PHUV, Inc.

[ghosthunter]

You should wear one. I suggest. because, you only see what you want to see.

LOL! First you ask me to remove my glasses and then followed by asking to wear one.

Boy, get your act together and be consistent in what you say.

With 20/20 vision? I doubt. You are stuck with the present, dont know the past and the negativity and pessimism you consistently showed in this thread magnify your idea of a dark future.

Stuck in the present? I wouldn't want to be anywhere else.

My more pessimistic view of our future is based on our (country's) track record. The fact that our country fails in making long term commitment into anything defines our country and how it grows or declines.

My ideas are more based on what we can achieve in shorter time tables that will have benefits for the long term development of society. If you call it negativity or pessimism, I would prefer to call it being realistic in finding solutions that fit our society.

[jpdm]

LOL! First you ask me to remove my glasses and then followed by asking to wear one.
Boy, get your act together and be consistent in what you say.

LOL! I very consistent.

You take off your smoke and oil tinted eye glasses and put a clearer one. Because all you can see is darkness, negativity and pessimism. Love to put down efforts of fellow Pinoy like those from the PHUV, inc ( and fellow tsikoteer)

Good thing you are not putting down efforts to put up Keila.

This PHUV bashing of yours pardon me , is plain and simple and definitely crab mentality.

Btw, boy, check your consistency also ( your blowing hot and cold with your arguments).

By the way, boy, stick to the arguments and minimize your habit of resorting to your cheap shots and personal insults. Do you what me to go down to your level and personally insult you too?

Just like this cheap shot of yours?

Stuck in the present? I wouldn't want to be anywhere else.

No wonder.

My more pessimistic view of our future is based on our (country's) track record. The fact that our country fails in making long term commitment into anything defines our country and how it grows or declines.

Oh..are you lecturing me with the country's track record?

Again, you are simply showing your myopic view of things and hyper pessimism.

I hope you are not suffering from depression from this kind of attitude.

My ideas are more based on what we can achieve in shorter time tables that will have benefits for the long term development of society. If you call it negativity or pessimism, I would prefer to call it being realistic in finding solutions that fit our society

Disagree.

Boy, you too! Be consistent also of what you say.

Long term development by importing everything including auto-lpg kits and Lpg?

This is the worst development paradigm that I heard of so far.

And achieve for a short time? jeepney, auv and Fx drivers and operators (most especially in the provinces) can barely maintain their units in good running condition what more converting to all imported auto gas engine or buy a auto gas powered vehicles.

Again, the government just last year dangled a 1 billion peso fund for conversion. What happen? Again, I will change my stand and I stand corrected if you have proven NCR and the rest of the country rode the auto lpg development program of yours.

Anyway, you hyper-pessimism and negativity burns whatever optimism you have.

Just my opinion.

[ghosthunter]

You are talking about VAT? Whats that got to do with e-jeepneys?

I was citing the CNG bus failure as an example of how our government fails in keeping the ball moving. Keep up with the discussion or is the lack of sleep getting to you?

Really now.

You saying this? in your previous post you just said, its ok for the country to perpetually import everything.

Since we cannot get international trade agreements that will be in our direct favor, why fight it when you make use of it instead?

Simply because we dont have industrial nor agricultural capacity to produce our own goods and services for our needs. You mentioned rice (export)for vehicles (import). Our imports are more expensive than our exports. Thats why we always incur massive trade deficits (8 billion dollars last year)

That is because our exports has not kept up with the rate we import. We cannot even manufacture consumer items that can be exported. And here you are pushing for developing a 100% filipino designed and sourced car.

Maybe if you can make it in more realistic steps and goals.

yeah, as if all engineers in the Philippines can work abroad.

Well, the brighter and better ones are.

Do you think all auto salesmen are paid handsomely?

You're the one proposing of getting everyone to be employed with the Philippine auto industry.

Will an engineering grad from DLSU go abroad as maid? Go figure.

I correct myself, some engineers from DLSU-TAFT have worked as a hotel concierge.

Who said that the e-jeepney would solve all their income problems?

Well, you seem to imply that going Auto-LPG won't solve their income problems. So maybe if they embrace your e-jeep would do it.

I am saying that Auto-LPG can be a step in the right direction. I am not implying that it is the only direction.

You should get those blinders off your eyes and see there are other solutions and directions other than e-jeeps and the Philippine auto industry.

I stand corrected if you can give me hard data.

