,000 miles (depending on your state).
Beyond that, automakers know very well that replacing a pack (a Gen II Prius pack costs about $2,500) would be a huge customer dissatisfaction issue. The packs are built with plenty spare energy capacity, and they control them to operate within a very narrow state-of-charge range, usually between 40 and 60 percent.
This reduces stress on the pack, prolonging its life. While there's little public data so far on how long packs last, hundreds of hybrids have been used as taxis for 300,000 miles or more, and they still run fine.
The packs may not have 100 percent of their original energy capacity, but they still function as hybrids.
Battery chemistry is key
A technical note: The battery chemistries used by most manufacturers degrade only with duty cycles (usage) and NOT with time alone. Electric-car maker Tesla is one of the few exceptions: It uses consumer-grade lithium-ion cells, which lose energy capacity over time, even if you never use them.
So, while a hybrid car owner may theoretically need to replace the pack at some point, it most likely won't be required until around the same time the car itself becomes uneconomical: 12 to 15 years or more.
As you point out, if your Saturn loses its engine, or even its transmission, there's no sense in repairing it. The hybrid battery pack falls into that same group of components: the ones that usually last the life of the car, and whose failure determines when the car gets scrapped.
Toyota, incidentally, has said that the hybrid battery pack is one of its least-replaced items. The bulk of them are sold to repair accident damage, not because they failed.
+++++++++++
Follow GreenCarReports on Facebook and Twitter.
Related Articles
-
Summer, Sensibly: Four 2013 Convertibles With Good Gas Mileage
-
Tesla Repays $465-Million DoE Loan, Chrysler Bites Back At Claim
-
Audi Startled By Tesla Sales Success? Deleted Press Release Seems To Say So
-
100,000th Plug-In Electric Car In U.S. Sold Today (More Or Less)
-
![Tesla owners & supporters gather in Statehouse in Austin to support company [photo: John Griswell]](http://static.hgmsites.net/images/cache/tesla-owners-supporters-gather-in-statehouse-in-austin-to-support-company-photo-john-griswell_100424739_130x80.jpg "North Carolina Wants To Make It Illegal For Tesla To E-Mail Customers")
North Carolina Wants To Make It Illegal For Tesla To E-Mail Customers
-
Follow Us
On Facebook
Most Popular This Week
More »
Can Tesla Raise More Than $1 Billion On Soaring Stock Price? 
Audi Startled By Tesla Sales Success? Deleted Press Release... 
Four Used Plug-In Electric Cars To Avoid 
How Are Electric-Car Batteries Made? Photos From Nissan's New... 
Toyota Accelerates Switch To Lithium-Ion Batteries, Still Lags... Find Green Cars
Photo Galleries
More from High Gear Media
- Follow Us
Have an opinion?
Despite the supposed psychological report supporting your argument, I strenuously object to the idea that people buy a Prius to make a public statement. People buy a Prius to effect a positive change in either the environment, foreign trade, global warming, etc. This purchase does have a positive effect in all those areas.
On the flip side, people buy Hummers because they don't give a rat's arse about any of those things. They are having a negative impact on the country.
So the logic that says there is a comment thread between the Prius buyer and the Hummer buyer is ridiculous. The Prius is being purchased to have a positive impact, and it is having a positive impact. As for the Hummer buyer, well, let's not beat a dead horse, or apologize for the dead horse after it is already dead.
Yeahbeer Posted: 2/23/2011 11:00am PST
Kara K Posted: 2/23/2011 11:12am PST
Alysha Webb Posted: 2/23/2011 11:13am PST
http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/1048230_honda-civic-hybrid-software-upgrade-fixes-battery-issue
And, a link I forgot to add. Hyundai is warranting its battery for 10 years/100K miles:
http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/1051494_2011-hyundai-sonata-hybrid-battery-gets-10-year-100k-mile-warranty
mimidustie Posted: 2/23/2011 2:14pm PST
Also, I am producing 20+ less tons of carbon-dioxide per year! Have I made you guys breath a little easier? Haha! I feel good!
JKD Posted: 2/23/2011 2:26pm PST
One good point about Tesla (and also the LEAF) is that individual lithium ion battery packs (40+ for the Nissan) can be tested and replaced as needed.
Rob O'Keefe Posted: 2/23/2011 2:54pm PST
Personally, I'll take a hybrid or EV with nothing stating it's a hybrid but do you not remember the Silverado or Yukon hybrid release when feedback from the customers was mainly "why aren't there larger "Hybrid" decals/lettering?" Sad, but true. Well, if my memory serves me correct, that is...
Just because the HUMMER makes a statement you don't like doesn't mean it isn't a statement. Both vehicles make a statement in my opinion.
Dan Abbott Posted: 2/24/2011 6:57am PST
Data? My experience so far is that you ignore it in favor of your preconceived notions (OK, maybe I am guilty on that score as well). But let's take a typical example.
You keep denigrating hybrids saying they are only 2% of the market. I keep sending you the link to "Light-Duty Automotive Technology, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 Through 2010" that says the number is actual twice that amount or 4.3%. Please explain why you ignore that data.
