Initially wanted a hybrid to get better gas mileage and disappointed in the SC mileage (like to see 30mpg somewhere). Realizing full electric cars are still in the future - until can go 1000 miles between charges or charges to go 500 miles take only ten minutes. Ford surprised everyone with the base Maverick as a hybrid getting up to 40mpg. Now just wait a minute - do I really want to have the extra weight of a battery pack? Do I really want to cruise with a fair amount of lithium under the boards? Are we really saving the environment with these somewhat more hazardous metals - lithium, cobalt, manganese and with all their handling and mining??????????? Manufacturers are being pushed into this electric car game through a false narrative. Fossil fuels expend NOx and CO which we all know are nasty but this country contains them fairly well. They say there is a demand for electric vehicles - well only 2% of buyers are going that way at the moment and some have reverted back to more conventional fossil fuel so what is the deal???? Now there is a foolish push to get rid of CO2. Back in Biology it was highlighted humans expel CO2 and plants use CO2 to grow. Now with more people, more CO2 is expelled so we need more food so hence need more CO2, cut back on CO2 and we cut back on possible plant food production. That's the way I see it.
Hybrid desire
-
Hyundai Santa Cruz Owners Registry: Add Your Info Here!
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Let me preface what I am going to say with some background about me. I graduated with a bachelor's in mechanical engineering where I worked on a hybrid/electric competition and took many classes on the matter. I then got my masters in automotive engineering where I specialized in hybrid/electric drivetrains. I currently work in product planning at an OEM and attend industry meetings where I speak with other automakers. I also want to point out that I did not choose to study hybrid/electric technology to "save the environment" or anything. I just recognized that the automotive industry is evolving and relying on the price of gas to plan a vehicle lineup is not feasible. Remember when everyone sold their big trucks in 2008 due to high fuel costs?
I really want to address your point about which drivetrain is cleaner for the environment. Firstly, there are thousands of research articles that highlight the effects of greenhouse gasses caused by traditional ICE. This has been well known since the late 70's and everything since then has been an effort to reduce the effects on the environment. If you're trying to argue that the gasses released by ICE are not harmful then I cannot discuss any further. This is well known fact at this point in the scientific community. Assuming you acknowledge the harmful effects of ICE emissions, lets compare electric vs ICE. There are 2 different talking points here.
First, there is the well-to-wheel cost. This is the total environmental impact on powering a vehicle. For an electric car, this is simply the environmental impact of getting the electricity to charge the battery. The best case is the power comes from wind, solar, nuclear, or water. The worst case scenario is the electricity comes from a coal power plant. For an ICE, this is the cost of mining, processing, transporting, and burning the fuel. It should be pretty obvious that even if the electricity for an electric car comes from a coal power plant, it is drastically better for the environment than getting fuel to the pump.
The bigger environmental impact is what you referenced in your post. This is the manufacturing of electric vs ICE vehicles. You are correct that manufacturing a NEW battery for an electric vehicle will result in a more negative impact on the environment than producing a ICE at first. However, it is unreasonable to stop the conversation there. When factoring in the well-to-wheel cost, at some point the electric car will become less harmful for the environment than the ICE. This is called a life cycle analysis (LCA). Now there are hundreds of scholarly articles on an electric car LCA. There are so many variables to consider, but the studies consistently show that the electric car is better for the environment than the ICE over it's entire life cycle. For instance, let's consider the worst case scenario. A new electric lithium-ion battery is produced and the electricity is coal generated. Most studies show that the electric car will become better for the environment than a new ICE after only 2 years. It is obviously less than that if powered by clean electricity or a recycled battery. Remember, we are still in the very beginning of this new technology. We will become much better at recycling used batteries and creating more energy dense batteries.
I would like to point out that only 2% of new cars in the US were electric. The world average is almost 5%.The number of new electric cars sold in the US has tripled since 2016 and will continue to grow as more affordable option become available. I'm shocked the number is that high considering the only real options were an expensive Tesla or a goofy Leaf or Bolt. Again, we are still very early with this new technology. As electric vehicles gain range, charge faster, and the infrastructure grows, so will demand.
As far as added weight on the Maverick, the curb weight of a SC and hybrid Maverick will be very similar. To your comment about "sitting on lithium" you currently sit on 20 gallons of gasoline. Ironically, Hyundai and Kia are currently in a half million vehicle recall due to a risk of fire for various reasons.