Why should I justify your opinion without you even having a sampling of data to support your (lack of) observation?

Have you also interviewed those thousands ( jeepney associations) who did not convert to auto-lpg?

Have you?

Umm..decades? The e-jeepney was just launched late last year.

And within that time frame, what movement has there been done to get more "green" power sources for it?


[quote]
Wow! Who said the PHUv program will employ millions of pinoys? You.
I guess, you have to read again (should I read it for you to
understand) my statement before coming up with this out of ths world statement.

Or they brought down the prices of their Proton and Perodua( with government incentives)that is affordable to their middle class?

Actually the opposite, they brought up the prices of imported brands so the locally produced Proton and Perodua can have an "equal" footing in the domestic market.

Do you think, this situation will last?

Unfortunately yes, if there is no drastic/radical redistribution of wealth within the population.

A vibrant local auto industry will not benefit the people down the social pyramid. But having an improved agri-based industry would directly benefit those who need it the most in the shortest time frame (and that is still measured in years).

Thats the sad part.

Again, you are stuck with your dark present world. With no chance of changing.

Let me remind you of the saying...there is no permanent things in this world but change.

And thats the REALITY.

Let me quote you a saying, "the more things change, the more they stay the same".

I am not stuck. I am living in the reality of the present. I am also saying, with our limited resources, it might be better used for other development projects that would uplift the lives of more people who need it the most within a time frame that they can feel and appreciate.

So, this gloomy reality of yours can be reversed, right? Or you are just so hopelessly pessimistic?

My view is based on reality. If there is some light that can be seen at the end of the proverbial tunnel, ... just make sure it isn't a train.

Umm...reality check....Why should we start exporting rice (which we import), if we are already exporting cars (Ford)?

Well, who is dreaming now...

International trade, if we can export both, why will we limit ourselves? Diversification of trade makes a more robust economy. Why put all your eggs into one proverbial basket?

For someone with so much to say, you seem to have a limited scope on things.

Whats you point?

You asked for numbers for the China car industry. So I provided it.

Some facts behind the numbers. A big number of car manufacturers have or started manufacture for China's military requirements like military trucks and such. That gave the companies a head start having a steady buyer for what they produce.

Actually, the PHUV program is already here. Its the reality. Again, makati, and bacolod bought these e-jeepneys.

A year so far. Let us see how many of these vehicles will still be running once government financial support dries up. My point? What is the point of having a transport industry when it is just a big money pit? Does it actually benefit the people or simply covering up the short comings with a lot of glitz?

Im hoping I can in my own way drum up support.

What is wrong with supporting a local endeavor? You talk about benefits yet you keep on hitting local projects like e-PHUV?

Can you say something positive for a change?

I am positive that the funds used could have been better use elsewhere to directly benefit more people down the social pyramid.

I think this is better compared to what you are doing especially in this thread.. And its called crab mentality.

You are welcome to your opinion.

The thing is, a group of Pinoys started something without any support from the government. What Im doing is just highlighting their efforts and so that I can encourage them (in my own small way) not to give up.

Is that wrong for you?

Not wrong. Just saying it's not the cure to what ails us.

Why do you keep on bashing the phuv project?

Keep on bashing? I only have given critic to your opinions to keep it more grounded in reality. I have also given my opinions about the PHUV to make it better or simply to get it moving beyond pen and paper stage. If it cannot stand to the light of criticism, then maybe it should even be pressed forward?

As an engineer, we have been trained to design for the worst possible condition and design accordingly. I have designed and built cars in less time back when I was in college and right after. My viewpoints and opinions have benefited from my experience and knowledge I have gathered over the years.

[jpdm]

I was citing the CNG bus failure as an example of how our government fails in keeping the ball moving. Keep up with the discussion or is the lack of sleep getting to you?

Ha? Is it me or you?

I think its your lack of sleep is getting into you? Why because you consistently misread and made vague arguments and claims. From auto lpg and now CNG for long term development-great transition.

Is it the fault of the government? or Shell failed to follow up the investments made on CNG?

Besides, I thought we should not rely on the government how come, your blaming the government for the hanging Shell CNG investment?

Anyway, a Singaporean firm will continue the CNG program.

Since we cannot get international trade agreements that will be in our direct favor, why fight it when you make use of it instead?

What are you talking about? Heard of the safeguard provisions of the WTO and the safeguards law in the Philippines?

