MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527786716 · doi:10.4271/2001-01-3738

An Environmental-Economic Evaluation of Hybrid Electric and Other Advanced Vehicles

2001· article· en· W1527786716 on OpenAlexaff
Lester B. Lave, Heather L. MacLean

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersArgonne National LaboratoryU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) and other advanced propulsion technologies offer greater fuel economy and lower pollutant and tailpipe emissions. Some experts regard the HEV technology as a practical, attractive solution to social concerns about fuel economy (and related fossil fuel conservation) and vehicle emissions. [Maples 98] The technology is practical; however, an HEV is more expensive to produce than a conventional internal combustion engine (ICE). In a world of limited resources and many petroleum users and emissions sources, the policy question is whether the best use of resources is to build HEV, to improve the fuel economy and lower emissions from other sources, or to devote the resources to other environmental projects. We compare the second generation (designed for the United States) Toyota Prius, to the conventional internal combustion engine Toyota Corolla. We examine both private (vehicle purchase price, maintenance, and fuel) and social (the pollutant [non-methane organic gases, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides] and carbon dioxide emissions) costs. For each of the vehicles, we evaluate lifetime vehicle exhaust emissions as well as upstream emissions from producing the fuel. We find that the second generation Prius is still not cost-effective in improving fuel-economy and lowering emissions. For the Prius to be attractive to U.S. consumers, the price of gasoline would have to be more than three times greater than the present level. To be attractive to regulators, the social value of abating tailpipe emissions would have to be 14 times greater than conventional values. Alternatively, the value of abating greenhouse gas emissions would have to be at least $220 per ton. We judge that any HEV would have a difficult time competing with the Corolla because of the Corolla's already high fuel economy and low pollutant emissions. We also examine the costs and benefits of making a GM Silverado pickup truck into a gasoline hybrid. Like the analysis of the Prius, we again find that the price of gasoline or social value of abating carbon dioxide would have to be higher than the base case values in order to payback the cost of converting the vehicle to an HEV. Finally, we find that at current gasoline prices and carbon dioxide valuation, a conventional vehicle would need to have a fuel economy of 13 mpg or less in order for a $4,000 cost of converting it to an HEV to get 30% better fuel economy would pay off. We conclude that HEV will not have significant sales unless fuel prices rise several-fold or unless regulators mandate them.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207