I don't want to sound like electric is flawless. I do not think electric is the answer for commercial work vehicles or people that due even a moderate amount of towing. I also think we need some serious updates to the power grid to support an electric future. I just get so tired of the "are electric cars actually better for the environment" narrative. Yes, the answer is yes.
THIS ^^
Thank you for not trying to make the argument that electric cars will solve the "cyclical nature" of global warming.
Clean transportation is great for the sake of clean transportation, period.
Right. Honestly, I'm most excited about the convenience of an electric vehicle more than anything. The lack of oil changes, very infrequent maintenance, and most importantly, never stopping at gas stations. I'm lazy by nature and hate filling up once a week on my way home. I understand charging at home might not be feasible for some right now if they live in an apartment or do not have a garage, but simply plugging up my vehicle after I get home from work would be perfect. I think many people would never look back once they experience that luxury. I'm lucky enough that I got to "product test" one of my OEM's electric vehicles for about a month and fell in love with the instant torque (out of a family sedan) and lack of gas stations. Unfortunately, I need a truck that can tow and there are no options at the moment. So I might just have one last hurrah with a SC until the right electric or hybrid midsize is available.THIS ^^
Thank you for not trying to make the argument that electric cars will solve the "cyclical nature" of global warming.
Clean transportation is great for the sake of clean transportation, period.
Joined
·
227 Posts
I am planning on buying a SC and the first small and sexy electric truck (maybe SC EV) will replace it after the warranty goes out. Can't fit a F-150 Lightning or Cybertruck in my garage, but honestly if they hike the price of the SC Limited any higher I will probably just wait for one of those and put the charger on the outside or wait for a midsize version.
As an electrical engineer working for a motor and drives company, as much as I love the sound and smell of gas, the absolute power and control of electric makes the environmental impact a pointless topic. Electric vehicles are better in every way short of the lithium fire risks (again gas is the basically the same here though) and the recharging infrastructure.
I am of the camp that the 'Earth' and most of humanity will be fine regardless of if we address climate change (we can adapt and the earth has been through this plenty of times), but if we don't do something we probably will wipe out a very large chunk of our beautiful flora and fauna because of our ignorance.
Earth heating is natural, but we are hitting it with a blowtorch. We can live underground if needed, but the sea turtles can't live in an ocean of carbonic acid.
As an electrical engineer working for a motor and drives company, as much as I love the sound and smell of gas, the absolute power and control of electric makes the environmental impact a pointless topic. Electric vehicles are better in every way short of the lithium fire risks (again gas is the basically the same here though) and the recharging infrastructure.
I am of the camp that the 'Earth' and most of humanity will be fine regardless of if we address climate change (we can adapt and the earth has been through this plenty of times), but if we don't do something we probably will wipe out a very large chunk of our beautiful flora and fauna because of our ignorance.
Earth heating is natural, but we are hitting it with a blowtorch. We can live underground if needed, but the sea turtles can't live in an ocean of carbonic acid.
Can't see Hyundai waiting too long before adding a Hybrid Santa Cruz to their line. I could wait, but don't want to as I'm driving my parents CRV so that I can transport my elderly mother around. With the Santa Cruz I can do that in style and function with a smile on my face, while cutting a car out of the family fleet.
There's always Lake Baikal in Russia. I hear the underwater aliens there have it all worked out and can breath underwater without air tanks.There's something so simple and obvious about having an all electric option in the city, while still having gas range for those long trips. That reduces the smells and pollution in the city if nothing else. I can't believe it has taken so long for autos to find that happy medium. It's as if the industry itself really doesn't want to make anything that's "too good" for fear of killing their own industry.
Joined
·
228 Posts
Without debating the virtues of electrification and as a long time urban dweller, where does one plug in while parked on the street? Long extension cord out the apartment window? Infrastructure just isn't there yet.
There's something so simple and obvious about having an all electric option in the city, while still having gas range for those long trips. That reduces the smells and pollution in the city if nothing else. I can't believe it has taken so long for autos to find that happy medium. It's as if the industry itself really doesn't want to make anything that's "too good" for fear of killing their own industry.
Joined
·
227 Posts
Solution, don't live somewhere you have to park a nice car on the street. 😂 All kidding aside, you have a point.
Joined
·
228 Posts
Thankfully I've been fortunate to have garage space, but that's a rarity for most. Always had a "beater", can't leave a nice car on the street.
Not a fan at all of 100% electric myself. Gotta have that gas option at all times. Your point is well taken.