That is because our exports has not kept up with the rate we import. We cannot even manufacture consumer items that can be exported. And here you are pushing for developing a 100% filipino designed and sourced car.

Why because of people like you. A local firm tries to localize production, you put them down. No wonder, local investors are discourage to put money in local production in this country.

How realistic can you get when without you help and thanks with your pessimism and crab mentality, PHUV, Inc of ROmski123 where able to build e-jeepneys. And now used in selected cities and establishments.

Im not pushing for a filipino designed car. Im pushing hopefully for a 100% locally build e-jeepney and eventually PUJs, AUVs and FX. Hopefully cars in the future.

Take note, did I say now? I said eventually 10, 20-30 or 50 years from now. And thats realistic right.

Maybe if you can make it in more realistic steps and goals.

The PHUV is real. Its not a ghost.

Well, the brighter and better ones are.

Hmm...

You're the one proposing of getting everyone to be employed with the Philippine auto industry.

Duh.

Here is my original post

Who has income, a fracton of the Philippine population. How do you jumpstart the income of millions of Pinoys? Give them jobs by making them productive and buying local produce.

I think you need to read this carefully.

So, where is the auto industry here? I said local produce not necessary auto because you keep on insisting your fantastic idea of development by importing evertything.

Boy, you need sleep and be consistent!

I correct myself, some engineers from DLSU-TAFT have worked as a hotel concierge.

Hmmm...

Well, you seem to imply that going Auto-LPG won't solve their income problems. So maybe if they embrace your e-jeep would do it.

Probably.

But you people who own cars and SUVs can stick with your LPG. Definitely it will work for you and suit your needs as private vehicle owners in terms of convenience and fuel economy.


But for public transport especially in the provinces and provincial cities...PHUV will do. perhaps a CNG or biodiesel fed jeepneys will do.Instead of those rickety suplus engine powered diesel engines that belches toxic emissions.

I am saying that Auto-LPG can be a step in the right direction. I am not implying that it is the only direction.

Good.

I will accept that. And you can say that all over again without the PHUV bashing and personal insults, right?

You should get those blinders off your eyes and see there are other solutions and directions other than e-jeeps and the Philippine auto industry.

No. It is you who should get those blinders off your eyes and see also other solutions and directions other than your auto-lpg devlopment program mumbo jumbo.

And stop you distasteful bashing of the local pioneering project like PHUV and your fantastic pessimism, negativity and myopic views.




Why should I justify your opinion without you even having a sampling of data to support your (lack of) observation?




Have you?




And within that time frame, what movement has there been done to get more "green" power sources for it?


[quote]
Wow! Who said the PHUv program will employ millions of pinoys? You.
I guess, you have to read again (should I read it for you to
understand) my statement before coming up with this out of ths world statement.




Actually the opposite, they brought up the prices of imported brands so the locally produced Proton and Perodua can have an "equal" footing in the domestic market.




Unfortunately yes, if there is no drastic/radical redistribution of wealth within the population.

A vibrant local auto industry will not benefit the people down the social pyramid. But having an improved agri-based industry would directly benefit those who need it the most in the shortest time frame (and that is still measured in years).




Let me quote you a saying, "the more things change, the more they stay the same".

I am not stuck. I am living in the reality of the present. I am also saying, with our limited resources, it might be better used for other development projects that would uplift the lives of more people who need it the most within a time frame that they can feel and appreciate.




My view is based on reality. If there is some light that can be seen at the end of the proverbial tunnel, ... just make sure it isn't a train.




International trade, if we can export both, why will we limit ourselves? Diversification of trade makes a more robust economy. Why put all your eggs into one proverbial basket?

For someone with so much to say, you seem to have a limited scope on things.




You asked for numbers for the China car industry. So I provided it.

Some facts behind the numbers. A big number of car manufacturers have or started manufacture for China's military requirements like military trucks and such. That gave the companies a head start having a steady buyer for what they produce.




A year so far. Let us see how many of these vehicles will still be running once government financial support dries up. My point? What is the point of having a transport industry when it is just a big money pit? Does it actually benefit the people or simply covering up the short comings with a lot of glitz?




I am positive that the funds used could have been better use elsewhere to directly benefit more people down the social pyramid.




You are welcome to your opinion.




Not wrong. Just saying it's not the cure to what ails us.




Keep on bashing? I only have given critic to your opinions to keep it more grounded in reality. I have also given my opinions about the PHUV to make it better or simply to get it moving beyond pen and paper stage. If it cannot stand to the light of criticism, then maybe it should even be pressed forward?

