Dark Side of Hybrid Vehicles

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by Jason, Jul 31, 2005.

  1. Jason

    Abeness Guest

    Maybe so. Out of curiosity, what would be your suggestion for an
    alternative power source for consumer vehicles?
     
    Abeness, Aug 2, 2005
    #41
  2. Jason

    dold Guest

    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=27&article_id=9489
    The hybrid portion is filled with diatribe and a few factoids.

    http://fareedzakaria.com/articles/newsweek/030705.html
     
    dold, Aug 2, 2005
    #42
  3. Jason

    dold Guest

    It was Fareed.
    http://fareedzakaria.com/articles/newsweek/030705.html
     
    dold, Aug 2, 2005
    #43
  4. Jason

    dold Guest

    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=27&article_id=9489
    The hybrid portion is filled with diatribe and a few factoids.
    Other than the negative spin that Yates is deliberately putting on it, I
    don't see any misstatements.

    The hybrid market is small. Yates cites the wonderful surveys from
    J.D.Powers. As a J.D.Powers member, I see that the surveys are all
    whatever the buyer of the survey wants them to be.

    He says all of the hybrids cost more to manufacture than the sales premium,
    and that manufacturers are losing money on them. Toyota says that's not
    true, but it has been questioned.

    The MPG goes down when you run the A/C. That is surprisingly true. The
    MPG drops a couple of miles per gallon with the load of A/C. It's a small
    percentage, that isn't noticed when your H2 is only getting 8mpg to begin
    with, but a 5% drop at 50mpg is noticeable. Plus the hybrid owners are
    paying attention. Brock is trying to ignore his mileage, A/C or not.

    http://fareedzakaria.com/articles/newsweek/030705.html
    Fareed's article is dismissed with an italicized "voila 500mpg!", knowing
    full well that it must be false. I doubt if he even read the article
    beyond the mention of methanol.

    It is a spin. 500mpg of Gasoline. But there are other components. And it
    is a speech that President Bush "could make tomorrow". It is not a
    statement that such a thing does exist, although he does explore it.

    "Here's the math (thanks to Gal Luft, a tireless <and independent> advocate
    of energy security). The current crop of hybrid cars get around 50 miles
    per gallon. Make it a plug-in and you can get 75 miles. Replace the
    conventional fuel tank with a flexible-fuel tank that can run on a
    combination of 15 percent petroleum and 85 percent ethanol or methanol, and
    you get between 400 and 500 miles per gallon of gasoline. (You don't get
    500 miles per gallon of fuel, but the crucial task is to lessen the use of
    petroleum. And ethanol and methanol are much cheaper than gasoline, so fuel
    costs would drop dramatically.) "

    The comment about ethanol and methanol being cheaper is dubious. I tend to
    agree with Brock on that one, unless the production becomes ubiquitous,
    reducing the transportation costs.


    I think plug-in hybrids are the way to go. My Ford Escape Hybrid would
    run the gas engine for the required few minutes every day, but would run
    electric-only every workday, plugging in to my home solar power system for
    recharging at night. The ICE would still be there for needed additional
    power, or for long trips. I could easily get 500mpg of gasoline with no
    other energy source but the sun. The upfront cost might be high, but I
    personally don't care about that. I will amortize today's purchase price
    over a period of many years to eliminate my need for foreign oil.
     
    dold, Aug 2, 2005
    #44
  5. Jason

    dold Guest

    Hmmm. Everybody's right.

