California considers legislation for PHEV conversions
If the California Air Resources Board (CARB) passes the legislation that it is currently considering, getting your hands on a PHEV conversion, like the one recently created by Hymotion, might be a bit more difficult. Whether or not this is a bad thing depends on your point of view. Those looking to add a plug-in module to their Prius in order to use as little gas as possible might be paying a few more bucks for the conversion, as the pending legislation would force the manufacturer to go through the same rigorous certification process that new cars must pass. Of course, this could be an expensive proposition and could keep some contenders completely out of the market. The benefit, as some see it, would be that owners would be sure that their newly-converted plug-ins would meet all current emissions standards, something which may not necessarily be the case otherwise. Added peace-of-mind would come from forcing the manufacturers to offer a standard , something the legislation would also require. Another requirement which has seen some opposition is the mandate of a maximum four-hour charge time and a specific branded charger.
Those with an interest in following the legislation can click here. CARB is currently accepting comments from the public regarding the pending legislation. If you feel strongly about the subject, you can make your voice heard by clicking here for CARB's contact information.
[Source: Greentech Media]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
jake 3:05PM (7/25/2008)
I actually don't like a lot of the CARB's regulations in regards to aftermarket parts, specifically b/c it requires you to buy specific brands that have the money to do the carb certifications. They don't just measure your emissions and pass you that way, your aftermarket parts actually have to be "carb legal". It's frustrating because even if your car passes emissions testing with the part, if the part isn't certified, you still have to take it off.
I don't see any good reason why there should be a regulation on charge time either.
Reply
axiom 4:11PM (7/25/2008)
"I don't see any good reason why there should be a regulation on charge time either."
Even the big car makers future PHEV and EV specs don't have that kind of charge time. It looks like some big auto is spiking this legislation to kill potential competition before it spawns into actual competition. When the plug in Prius starts roling out at around 400K units a year EVERYONE will want a plug-in.
This kind of legislation in the one state that would spawn such a conversion industry is effectively an attempt to ensure there are no PHEV conversion systems on the market,
tankd0g 3:57PM (7/25/2008)
If this keeps fly by night companies from installing li-ion battery packs that are not designed to take a crash without unleashing a run away chain reaction, then it sounds like a good idea to me.
Reply
jake 5:00PM (7/25/2008)
This is just emissions, and perhaps a warranty on battery life; it has nothing to do with safety.
tankd0g 7:40PM (7/25/2008)
Mandatory charging and warranty guidelines. The mortal enemy of cheap crap off ebay.
Tim 4:06PM (7/25/2008)
How does this affect people like me doing gas->electric conversions in their back yard?
Reply
axiom 10:32AM (7/28/2008)
It doesn't. And you still sell the kits online for "research purposes". If this passes you just can't have a company that sells and installs them...in CA.
Erik 4:34PM (7/25/2008)
Max 4 hour charge time? That makes a lot of sense. So the longer your all-electric range, the more evil your car is. Oh, but wait, if you install a bigger charger then your car is good again. Until you add more batteries.
Reply
jzj 5:38PM (7/25/2008)
I have no objection to this proposed rule as long as CARB applies it fairly: that is, every manufacturer for every non-OEM vehicle component that may in any way effect automobile performance must adhere to this same stringent standard. Without such a proviso, I believe this proposed rule is unfairly singling out PHEV.
Reply
Ben 6:12PM (7/25/2008)
CARB incarnates both the oil industry and auto lobby. I have read where board members have said: ...they must rely on auto experts for advice [read: GM, and their ilk ] on what is possible... Also, one of the board members lost significant funding for their university program he over saw funded by the auto industry after voting earlier on moves unfavorable to the auto industry and said he had learned his lesson. That Arnold even considers CARB valid is something terrifying to consider. I know Arnold is thinking about jobs when he talks about working within the present CARB, but, when a critical gas crisis happens and there are no options, except a Katrina like experience CARB will have proven to have been a crime against humanity.