As an engineer, we have been trained to design for the worst possible condition and design accordingly. I have designed and built cars in less time back when I was in college and right after. My viewpoints and opinions have benefited from my experience and knowledge I have gathered over the years.

[ghosthunter]

*jpdm

You seem to have the inability to take alternative points-of-view, criticism and turning it into a personal attack or even taking it to the point of calling it some degree of pinoy crab mentality.

Maybe this is the point why most people prefer to ignore your posts/threads beyond saying "wow" and "nice" pic?

As for answering your responses, I do have a life and work does keep body and soul together and I have to get back to it.

[jpdm]

*jpdm

You seem to have the inability to take alternative points-of-view, criticism and turning it into a personal attack or even taking it to the point of calling it some degree of pinoy crab mentality.

Maybe this is the point why most people prefer to ignore your posts/threads beyond saying "wow" and "nice" pic?

As for answering your responses, I do have a life and work does keep body and soul together and I have to get back to it.

As usual your patented cheap shots.

Anyway, say whatever you want. You stated your opinion. I stated mine.

Good, have a good life, do your work and I suggest have a positive view in life.

As for me Im enjoying posting pictures in tsikot for those who care. And I really dont mind if tsikot members ignore me.

At least they dont ignore the pictures.

Just stating my opinion.

[cktlcmd]

Our government is a short sighted pig. It only sees what is obvious and where financial kickbacks can be done.

This is the main hurdle we all need to find a solution first...sadly I agree 100%.

[niky]

Is it the fault of the government? or Shell failed to follow up the investments made on CNG?

We blame the government because it is the government that brokered the program. They convinced Shell to open up the CNG station and convinced the bus companies to invest in CNG-powered buses.

Neither of the two parties continued because, in the end, the agreements were not financially viable.

Compare this to Auto-LPG, where the private sector started conversions themselves, created the refueling infrastructure and created the demand. Grassroots level. And it became successful. We have almost two hundred refuelling stations for LPG in the Philippines now (I'd give you exact numbers, but my research is on my other computer). If you cannot fund something at the grassroots level, then, eventually, it will fail.

What are you talking about? Heard of the safeguard provisions of the WTO and the safeguards law in the Philippines?

The same laws that countries like Japan and the USA ignore by shoring up their agricultural sectors with extensive government subsidies? Subsidies that ensure that we will never be able to compete with other countries on equal footing. Yeah.

Why because of people like you. A local firm tries to localize production, you put them down. No wonder, local investors are discourage to put money in local production in this country.

Businessmen put money where money will work. Cry crab-mentality all you want, but even with a zillion people criticizing businessmen like Henry Sy and Lucio Tan, they still put their money into local businesses and make billions. But they do it by being smart. Knowing what to do themselves and what to outsource to other companies and other countries.

"Crab mentality" is over-rated. If nobody can make it work, it means it's inherently difficult, not because negative psychic energy is defeating them.

Im not pushing for a filipino designed car. Im pushing hopefully for a 100% locally build e-jeepney and eventually PUJs, AUVs and FX. Hopefully cars in the future.

It's a nice dream, but you have to take a realistic long-term view of the project.

I applaud what Romski's doing, but he's facing competition from foreign electric vehicles which benefit from economies of scale. See the buses at SM? Those start at merely 400-700k pesos. Bang-square in Romski's price range.

With support and volume, the e-Jeep can undercut the competition, but you're faced with the dilemma of battery life. The battery pack, which can cost anywhere between 60k pesos to 120k pesos, will only last two years under rigorous use. Consider that on wall current, it will take 8 hours to charge. Operators may need two packs to run all day.

That means an investment of another 60-200k pesos every other year for operators. No PUV operator wants that.

The only reason LPG is not common amongst jeepneys is because of the extra cost involved in converting the diesel engine to LPG. The LPG-injected diesel system, on the other hand, is still impractical... but for those with gasoline-powered AUVs, LPG is more than just viable... on LPG, those anemic, poorly designed old gassers actually make more power and use less fuel.

Who has income, a fracton of the Philippine population. How do you jumpstart the income of millions of Pinoys? Give them jobs by making them productive and buying local produce.

We probably missed our boat in terms of automotive industry development. Yes, Malaysia is doing it, but they have a huge internal market to drive Proton, yet it isn't on very firm footing. When Malaysia is forced to stop protecting its local auto industry by WTO and ASEAN free trade agreements, it'll be in big trouble.