Bear in mind this is a knowable number. It is the actual number of cars purchased. This is hard data. Perhaps subject to error of one kind of another, but at least there is a real answer.
So what data do you like. Well your reference "data" for this story is called "Going Green to Be Seen: Status, Reputation, and Conspicuous Conservation". This data is more than a little bit softer. As an example of its softness, it predicts that hybrid sales should be 37.2%. That is more than a little bit off as we all know.
Why is the data off, well the authors explain it this way. "One limitation of the current research is that our experiments did not involve the actual purchasing of products". That is right, no actual purchases were made during the research. The authors point this because it is well known that people don't buy what they say they are going to buy.
If you haven't had the pleasure of being involved with "conjoint analysis", let me explain. Conjoint analysis is a well thought out system for analyzing what features people want and how much they are willing to pay for them. The only problem is that it does not predict real world purchases. Oops, big problem. But hey, many consultants made a lot of money off of it.
But here is the leap of faith that you need to go through. 1) the story evoke "status" feeling. 2) the person seeks higher status, 3) the person chooses an ECO vehicle so as to be seen as an altruistic person. 4) no other possible interpretations are possible.
Really you can't make this stuff up. It is a long and complex chain of events that lead to the philosophy of "conspicuous conservation".
I also note the report was dated Nov 2010, and a sentence in the executive summary says, "The EPA database for this report was frozen in June 2010." Hence their "2010" figure is a guesstimate based on half a year's data.
The HybridCars.com Market Dashboard indicates a 2010 hybrid sales rate of 2.4%. That seems to me far more likely:
http://www.hybridcars.com/hybrid-clean-diesel-sales-dashboard/december-2010.html
Hybrid sales percentages vary slightly depending on the denominator: Are heavy-duty vehicle sales included, for example, or just passenger vehicles? But frankly, I find the 4.3% number bizarre.
Secondly, what are we to make of this complex sequence of events that the authors go through to show that Prius driver really buy them to show "status".
Firstly, the authors provide all the necessary information to shoot down this theory. Firstly, as the point out, this 2010 paper is the first time anyone has ever shown this linkage. So this is not exactly been confirmed.
Secondly, they provide three alternative explanations for their data. Most interestingly is the idea of "indirect reciprocity". The idea that you do the right thing in life so that people with do the right thing to you. What a radical idea? Unfortunately it is as old as the bible and the golden rule. So is the Prius buy seeking "status" or "doing the right thing", well there is probably some of each category. So the question becomes one of percentages.
How does this compare with what they say about Prius drivers? Aside from considering them an enigma, they consider them "prosocial" "altruistic", etc. So very different from the Hummer driver.
Two guys really want TVs, so they each go down to the store and get one. The key difference is that one guy purchases it with his hard earned money, and the other guy steals it. Now, this guys are really the same. After all, they are both motivated by the same desire, to have a TV set. So the process is equivalent.
The only problem, is their motives are not usually the thing people focus on. One is taking an action compatible with civil society, the other is doing something illegal.
The same could be said for car purchases. Some people make purchases compatible with society (prosocial if you must). Other people make purchases that are less so.
So focus on the motives of Prius vs Hummer drivers if you must, but their actions are far more important.
I want to apologize for my comment about your usage of the hybrid 4.3% data. Rather than bias, you are reasonable rejecting an outlier data point.
The problem of bias was apparently mine. I really wanted to believe the 4.3% number. Unfortunately, I cannot find anything to confirm it.
Sorry
John C. Briggs
First, OK some people do the Prius thing as some sort of personal green-washing, but I think this number is very small.
Of the people that I know with a Prius, and that is a lot, the goal is to take personal action to effect positive change. These people often do other things in their life that are much less visible that reflect this personal action. Many have solar panels, recycle, conserve electricity, ride bicycles to work, reduce toxic waste, etc. In other words, their purchase of the Prius is consistent with other actions. The idea that they are seeking "status" seems flatly ridiculous as many of them could easily afford a Lexus or BMW. Their goal is to take action not to make a statement.
As for people with EV or hybrid stickers, this is part of the environmental effort to seek positive change by letting people see that these vehicles exist. It helps to educate people. This is important for the same reason that gay people should be out. It normalizes the behavior and people come to accept it. These technologies need to be seen and not be in the closet (sorry if the analogy is way off the mark).
As for the uniquely shaped Prius being a status symbol, perhaps. But also consider the fact that the Prius is by far the most fuel efficient vehicle available for sale. No other hybrid comes close. So the purchase of the Prius might be due to the fact that it is an awesome vehicle.
Seth Posted: 2/27/2011 10:41pm PST
http://www.dailytech.com/206Kmile+Toyota+Prius+MPG+Nearly+Matches+New+Figures/article20940.htm
*
The second (implied?) question is about "payback". This is a strange concept for a car, really. If the payback logic was applied, then only basic, stripped models would sell, and luxury brands would never have been started, I think.
*
The lower energy consumption is why people like the Prius, or EV's, or efficient ICE powered cars. The l cost of fuel over the lifetime of any car is just like the initial purchase cost, is just that -- a cost. No car is an "investment", so payback is not really applicable, I think?
Neil
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!