Are Mild Hybrids Wasted Investment?
 

At a panel discussion during the 2009 New York International Auto Show, the inevitable question came up: should we focus on one green technology or continue our scattered approach to things? Henrik Fisker, the charismatic man at the helm of Fisker Automotive, had an answer that surprised me: we should explore every avenue, except mild [...]Related posts:

1. Honda Sees Hybrids in the Future
2. Toyota Planning Two New Hybrids by 2010
3. IBM Says All Cars Will be Hybrids by 2020

More...

I think there are definitely ideas that are used in mild hybrids to date that could be very useful. Things such as auto start/stop and regenerative braking with smart alternators and a deep cycle battery. These things cost very little in new car construction and can provide some great benefits. Does this make the car not a mild hybrid since the regenerative braking isn't actively powering the car? I'm not sure, but there are definitely technologies like this that should be on every new car.

I'll admit that these days the only thing I use the IMA motor for is frequent restarting after FAS. Still get great fuel economy because of the light weight, very efficient gas engine, and aerodynamics. The IMA is still worth it because it allows the gas engine to be 2/3 the size it otherwise would be and use the IMA motor for the limited times you accelerate, move from a complete stop....unless you are a gearhead - then the driver and IMA system is a mismatch.

The BAS system GM introduced has to be one of the worst hybrid implementations.

I think he's wrong, for a lot of reasons, but one in particular that wasn't even mentioned: the chicken & egg problem of battery manufacturing. You obviously need batteries for (electric) hybrids and EVs, but who's going to invest billions in battery manufacturing plants unless they're fairly sure of a market for their product? And who's going to build a car that relies on batteries, unless they're sure that someone's going to be making those batteries?

Notebook computers & other personal electronics made mild hybrids economically possible by first creating a market for expensive but lightweight NiMH & Lion batteries. Mild hybrids in turn create a bigger market for batteries, while new technology & economies of scale bring down their price. This makes it economically feasible to put more batteries in each new hybrid, which in turn brings the price down further...

SVOboy -

I disagree with Fisker's definition of a "mild hybrid" :

I think he is saying that an SUV is not a "full hybrid" because it weighs too much. My definition of a mild-hybrid is how much of the drivetrain you tweak. The Saturn Aura "green line" was a mild-hybrid because it had a smaller battery pack and featured little ecodriver perks like "engine off at stop". It was still *very* ICE dominant.

I mean, Fisker is selling his boutique electric for $87K and he is complaining about mild-hybrids as unrealistic? His current game plan calls for selling his Karma to the same demographic that probably have Lexus Hybrid SUVs today. Pot-Kettle-Black and all that.

I just want the hybrid tech to propagate and become ubiquitous (go forth and prosper).

CarloSW2