As Manny Villar has said... and I agree with him... those Pinoys you employ won't be able to afford cars... what they reall need is motorcycles.

Look at all our neighbors... working populations liberated by personal transportation that's cheap and easy to own. Bicycles and motorcycles have given personal freedom and economic mobility to millions across Asia. The industrial powerhouses, India and China, both built on the backs of millions of two wheelers... Indonesia... Malaysia... even Japan and Taiwan...

Jeeps and trucks only help a small sector of the population in transport. A sector that's increasingly over-serviced... we actually have more tricycles, jeeps and buses on metropolitan roads than we need. Years ago, I had to stand three deep to get on a bus. Nowadays? I have to wait for hours at bus-stops for the bus to fill.

The challenge is to find a lower-cost alternative in rural areas which can't be serviced by jeepneys.

Hmmm...

And teachers work as maids overseas... PTs and Nurses work as caregivers there, or as service industry (fast food, restaurant, hotel, etcetera) blue collars here... we have a glut of college students and not enough jobs for all of them. Not really shocking news for anyone involved in the education profession, is it?

But you people who own cars and SUVs can stick with your LPG. Definitely it will work for you and suit your needs as private vehicle owners in terms of convenience and fuel economy.

I suppose that's why I'm always surrounded by a sea of taxis when I fill up my LPG tank.

But for public transport especially in the provinces and provincial cities...PHUV will do. perhaps a CNG or biodiesel fed jeepneys will do.Instead of those rickety suplus engine powered diesel engines that belches toxic emissions.

CNG conversions cost more than LPG. Storage and handling are trickier, and the weight of CNG tanks makes them impractical in anything smaller than a full-sized bus.

It's worth noting, that despite little to no government support, there are more LPG vehicles in the US than any other "alternative" vehicle. In fact, there are more LPG stations in the US than CNG, Hydrogen and Electric charging stations... and E85 stations... combined.

LPG is the cheapest alternative. It burns cleaner than gasoline or diesel. And if you build an LPG AUV with no gasoline carburetor, injectors or fuel tank, it will cost the same as a gasoline-only system, with less maintenance costs than either gas or diesel systems.

Of course, straight-vegetable-oil conversions are even cheaper... have the least effect on the environment... and are definitely cost effective, but you need a steady supply of waste-vegetable oil to run it. Surprising the government doesn't get behind that and instead wastes its time with hybrid manufacturer subsidies... (which they willingly give because they know no one will bite)

No. It is you who should get those blinders off your eyes and see also other solutions and directions other than your auto-lpg devlopment program mumbo jumbo.

GH is just being realistic. I don't agree with him completely, but many of his arguments are based on fact. Fact: Hydroelectric power hurts the environment... it causes habitat destruction upstream where the reservoir water rises... and it causes ecological damage downstream, as reservoir water is more prone to evaporation than flowing water... causing raised salinity levels, leading ecological devastation over time.

Fact: electric vehicles are very costly and are not yet a viable solution for a third-world country like ours. On paper, electric cars are the most fuel-efficient, but the up-front cost is staggering. If you think the 60-200k estimate is bad... switching to longer-lived lithium batteries will cost 500-700k pesos... and they still need changing every five years.

Fact: CNG doesn't work. Shell dropped it because they didn't see a return on investment in the refueling stations... because they had no subsidy. Same with the bus companies. CNG is used abroad for buses, but under government subsidy. Hybrids receive tons of tax breaks in the US, which helps boost their sales. But now that hybrids are coming of age on the secondhand market, the huge costs of the electric systems over time is becoming apparent. Electric vehicles will likely suffer the same fate... unless new battery systems are discovered within the next decade. Biofuels receive huge agricultural subsidies... and thus drive the cost of food even higher. There's hope in more efficient crops, but still...

The only alternative fuel that works without government support is LPG. That's been proven by statistics and hundreds of thousands of satisfied users worldwide.

Why should I justify your opinion without you even having a sampling of data to support your (lack of) observation?

I've been researching for the past year on an article on alternative energy that I've been trying to finish since last October.

Some of the numbers have changed, painting a brighter picture for some forms of biofuel. But electricity and hydrogen still make no economic or environmental sense, and LPG remains the best solution for any country without a hybrid or diesel subsidy.

