Jonn Axsen

Interpersonal Influence within Car Buyers' Social Networks: Applying Five Perspectives to Plug-in Hybrid Vehicle Drivers

Although interpersonal influence is thought to play in important role in proenvironmental consumption behavior, mechanisms of influence are not well understood. Through literature review, we identify five theoretical perspectives on interpersonal influence: contagion, conformity, dissemination, translation, and reflexivity. We apply these perspectives to car buyer perceptions of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), a technology with attributes that can be perceived as functional, symbolic, private, and societal. The context is a PHEV demonstration project in which 275 interpersonal interactions were elicited from interviews with 40 individuals in 11 different social networks in northern California. Results demonstrate how perspectives shape research findings. Contagion, conformity, and dissemination provide useful concepts regarding perceptions of functional, symbolic and societal PHEV attributes, respectively. However, translation and reflexivity provide language and theoretical depth to describe observed perceptions and motives, while also addressing dynamics in these perceptions and in consumer values. Utilizing these differing perspectives facilitated observation that participants are more amenable to developing new, prosocietal interpretations of PHEVs if they: (i) easily form a basic functional understanding of PHEV technology, (ii) are in a transitional state in their lifestyle practices, and (iii) find supportive prosocietal values within their social network. Results demonstrate the importance of integrating complementary research perspectives to better understand consumer valuation of technologies with environmental benefits.

Early U.S. Market for Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Anticipating Consumer Recharge Potential and Design Priorities

Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) are proposed as both a near-term technology to achieve energy and environmental goals and as a transitional step toward viable all-electric vehicles. To replace assumptions with observations of potential PHEV drivers’ behavior in market and impact analyses, an Internet-based survey of 2,373 new-car–buying households in the United States was conducted. The instrument required households to answer questions, complete a driving and parking diary, and then complete several PHEV design exercises. Three conclusions could be drawn from the resulting data. First, at least half of the target population is already equipped for at-home vehicle recharging but has little opportunity for recharging at the workplace or other locations. Second, the study found that the respondents had widely varied interests in four possible PHEV attributes: fuel economy (in both charge-depleting and charge-sustaining operations), blended versus all-electric operation, the distance over which the vehicle is in the charge-depleting mode, and the recharging speed. Nevertheless, the appeal of increased fuel economy appears to be the highest and that of faster recharging appears to be the lowest. Furthermore, there is little interest in all-electric operation. Third, given the previous two points, it was estimated that about a third of the target population has both the infrastructure to recharge a PHEV and interest in a vehicle with plug-in capabilities. Policy, technology, and energy providers may use this information to understand whether their plans, designs, and goals align with these present understandings or whether it would be collectively beneficial to foster new understandings of PHEVs among U.S. car buyers.

An interdisciplinary assessment of climate engineering strategies

Mitigating further anthropogenic changes to the global climate will require reducing greenhouse-gas emissions ( abatement ), or else removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and/or diminishing solar input ( climate engineering ). Here, we develop and apply criteria to measure technical, economic, ecological, institutional, and ethical dimensions of, and public acceptance for, climate engineering strategies; provide a relative rating for each dimension; and offer a new interdisciplinary framework for comparing abatement and climate engineering options. While abatement remains the most desirable policy, certain climate engineering strategies, including forest and soil management for carbon sequestration, merit broad-scale application. Other proposed strategies, such as biochar production and geological carbon capture and storage, are rated somewhat lower, but deserve further research and development. Iron fertilization of the oceans and solar radiation management, although cost-effective, received the lowest ratings on most criteria. We conclude that although abatement should remain the central climate-change response, some low-risk, cost-effective climate engineering approaches should be applied as complements. The framework presented here aims to guide and prioritize further research and analysis, leading to improvements in climate engineering strategies.

Batteries for PHEVs: Comparing Goals and the State of Technology

Publisher Summary This chapter focuses on the state of development of batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). The battery plays a crucial role in the PHEV architecture by storing energy from the electrical grid and from the gasoline engine, through a generator, as well as passing energy back and forth with the electric motor to maximize efficiency. The commercial success of the PHEV depends on the development of appropriate battery technologies and there is much uncertainty about the requirements of a battery required for a successful PHEV and where the present battery technologies stand in meeting such requirements. The basic design concepts of PHEVs are discussed and the three sets of influential technical battery goals are compared. The inherent trade-offs in PHEV battery design are also explained and the current state of several battery chemistries along with the comparison of their abilities to meet PHEV goals and their potential trajectories for further improvement are also presented. PHEV battery goals may vary according to differing assumptions of PHEV design, performance, use patterns, and consumer demand and the battery development is still constrained by inherent trade-offs among five main battery attributes such as power, energy, longevity, safety, and cost. The findings suggest that lithium–ion (Li–ion) battery designs are better suited to meet the demands of more aggressive PHEV goals than nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, which are currently used for HEVs. The flexible nature of Li–ion technology, as well as concerns over safety, has also prompted several alternate paths of continued technological development.This chapter focuses on the state of development of batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). The battery plays a crucial role in the PHEV architecture by storing energy from the electrical grid and from the gasoline engine, through a generator, as well as passing energy back and forth with the electric motor to maximize efficiency. The commercial success of the PHEV depends on the development of appropriate battery technologies and there is much uncertainty about the requirements of a battery required for a successful PHEV and where the present battery technologies stand in meeting such requirements. The basic design concepts of PHEVs are discussed and the three sets of influential technical battery goals are compared. The inherent trade-offs in PHEV battery design are also explained and the current state of several battery chemistries along with the comparison of their abilities to meet PHEV goals and their potential trajectories for further improvement are also presented. PHEV battery goals may vary according to differing assumptions of PHEV design, performance, use patterns, and consumer demand and the battery development is still constrained by inherent trade-offs among five main battery attributes such as power, energy, longevity, safety, and cost. The findings suggest that lithium–ion (Li–ion) battery designs are better suited to meet the demands of more aggressive PHEV goals than nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, which are currently used for HEVs. The flexible nature of Li–ion technology, as well as concerns over safety, has also prompted several alternate paths of continued technological development.

