Hybrids: Do they make economic sense?
#26
My question is .....
What is the REAL environmetal cost?
If I buy a 100% electric car that I plug into the wall every night and save some emissions from my tail pipe.....what is the generating plant actually doing to the environment to produce the electricty that I'm using.
Is there really, really, really an improvement in the environment?
What is the REAL environmetal cost?
If I buy a 100% electric car that I plug into the wall every night and save some emissions from my tail pipe.....what is the generating plant actually doing to the environment to produce the electricty that I'm using.
Is there really, really, really an improvement in the environment?
#28
Voo, that's a good question pertaining to all-electric cars. It's not an issue with current hybrids, though. Unless we really get our act together with clean electricity generation, I doubt that fully electric cars are going to factor very heavily in our transportation future. It doesn't make a lot of sense to burn coal to power electric cars to save gasoline.
_________________
"In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane." -Oscar Wilde
_________________
"In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane." -Oscar Wilde
#29
>>>>Joe.....hydrogen doesn't just happen...it needs to be extracted....it takes energy to do that......guess what the hot set up is? Using diesel to generate hydrogen... <<
>>
>>Seriously? So what's the big deal with hydrogen being one of the supposed premier energy sources of the future, then? Does the energy output of the hydrogen dwarf that of the diesel that's needed? Is it just that diesel is still cheap enough for that to be the preferred method? Interesting.
The big deal is this: Eventually we will be out of fossil fuels. It is that simple. There is only so much of the stuff, and when it gone, it's gone.
Hydrogen makes the most sense as a power source for automobiles. The reaction process that fuel cells use to produce electricity is zero emission, and sustainable indefinitely. You break down water to produce hydrogen. The by product of using hydrogen to create electricity is water. Clean, pure water.
Sure, right now, we can use fossil fuels to make the electricity needed to power the conversion process. But Iceland is not using any fossil fuels to create their hydrogen at the pump mentioned earlier. Most of the energy they use comes from geothermal sources powering steam generators. So their hydrogen is green from the start - no hydrocarbons are used at all.
If we don't work on hydrogen, and other renewable alternative motive power sources, one day in the not too distant future, we're all going to wake up and not be able to go anywhere.
-joe
>>
>>Seriously? So what's the big deal with hydrogen being one of the supposed premier energy sources of the future, then? Does the energy output of the hydrogen dwarf that of the diesel that's needed? Is it just that diesel is still cheap enough for that to be the preferred method? Interesting.
The big deal is this: Eventually we will be out of fossil fuels. It is that simple. There is only so much of the stuff, and when it gone, it's gone.
Hydrogen makes the most sense as a power source for automobiles. The reaction process that fuel cells use to produce electricity is zero emission, and sustainable indefinitely. You break down water to produce hydrogen. The by product of using hydrogen to create electricity is water. Clean, pure water.
Sure, right now, we can use fossil fuels to make the electricity needed to power the conversion process. But Iceland is not using any fossil fuels to create their hydrogen at the pump mentioned earlier. Most of the energy they use comes from geothermal sources powering steam generators. So their hydrogen is green from the start - no hydrocarbons are used at all.
If we don't work on hydrogen, and other renewable alternative motive power sources, one day in the not too distant future, we're all going to wake up and not be able to go anywhere.
-joe
#30
#31
#32
>>My question is .....
>>
>>What is the REAL environmetal cost?
>>
>>If I buy a 100% electric car that I plug into the wall every night and save some emissions from my tail pipe.....what is the generating plant actually doing to the environment to produce the electricty that I'm using.
>>
>>Is there really, really, really an improvement in the environment?
Just as there is unwanted by products of generating electricity, there's also many unwanted by products of pumping the oil from the ground, shipping it to the refinery, refining it into gasoline, then shipping it to distribution points, then pumping it into your car.
I was just talking to a friend a few weeks back and we had a discussion about this. The only way we can tell which one is more environmentally friendly, would be to have all of the facts and data points. Then come up with a pollutant particulates per mile (pp/m) ratio to determine the overall winner.
>>
>>What is the REAL environmetal cost?
>>
>>If I buy a 100% electric car that I plug into the wall every night and save some emissions from my tail pipe.....what is the generating plant actually doing to the environment to produce the electricty that I'm using.
>>
>>Is there really, really, really an improvement in the environment?
Just as there is unwanted by products of generating electricity, there's also many unwanted by products of pumping the oil from the ground, shipping it to the refinery, refining it into gasoline, then shipping it to distribution points, then pumping it into your car.
I was just talking to a friend a few weeks back and we had a discussion about this. The only way we can tell which one is more environmentally friendly, would be to have all of the facts and data points. Then come up with a pollutant particulates per mile (pp/m) ratio to determine the overall winner.
#33
They have also come along way from the earlier fuel cells, which were gigantic monstrosities taking up the entire space in the back of a panel van. Whne the technology advances sufficiently that fuel cells become small enough, you could see two sets of fuel cells in a vehicle. One set turning hydrogen into water, producing power for the electric motive power, while the other turns the water back into hydrogen for the fuel - using left over electricity from the motive side for power.