I've also been watching the local automotive industry... and a successful locally made car is not yet in our immediate future. In fact, it's more likely that locally made motorcycles will prosper... and they're already doing so... because it's really motorcycles and bicycles we need to serve the needs of the masses at the moment... not jeeps.

I still wish the endeavor success. I'm just not sure it's viable with the electric system. I'd prefer to see a wastes-derived biodiesel system with a lightweight body. It might even be successful without government help.

There's pessimism and realism. I think you ought to learn to recognize which is which. I can tell when GH is being sarcastic and when he's being realistic...

So far in this thread... a little bit of both...

[niky]

It's also fun to compare....

from the Philippine Information Agency:

http://www.pia.gov.ph/?m=12&fi=p090403.htm&no=99

On auto-LPG, there are now 13,886 converted vehicles running on LPG and 165 auto LPG dispensing stations.

There are 19 CNG buses plying the Batangas, Laguna to Manila routes. A Libreng Sakay of CNG buses was held from March to April 2008 to promote this type of transport. The commercial operation of CNG mother station in Tabangao, Batangas and the daughter refilling station in Binan, Laguna in April 2008 jumpstarted the use of CNG in the transport sector.

Let's see:

Private sector... 13,886 vehicles (surely not a complete number... does not count "illegal" conversions and backyard conversions...), with 165 stations... meaning an increase of local investment of probably over a billion pesos and generating hundreds of jobs for conversion center workers and gasoline boys... oh... and saving PUV drivers and operators tens of thousands of pesos a year.

Government: 19 buses and 2 stations... Wow. They should've just spent the money on hydrogen. More useless, but not as embarrasing...

[ghosthunter]

Pencil pushing time:

GIVENS:

E-jeepney cost = P625,000
battery pack cost = 1/4 of vehicle cost = P156,250
charging time = 8 hours
charging life = 500 cycles
distance per charge = 65 km (120km maximum)
claimed operating time on a single charge = 6 to 8 hours
cost per full charge = P158
maximum speed = 40 kph

diesel jeepney = P700K to P800K

Typical jeepney operating average speed = 5 to 6 kph

Pricing sources:
http://www.manilatimes.net/national/...90310top7.html
http://tsikot.yehey.com/forums/showp...9&postcount=29

-----------------------------------

So the battery pack only last 500 cycles = 1.37 years.

Given the battery pack costs = P156,250.00

Computing average monthly cost = P9,504/month

-----------------------------------

And that is on top of the daily power cost of P158 = P4,740/month

-----------------------------------

So that is equivalent to a monthly overhead cost of = P14,244/month

Pushing that to annual cost = P14,244 x 12 months
= P170,928/year (the cost to operate the e-jeepney)

* note: this assumes no tires need replacing nor any other parts as well.

[ghosthunter]

Given:

P170,928/year (the cost to operate the e-jeepney)

Regular jeepney spends P500 per day on diesel.

Operates = 325 days a year

Annual fuel bill = P162,500/year for a regular jeepney.

------------------------------------------

Comparison of annual cost to operate:

E-jeepney = P170,928/year
Jeepney = P162,500/year

Where is the supposed savings on operating the e-jeepney?

[ghosthunter]

Pencil pushing time:

GIVENS:

E-jeepney cost = P625,000
battery pack cost = 1/4 of vehicle cost = P156,250
charging time = 8 hours
charging life = 500 cycles
distance per charge = 65 km (120km maximum)
claimed operating time on a single charge = 6 to 8 hours
cost per full charge = P158
maximum speed = 40 kph

diesel jeepney = P700K to P800K

Typical jeepney operating average speed = 5 to 6 kph

Pricing sources:
http://www.manilatimes.net/national/...90310top7.html
http://tsikot.yehey.com/forums/showp...9&postcount=29

-----------------------------------

So the battery pack only last 500 cycles = 1.37 years.

I find it amazing that in all the articles posted about the e-jeepney, the simply fact that the battery can only be recharged 500 times before replacement was forgotten or "overlooked" or simply ignored.

Whatever the reason, it means the e-jeepney must have it's batteries replaced every 1.5 years if it's to operate at all.

Another amazing fact that was so difficult to find anywhere was the cost of the batteries. Many people asked but somehow that question was never answered or even acknowledged. Anyway, it will be "interesting" day in the least to see how the current operators will handle the fact that they have to shell out PHP 156,000 for a new battery pack in a few more months.

[ghosthunter]

[SIZE="4"]*jpdm

Why are you reposting so many old pictures and old articles?