Batteries for PHEVs

Publisher Summary This chapter focuses on the state of development of batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). The battery plays a crucial role in the PHEV architecture by storing energy from the electrical grid and from the gasoline engine, through a generator, as well as passing energy back and forth with the electric motor to maximize efficiency. The commercial success of the PHEV depends on the development of appropriate battery technologies and there is much uncertainty about the requirements of a battery required for a successful PHEV and where the present battery technologies stand in meeting such requirements. The basic design concepts of PHEVs are discussed and the three sets of influential technical battery goals are compared. The inherent trade-offs in PHEV battery design are also explained and the current state of several battery chemistries along with the comparison of their abilities to meet PHEV goals and their potential trajectories for further improvement are also presented. PHEV battery goals may vary according to differing assumptions of PHEV design, performance, use patterns, and consumer demand and the battery development is still constrained by inherent trade-offs among five main battery attributes such as power, energy, longevity, safety, and cost. The findings suggest that lithium–ion (Li–ion) battery designs are better suited to meet the demands of more aggressive PHEV goals than nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, which are currently used for HEVs. The flexible nature of Li–ion technology, as well as concerns over safety, has also prompted several alternate paths of continued technological development.This chapter focuses on the state of development of batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). The battery plays a crucial role in the PHEV architecture by storing energy from the electrical grid and from the gasoline engine, through a generator, as well as passing energy back and forth with the electric motor to maximize efficiency. The commercial success of the PHEV depends on the development of appropriate battery technologies and there is much uncertainty about the requirements of a battery required for a successful PHEV and where the present battery technologies stand in meeting such requirements. The basic design concepts of PHEVs are discussed and the three sets of influential technical battery goals are compared. The inherent trade-offs in PHEV battery design are also explained and the current state of several battery chemistries along with the comparison of their abilities to meet PHEV goals and their potential trajectories for further improvement are also presented. PHEV battery goals may vary according to differing assumptions of PHEV design, performance, use patterns, and consumer demand and the battery development is still constrained by inherent trade-offs among five main battery attributes such as power, energy, longevity, safety, and cost. The findings suggest that lithium–ion (Li–ion) battery designs are better suited to meet the demands of more aggressive PHEV goals than nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, which are currently used for HEVs. The flexible nature of Li–ion technology, as well as concerns over safety, has also prompted several alternate paths of continued technological development.

CHAPTER SIXTEEN – Batteries for PHEVs: Comparing Goals and the State of Technology

Publisher Summary This chapter focuses on the state of development of batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). The battery plays a crucial role in the PHEV architecture by storing energy from the electrical grid and from the gasoline engine, through a generator, as well as passing energy back and forth with the electric motor to maximize efficiency. The commercial success of the PHEV depends on the development of appropriate battery technologies and there is much uncertainty about the requirements of a battery required for a successful PHEV and where the present battery technologies stand in meeting such requirements. The basic design concepts of PHEVs are discussed and the three sets of influential technical battery goals are compared. The inherent trade-offs in PHEV battery design are also explained and the current state of several battery chemistries along with the comparison of their abilities to meet PHEV goals and their potential trajectories for further improvement are also presented. PHEV battery goals may vary according to differing assumptions of PHEV design, performance, use patterns, and consumer demand and the battery development is still constrained by inherent trade-offs among five main battery attributes such as power, energy, longevity, safety, and cost. The findings suggest that lithium–ion (Li–ion) battery designs are better suited to meet the demands of more aggressive PHEV goals than nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, which are currently used for HEVs. The flexible nature of Li–ion technology, as well as concerns over safety, has also prompted several alternate paths of continued technological development.This chapter focuses on the state of development of batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). The battery plays a crucial role in the PHEV architecture by storing energy from the electrical grid and from the gasoline engine, through a generator, as well as passing energy back and forth with the electric motor to maximize efficiency. The commercial success of the PHEV depends on the development of appropriate battery technologies and there is much uncertainty about the requirements of a battery required for a successful PHEV and where the present battery technologies stand in meeting such requirements. The basic design concepts of PHEVs are discussed and the three sets of influential technical battery goals are compared. The inherent trade-offs in PHEV battery design are also explained and the current state of several battery chemistries along with the comparison of their abilities to meet PHEV goals and their potential trajectories for further improvement are also presented. PHEV battery goals may vary according to differing assumptions of PHEV design, performance, use patterns, and consumer demand and the battery development is still constrained by inherent trade-offs among five main battery attributes such as power, energy, longevity, safety, and cost. The findings suggest that lithium–ion (Li–ion) battery designs are better suited to meet the demands of more aggressive PHEV goals than nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, which are currently used for HEVs. The flexible nature of Li–ion technology, as well as concerns over safety, has also prompted several alternate paths of continued technological development.