Dunno. Mild hybrids don’t really count, IMHO. If your car doesn’t plug in, you get all your energy from fossils. Yeah, you can save some in a battery for later, but if none of that comes from the grid, there’s no way to make it green.
Yeah, it still doesn’t make sense. If your car already has an electric drivetrain and a battery, why wouldn’t you want to charge it at home to reduce emissions by up to 100% while reducing cost per km by a factor of like 3 or 4 and instead use a diesel generator to charge the car while it’s driving? Mild hybrids can suck it.
Not everyone has their own home. Fueling up is much faster. EV’s are more expensive when buying. Hybrids have much longer range. EV’s at 15kwh/100km would be depending on the price end up at like 4-6€/100km, Hybrids at 4L/100km would end up at like 7€/100km.
Each of these points has its counter arguments and as I’m one of those people who think that we urgently need to stop burning fossil fuels, I’d happily deliver them. However, you’re entirely missing the point, so I won’t unless you actually want to change the topic. While I’m not a fan of them, the previous comment was about plug in hybrids (vs mild hybrids) while you’re arguing against battery electric EVs.
A plug in hybrid and a mild hybrid car are essentially the same thing already, with the important distinction that you can charge one using external power. Why anyone would design such a car and omit the option to charge the battery at home to drive more efficiently is absolutely beyond me.
Oh, sorry i thought its about EV’s. I recently bought a car and thought about getting a Audi A3 Plugin Hybrid but decided for the toyota Corolla hybrid because I couldnt charge it at home and driving out to Charge + drive out to get fuel is kinda annoying. And it still says that the A3 would need like 14.7KWH + 0,3L / 100km so its really not cheaper by a factor of 3 or 4 but rather by 1.2
I still don’t get it. If you drive the a3 without ever plugging it in you’d have exactly the same driving experience as with the corolla, with the car charging just from the energy it gets from the combustion engine. You don’t have to charge it, you know? It’d be an option you just don’t have now.
Also, the small phev batteries can often easily be charged while doing something else. Groceries, shopping, theater, whatever. They’re small enough to fill up quickly even on slower AC chargers, so charging at home is even less of a requirement for a phev than for a bev.
The A3 costs like 10k more (New price). With similar age/KM as mine they are like 7k more (not many on the market tbh). And if I had 20k and really wanted to save the enviorenment and reduce my Co2 output I would buy a old used car for 5k and plant trees for 15k.
Crazy to me that EV + Hybrid is larger than petrol cars already.
Dunno. Mild hybrids don’t really count, IMHO. If your car doesn’t plug in, you get all your energy from fossils. Yeah, you can save some in a battery for later, but if none of that comes from the grid, there’s no way to make it green.
Well, average Fuel Consumption for petrol engines in germany is 7.7L, so if you drive a mild hybrid that has 4-5L it still helps.
Edit: also i just realized that its new cars registrations for december, not total share.
Yeah, it still doesn’t make sense. If your car already has an electric drivetrain and a battery, why wouldn’t you want to charge it at home to reduce emissions by up to 100% while reducing cost per km by a factor of like 3 or 4 and instead use a diesel generator to charge the car while it’s driving? Mild hybrids can suck it.
Not everyone has their own home. Fueling up is much faster. EV’s are more expensive when buying. Hybrids have much longer range. EV’s at 15kwh/100km would be depending on the price end up at like 4-6€/100km, Hybrids at 4L/100km would end up at like 7€/100km.
Each of these points has its counter arguments and as I’m one of those people who think that we urgently need to stop burning fossil fuels, I’d happily deliver them. However, you’re entirely missing the point, so I won’t unless you actually want to change the topic. While I’m not a fan of them, the previous comment was about plug in hybrids (vs mild hybrids) while you’re arguing against battery electric EVs.
A plug in hybrid and a mild hybrid car are essentially the same thing already, with the important distinction that you can charge one using external power. Why anyone would design such a car and omit the option to charge the battery at home to drive more efficiently is absolutely beyond me.
Oh, sorry i thought its about EV’s. I recently bought a car and thought about getting a Audi A3 Plugin Hybrid but decided for the toyota Corolla hybrid because I couldnt charge it at home and driving out to Charge + drive out to get fuel is kinda annoying. And it still says that the A3 would need like 14.7KWH + 0,3L / 100km so its really not cheaper by a factor of 3 or 4 but rather by 1.2
I still don’t get it. If you drive the a3 without ever plugging it in you’d have exactly the same driving experience as with the corolla, with the car charging just from the energy it gets from the combustion engine. You don’t have to charge it, you know? It’d be an option you just don’t have now.
Also, the small phev batteries can often easily be charged while doing something else. Groceries, shopping, theater, whatever. They’re small enough to fill up quickly even on slower AC chargers, so charging at home is even less of a requirement for a phev than for a bev.
The A3 costs like 10k more (New price). With similar age/KM as mine they are like 7k more (not many on the market tbh). And if I had 20k and really wanted to save the enviorenment and reduce my Co2 output I would buy a old used car for 5k and plant trees for 15k.