Day Two: Hybrids vs. Electrics - why is the alternative to petrol petrol?

Piecing together the varying answers I received from both the big players and the smaller EV companies, this is what I think is going on. The industry is convinced, probably rightly, that any new technology must not only be competitive in price terms, but must offer the same high standards of reliability and convenience which current models provide. Mass producing a car with a novel power source which conforms to these expectations is very, very expensive. Not prohibitively so, but there is an additional problem.

There are various alternative 'green' technologies offering varying advantages to the environment and to motorists. EVs tend to be battery powered, and the input you need is electricity to charge the batteries. Batteries store and release energy slowly, and batteries are heavy. Lithium Ion batteries are better, but more expensive.

Hybrids can have a petrol engine in parallel to a battery so that the car can switch between power sources, or an engine in series with a battery, so that the petrol or diesel motor is only a generator for charging the battery. This is more efficient, whilst the parallel version is more flexible and generally gives more power. Hybrids' use of petrol (or diesel) makes them convenient to refuel, but gives them limited scope in cutting emissions.

Fuel cell technology, using hydrogen, is cleaner than hybrids and can be refuelled much faster than a battery can be recharged. This was seen as the best 'green' fuel, but has the drawback of needing a convenient supply of highly flammable gas, which must be produced in an energy intensive manner (there are no natural hydrogen reserves) and kept under high pressure.

A large car company can afford to develop a vehicle with any of these technologies, and make sure it is competitive in price and quality. However, even the biggest wouldn't consider developing models using variants of all three technologies, and here is where the problem really lies. Who wants to spend many years and billions of dollars producing a truly mass-market Lithium Ion EV, only for the rest of the world to suddenly decide that fuel cells are the way to go?

Hybrids don't need radical changes to the fuel supply infrastructure or people's driving habits, but are only capable of reducing emissions to a limited degree, so whilst they are a lower risk, they offer lower benefits. For this reason they weren't seen as the leading contender, until recently. Nevertheless, in 1995 Toyota started work on what became the Prius, on the assumption that even though it would probably lose them money, it would be a useful learning experience. To nearly everyone's surprise, the Prius has been a commercial success, and this is why hybrids are now flavour of the month - new technologies are risky and this one has already been tried and tested.

Ford, meanwhile, had tried out an EV, the 'Th!nk', and were one of the leading researchers in fuel cell technology, but suddenly found that the least promising of the 'green' technologies, hybrids, were all anyone was interested in. From having been far ahead of the competition in this area, they were reduced to buying hybrid technology from Toyota.

Of course, the problem with hybrids - that they still burn fossil fuels - is a massive advantage from the point of view of the oil companies, and there is an alternative theory that the whole thing is another Big Oil conspiracy. Looked at more positively, they are half a step in the right direction, but it would be a disaster if R&D funding for EVs or fuel cells was diverted into hybrids due to Toyota's success, and this is almost certainly what's happening.

Tomorrow, the start of my seventeen part rant on SUVs. Don't miss it.