Basically all you need to produce hydrogen is a backward fuel cell. The reaction process reverses, turning H2O back to H, but using power, instead of producing it.
Whenever a new technology goes into mass production, it becomes cheaper, better, and smaller.
-joe
Basically all you need to produce hydrogen is a backward fuel cell. The reaction process reverses, turning H2O back to H, but using power, instead of producing it.
Whenever a new technology goes into mass production, it becomes cheaper, better, and smaller.
-joe
#34
At the heart of the deal, clean energy has to come from a renewable, clean source.
The world was once powered by wind alone...it just is not reliable enough. Same can be said of solar, and advances in battery design will have to be quantum before we can go there reliably. Energy is a VERY tough nut to crack because even the ultimate (nuclear fusion) is fraught with danger....having said that, the only thing that allows us to live is a little ole nuclear fusion generator called the SUN.......maybe humanity needs to get real, realize that the ultimate is fusion and so we might as well get on with it....the rest is like ole Dilbert says....."wasted time by time wasting morons..."
The world was once powered by wind alone...it just is not reliable enough. Same can be said of solar, and advances in battery design will have to be quantum before we can go there reliably. Energy is a VERY tough nut to crack because even the ultimate (nuclear fusion) is fraught with danger....having said that, the only thing that allows us to live is a little ole nuclear fusion generator called the SUN.......maybe humanity needs to get real, realize that the ultimate is fusion and so we might as well get on with it....the rest is like ole Dilbert says....."wasted time by time wasting morons..."
#35
>>My father-in-law just bought a Prius. He hasn't a clue how it works (although his "explanations" are truly comic gems...he was telling me last week that the car gets 65 mpg and operates off something sort of like a fuel cell).
_____________
He's probably thinking like this: 32.5 mpg going and 32.5 mpg returning. That makes it 65 mpg
But I disagree with you about the Prius being the ugliest, etc.. The new Prius looks better than the old model. Compare with the Pontiac Aztek or Toyota Echo or Kia whatchamacallit.
My friend, who drives a Ford F-250 diesel had 350,000 miles on the engine before he had to do major work. I believe a new transmission.
#38
#41
#42
I'd go diesel if I were really concerned about fuel economy. A diesel is much easier to work on (read cheaper), will likely be more reliable when the miles pile on, no battery replacement to worrry about (ok, well the main car battery which is what, $70 to get replaced, vs hundreds (thousands?)...
True, diesel is dirtier out of the tail-pipe. But it also takes less energy and inputs to refine, you have to distribute it less (because you consume less than comparable gas). In comparisons with hybrids, you do not have to deal with battery pack replacements. Even tho battery recycling and manufacturing is much cleaner than before, it still isn't a clean process all-told.
Plus a diesel is quicker all around than a hybrid. A trip in the fall with three guys in a 2003 Golf TDI, luggage and running about 80MPH from Detroit to Chicago yielded an average of 44MPG. Same trip back at night (no A/C, strong tail-wind) yielded 47MPG... In perspective, my friend drove from Cleveland, OH to Chicago in his 2004 Prius, going a little slower, and averaged 47MPG. This was only carrying 2 people in the sping (no A/C).
The Golf Mk V with it's improved TDI engine, 6 speed manual, and slightly lower drag coefficent should improve that figure slightly as well...
At the moment, I walk to work and the gym, if gas hit's $5 a gallon, maybe the grocery store too! Tho I'd have to cut back on my weekend trips to the city
Perhaps if the Prius actually got the 58ish MPG as it's advertised on the highway, it'd seem more attractive...
True, diesel is dirtier out of the tail-pipe. But it also takes less energy and inputs to refine, you have to distribute it less (because you consume less than comparable gas). In comparisons with hybrids, you do not have to deal with battery pack replacements. Even tho battery recycling and manufacturing is much cleaner than before, it still isn't a clean process all-told.
Plus a diesel is quicker all around than a hybrid. A trip in the fall with three guys in a 2003 Golf TDI, luggage and running about 80MPH from Detroit to Chicago yielded an average of 44MPG. Same trip back at night (no A/C, strong tail-wind) yielded 47MPG... In perspective, my friend drove from Cleveland, OH to Chicago in his 2004 Prius, going a little slower, and averaged 47MPG. This was only carrying 2 people in the sping (no A/C).
The Golf Mk V with it's improved TDI engine, 6 speed manual, and slightly lower drag coefficent should improve that figure slightly as well...
At the moment, I walk to work and the gym, if gas hit's $5 a gallon, maybe the grocery store too! Tho I'd have to cut back on my weekend trips to the city
Perhaps if the Prius actually got the 58ish MPG as it's advertised on the highway, it'd seem more attractive...
#44
I rented a Peugeot 307 this morning here in London. 5500 RPM red line! Other than a different kind of growl when you hammer it, from inside you cannot tell it is a diesel. Have not top speed tested it yet, but i will be here a week so, i am sure i will do do.....in the meantime, cruising at 90 MPH on the M-25 is a breeze......:smile:
#45
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post