CARB definitely weakened the earlier vote on promoting electric vehicles this year in favor of the auto industry and this, this regulatory situation, which could be done w/out destroying the growing plug-in movement research among universities and small companies again intrinsically favors multinational corporations like GM.. GM's reputation grows increasing worse since the "Impact"
Reply
stevefazek 5:49PM (7/25/2008)
before you get a A123 system look at this
http://file.sunshinepress.org:54445/toyota-prius-a123-car-fire-investigation-report-2008.pdf
Reply
wildgoosechase73 7:29PM (7/25/2008)
Why shouldn't conversions have to be certified? Everything other aftermarket part has to.
Reply
Paul Sallmen 10:08PM (7/25/2008)
I've always admired California in the sense that they've always been first or nearly first at implementing eco-friendly features for cars. However, they clearly have done mistakes (such as weakening the EV requirement in the 90s/early 2000s). This rule about requiring PHEV to be 'certified' is bogus. It erects barriers, rather than stimulates competition. It's competition and a variety of products/companies that improve the overall quality of products on the market. What competition is not, is CARB putting its stamp of approval on something! If anything, that's protectionist for big companies (like GM) to keep the smaller companies out of the market. Sure CARB can give a seal of approval to something, but it shouldn't be required. As long as the vehicle meets the annual or so smog test, shouldn't that be fine? The market will sort out what products stay and what products disappear. Californians: write Arnie and tell him this PHEV certification should be voluntary. And do it Ngaaaowww! (now, with German accent).
Reply
sundowner 11:49PM (7/25/2008)
the California Air Resources Board should be (but is not) a self-defeating organization. In other words, CARB should be trying to put themselves ouit of business. This rule says to me that CARB is makng a bid to operate outside of its original charter and ensure that they have the ability to regulate personal motor vehicles after personal motor vehicles no longer detract from the air quality of California. Regulating charge time and brand specific chargers? How does this regulation contribute to California's air quality? How long until some entity like SEMA sues the CARB?
Reply
David A 2:08AM (7/26/2008)
The weird question is why someone making a PRIUS conversion to ALL ELECTRIC would need to "prove" that their emissions aren't harmful. Seems like a "Duh" factor to me, which is just being tossed unnecessary legislation for the hell of it.
It's like testing little league players for steroids use. Simply overkill and not appropriate.
Reply
Sean 8:38AM (7/26/2008)
I hope there are a flood of comments to CARB on this one too. (BTW, you can make comments even if you don't live in CA. Just frame them with how CA's decisions have the potential to affect the rest of the country.)
IF this passes, I have a feeling it will be ignored much like prohibition was. (Are police going to pull over PHEVs and look at the charger? How are they going to find out the charge time?!) Either that, or conversion companies will continue to do business outside of CA and CARB ends up shooting their mission statement in the head. I agree with sundowner. CARB is really becoming useless at least in the auto field.
Damn politicians...there should be salary caps for all politicians so as to emphasize the SERVICE in "public service." Politics is currently too lucrative, so it attracts self-serving people. If politicians got paid what teachers do, I think we'd see a change for the better in a quick hurry!
Reply
meme 11:30AM (7/28/2008)
"Even the big car makers future PHEV and EV specs don't have that kind of charge time. "
What are you talking about? The Mitsubishi MiEV does 20 minutes. The Subaru R1e is... I think that's 20 minutes, too. The vehicles that take Level 3 charging that are being tested on Oahu do ~30 minute charging. Phosphate cells can do 15 minutes. Titanates can do 10. SCiB and supercapacitors can do 5. Level 3 chargers can provide up to 250kW. What's the problem?
They're not trying to kill the mandate; they're trying to *do it right* this time. We need vehicles that charge onboard from normal outlets and offboard with very high power, fast charge outlets, if we want to completely supplant gasoline.
Reply