Are you trying to bury the posts of Niky of some reason?[/SIZE]

Note: I have moved those reposts into another thread which might be more appropriate for such old stuff which can be found here:
http://tsikot.yehey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38959

[kulotz]

I find it amazing that in all the articles posted about the e-jeepney, the simply fact that the battery can only be recharged 500 times before replacement was forgotten or "overlooked" or simply ignored.

Whatever the reason, it means the e-jeepney must have it's batteries replaced every 1.5 years if it's to operate at all.

Another amazing fact that was so difficult to find anywhere was the cost of the batteries. Many people asked but somehow that question was never answered or even acknowledged. Anyway, it will be "interesting" day in the least to see how the current operators will handle the fact that they have to shell out PHP 156,000 for a new battery pack in a few more months.

awwwtttss grabe ang presyo!

ot: nahilo ako sa arguments dito ah dameng quotes:P

maganda siguro kung makahanap sila ng way na ipamura yung batery o kaya patagalin ang replacement period?:P

[hein]

As long as e-jeepney uses the old-tech Lead Acid batteries to run, it will not be feasible. Short Range and Short Battery Life {500 Charging Cycles} will render it unworkable.

When they were planning the e-jeepney with these specs 2 years ago, I already knew that they will have problems with market acceptance.

Kulang talaga sa R & D ang project na ito. It was doomed to fail from the start.

[ghosthunter]

awwwtttss grabe ang presyo!

ot: nahilo ako sa arguments dito ah dameng quotes:P

maganda siguro kung makahanap sila ng way na ipamura yung batery o kaya patagalin ang replacement period?:P

Unfortunately deep-cycle are expensive, costing over P10K each.

And you can only use it for a number of cycles before it is "worn out". This doesn't even assumes the problem of over-discharging the battery which can shorten the battery's life.

It's a matter of chemistry. It is not something you can just decide on changing.

As long as e-jeepney uses the old-tech Lead Acid batteries to run, it will not be feasible. Short Range and Short Battery Effective life will render it unworkable.

When they were planning the e-jeepney with these specs, I already knew the problems they will face.

Kulang talaga sa R & D ang project na ito. It was doomed to fail from the start.

Not really as doomed as you would think.

Based on current fuel prices, it is not economically viable.

But if fuel prices would increase by ten percent or more and stay there, the e-jeepney can be economically viable assuming the cost of replacement batteries, cost of recharging etc do not increase as well.

As for it's range, for the purpose, it has enough range to do it's task. But definitely not something that can be used for private transport use.

As for "old-tech" batteries,... lead acid batteries would be the storage of choice because using better batteries like lithium-ion, etc would make the battery pack prohibitively expensive.

[jpdm]

Here are the specs of the e-phuv of PHUV, Inc.



Cost of operation:

[niky]

Unfortunately deep-cycle are expensive, costing over P10K each.

And you can only use it for a number of cycles before it is "worn out". This doesn't even assumes the problem of over-discharging the battery which can shorten the battery's life.

It's a matter of chemistry. It is not something you can just decide on changing.



Not really as doomed as you would think.

Based on current fuel prices, it is not economically viable.

But if fuel prices would increase by ten percent or more and stay there, the e-jeepney can be economically viable assuming the cost of replacement batteries, cost of recharging etc do not increase as well.

As for it's range, for the purpose, it has enough range to do it's task. But definitely not something that can be used for private transport use.

As for "old-tech" batteries,... lead acid batteries would be the storage of choice because using better batteries like lithium-ion, etc would make the battery pack prohibitively expensive.

Another problem is... China now seems to be making noise about preserving rare earths for internal use... which means that the high-tech batteries in more advanced hybrids and electrics will become even more expensive, not cheaper.



Here's an interesting one.

I actually think 5 km/l is very optimistic for our old jeeps. It's more like 4 km/l in traffic, due to all the stops and starts jeepneys do.

So... calculating from there...

65 kms - 4 km/l... 16.25 liters... or 0.25 liters per kilometer. At 29 pesos per liter... 7.25 pesos per kilometer. Add 1000 pesos for an oil change and filter change every 5000 kilometers... and that's 7.45 pesos per kilometer.

Diesel Jeepney total cost per kilometer: 7.45 pesos.

Not knowing current electric rates, I'll accept the 200 pesos at face value.