Thanks for all the great responses. I agree that NOx is really nasty but in this country even sitting in traffic in NYC it does not get that bad. I've been in Calcutta where people have to shut the engines off at red lights and I was getting nauseous over the fumes which never happened to me before. The point really wanted to make is there is a very false and deceptive narrative that the power of man has caused this climate change. If at all, man had a minor impact but we definitely have a responsibility to plan for any future we have left. Also a possibility that the last great warming 100 years ago might have been influenced by the industrial industry with coal. When I was growing up, there was a big scare about the soon coming ice age. The term 'science' is used arbitrarily with falsified data and/or data that seems to change over time, etc. We have clearly entered what was portrayed in 1984 where terms mean the complete opposite what leaders???? tell us.
Joined
·
350 Posts
There is one reason I don't see a hybrid version in the near future (a couple years at least). The Santa Cruz is designed/built just for the North American market and currently all of their hybrids - including Tucson & Santa Fe that have most of the ICE models built in Alabama - have the hybrid versions built in Korea. Korea does build some of the regular Tucson/Santa Fe to supplement the Alabama production and also they are produced there for other markets. It wouldn't make financial sense to set up an assembly line there just for the SC Hybrid - and would also add tax/tariffs to it bringing a "pickup" into the US. Hyundai/Kia is supposed to be building/expanding US facilities to build EVs & hybrids here in the future, but it's still a few years out.
Joined
·
1,192 Posts
Yup, I told them they were all silly fear mongering because while gas prices do fluctuate, over long periods of time they still average out to a safe calculation of $3 a gallon. So my dad bought our 2009 Ram 1500 Hemi at around $10K off MSRP, and sure enough gas prices plummeted within a year.
In the 1970s they warned us that within a few years we would enter into an ice age, trying to get everyone to panic and give them money and power. Then they told us that actually its acid rain that will kill us all, and that was all the hype in movies of the 80s like Highlander's future visit and Blade Runner with everyone carrying umbrellas and all flora destroyed, trying to get everyone to panic and give them money and power. By the 90s the narrative shifted to something called "peak oil" causing nuclear holocaust whereby all the major powers would be fighting for the last drops of fuel by the year 2000 inspiring movies like Mad Max, trying to get everyone to panic and give them money and power.
Of course we know that by 2020, for the first time in history the world produced so much oil far in excess of what was required that oil traded negatively on the market (you had to pay people to take oil as all storage was full and you couldn't just dump the production on the ground) with world governments coming to an agreement to artificially reduce oil production... literally the opposite of peak oil. Meanwhile, nobody talks about acid rain anymore, and recent advances in satellite imagery and computer analysis shows that the world is more forested today than estimates believe existed since the start of the industrial revolution. Even coca cola tried to scare us into thinking that polar bears would be extinct by now due to global warming, when in fact their populations are now so healthy that there is debate about removing them from endangered status, with populations now well distributed and estimated as high as 58K.
We know that humans are highly adaptable, living comfortably in the hot dry deserts of Arizona to the humid tropical monsoons of SE Asia to the cold of Russia. When it comes to biomass in general on what climate can sustain the most life, we can look at Earth's history. The period with the most tonnage of plant and animal life that we know of happened in what we call the Carboniferous era (its the time that most of our fossil fuels come from), and during this time CO2 levels were over 5x higher than they are today due to large amounts of volcanic activity, something we couldn't hope to duplicate with our cars if we tried. Higher CO2 levels are known to produce higher plant growth rates, and with more plant biomass the fauna increases as well to consume it. Places near the equator may become less enjoyable to live in such extremes, but it also just means that places like the vast practically dead Canadian and Russian tundra could become lush rain forests again like they once were.
At some point, when the climate alarmists cry wolf for the umpteenth time trying to push their agenda, we have to argue that at a minimum they are grossly exaggerating since their predictions never bear fruit.
Joined
·
1,192 Posts
Exactly, which is why I support evolutionary changes, and would be a hybrid buyer if Hyundai made one for the SC like they do the Tucson. There are practical reasons why hybrids are a great option, from just saving you money at the pump to just overall nice smooth reliable operation, and even though I think CO2 fearmongering is nonsense, hybrids still do tend to reduce REAL pollutants that all internal combustion engines emit.
So that's why I'm on the fence between a frugal hybrid Maverick or a sporty turbo SC, and even the sporty turbo option is hardly a gas guzzler.
Must have been a different Kolkata than I visited, no one even stops at red lights or stop signs in that city, and the only accessory on the vehicle is a horn! Haha
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