Electric cost: 3.076 pesos per kilometer

Consider the 500 cycle lifespan of the battery pack... and an estimated 65 kilometer range from each charge... you have an additional cost of 4.81 pesos per kilometer

Total cost (electric vehicle): 7.88 pesos per kilometer

-

This does not take into account the eventual overhaul of the jeepney engine, or the cost of tires. The jeepney, being heavier, will eat up its tires more and will require brake servicing more often.

But... the e-Jeepney has a lower capacity, at 14 persons versus the 20+ person capacity of the regular jeepney, thus, less revenue. And you will eventually need to service the electric motor somewhere down the line, anyway. Thus, the tire wear and other expendables will likely balance out in the end. And we are not taking into account the diminishing range after the battery has done a few hundred deep cycles. But since we don't know these figures, we'll leave them out.

The way to make the e-Jeepney work is to offer incentives for them or... to ban old-school diesel PUVs in certain city centers. By restricting inner city franchises to electrics, you can ease congestion and save fuel... since the e-Jeepney is more efficient at low speeds than the diesel jeepney is...

Another tactic is to use interchangeable battery packs and to actually reduce battery pack size... this saves weight and cost on the vehicles. The batteries will be leased/subsidized by the city government and drivers will be able to change them out easily at their end-point terminals. (considering the routes will only be 4-8 kms long... say... inside Makati)

This subsidy will not merely be for the service, but as an environmental bonus to the citizens in the area... reducing pollution... hell, our government subsidizes the MRT already (the MRT fare is artifically low by at least 50%)... why not something that will serve even more people?

Such a system would not be based on the boundary system. Drivers would be employees of the city, on a regular salary. This way, they'll also keep the average traffic speed high, contributing more to fuel savings.

-

But as a replacement for inter-town jeepney services? Still won't work, sadly. A 65 km range equals just three trips per day per vehicle, unless they spend an extra 156k pesos on a second battery pack... that will be difficult to load in a short amount of time... and that would still entail an additional cost of 300k pesos every two years.

And on inter-town trips, fuel economy of the regular jeepney actually goes up, due to long highway running... possibly hitting 6 km/l or so... bringing cost per kilometer down to 5 pesos for diesel jeeps. (this doesn't take into account newer diesel FB-style vans, which will cost less to run...)

-

Electrics will never really sell big. There's the problem with the cost of batteries, and the supply shortfall in terms of materials for more advanced batteries.

They will be limited to inner-subdivision services and city interior services with routes of not more than 4 kilometers... routes which will have hellishly high costs for internal combustion engines (short trips exact a huge fuel economy penalty, and will cause more wear and tear on the engine).

Unfortunately... the electrics have competition here from a new breed of motorcycle-based delivery and passenger vehicles... which are much, much cheaper. Still... there is a market for e-vehicles... but a small one.

For the "masa" and small-busines owners, who need vehicles that can deliver goods and commuters on routes of 10-20 kms or more, the LPG or waste-derived biodiesel solutions are still our best options for curbing pollution and easing the demand for foreign oil.

There's a critical point that has to be reached with waste-biodiesel first, though... a demand point that will enable the commercialization of straight-vegetable oil sales. It's not here, yet... but I'm hoping it will be, soon.

I actually urge romski and others to look into investments in smaller diesel powerplants, using veggie oil diesel... or even dedicated small LPG gas engines... as the cost of brand-new low-tech gasoline engines from the Japanese are a fraction of the cost of Japanese diesels (I remember we were talking about the reasons for using Chinese engines in the PhUV prototype before) ... running costs will be quite small, and by creating inner-city jeep services with smaller footprints (akin to the services at CCP... but hopefully wider, for more legroom), they will increase flexibility of these services, too.

[ghosthunter]

Here are the specs of the e-phuv of PHUV, Inc.



Cost of operation:

Be careful of overhyped advertisements in whatever form because they usually only tell you half of the story and hide the other half under somewhere hard to find.

[jpdm]

Be careful of overhyped advertisements in whatever form because they usually only tell you half of the story and hide the other half under somewhere hard to find.

IMHO, an evaluation from a "neutral" party/entity/group should be the basis if the advertisements are overhyped or not.

I guess PHUV, Inc., Greenpeace and the NGO GRIPP should be contacted to clarify questions about the e-jeepney.

I believe, PHUV, Inc. Greenpeace and GRIPP should also look for a respectable third party to come up with a credible evaluation of the performance of the e-jeepneys vis-a-vis other alternative fuels and engines.