    Tom Friedman, "As Toyota Goes"
    < http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/17/opinion/17friedman.html?ex=1276660800&en=da9affdfc40683db&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss >

    Fareed Zakaria, " Imagine: 500 Miles Per Gallon "
    http://fareedzakaria.com/articles/newsweek/030705.html

    and they are both acknowledge the work by Gal Luft as their source.
    http://www.setamericafree.org/news.htm
     
    dold, Aug 2, 2005
    #45
  6. Jason

    Jason Guest

    Hello,
    I disagree. The so called "greenies" love the word "hybrid" since they
    love to tell their friends and almost anyone else that they talk to that
    they have a "hybrid". They also like it when fellow greenies see the word
    "hybrid" on the back of their cars." It's not the actual word that they
    love--it's the thought behind the word. An example is the word "diamond".
    It's the thought behind the word that is important when it comes to
    "hybrid" or "diamond".
    Jason
     
    Jason, Aug 2, 2005
    #46
  7. Jason

    jmattis Guest

    You forgot to mention, he's also a lawyer.
     
    jmattis, Aug 2, 2005
    #47
  8. Jason

    Dave Guest


    I stand corrected. Friedman also wrote a column on this
    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/17/opinion/17friedman.
    html?
    ex=1276660800&en=da9affdfc40683db&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=
    rss

    But it looks like Zakaria's was first.
     
    Dave, Aug 3, 2005
    #48
  9. Jason

    Dave Guest

    Yup. And you had a good summary of Yates' biased spin (to be
    honest, Friedman and Zakaria have their own biases). Yates' plays
    the crochety, libertarian boor. F & Z in their liberal bent do not
    completely disclose the other primary energy sources (including
    fossil fuel) consumed in their "500 mpg" soundbite. Though one may
    argue that at least the majority of those other energy sources do
    not necessarily have to be imported.
     
    Dave, Aug 3, 2005
    #49
  10. Jason

    jim beam Guest

    it's not necessary or practical to go to a wholly alternative fuel
    model. but i'd go pure electric /if/ the power source was nuclear or
    wind/solar/geothermal, etc. but that would only be practical for local
    commute traffic affording known recharge schedules. the current
    electric car model [such as it is] is not so great because burning
    fossil fuels to generate electricity that charges batteries is only
    marginally more efficient than burning the fuel in the car.

    i'd also consider fuel cells. better conversion efficiency, and the
    fuel supply system is already in place.

    imo, the best most practical solution that meets the needs of urban,
    suburban and country dwellers is to encourage the use of smaller more
    efficient vehicles, strongly discourage the use of ridiculous gas
    guzzlers, and actually deploy known technology that increases
    thermodynamic efficiency. and all the folk that drive huge vehicles
    because they "need" them should go to europe for a few minutes to get
    some perspective. in europe, vehicles are smaller, substantially more
    efficient and do exactly the same job as the giant stuff we have here.
    tradesmen still haul their tools & supplies without gigantic trucks.
    soccer moms still drive their kids around without the gigantic suburban.
    delivery trucks still carry the same payload with half the engine
    size. last time i looked, the average american household consumed
    /double/ the energy per unit compared with the next highest consumer
    country. that's not because we're an impoverished techno-desert that
    doesn't know any better, it's because we just don't put this stuff on
    the agenda. if we got our act together, we'd be able to design, build &
    sell this stuff around the globe and make a huge fortune, but hey.
     
    jim beam, Aug 3, 2005
    #50
  11. Jason

    Dave Guest

    Jim, overall you make some good points. And I do agree that we
    should be working on the 10-20-30% improvements that can be had by
    conservation, downsizing, hybridizing, etc. But that still puts out
    a lot of CO2 and consumes lots of gasoline. So I think it slows
    down the looming crisis (if you subscribe to the evidence), but
    doesn't halt them.
    Gasoline-based fuel cell research has been all-but abandoned. I
    could go into the issues, but they are numerous. Hydrogen fuel
    cells are what all the auto companies are spending their R&D
    effort on, to the tune of over $1B. Note that is corporate
    money, not tax payer (though the DOE budget over the next 5
    years is slated at a combined $1.7B or so). Direct methanol may
    have small portable application. Large stationary may be natural
    gas based.

    Link:
    http://www.eere.energy.
    gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/committee_report.pdf
     
    Dave, Aug 3, 2005
    #51
  12. I would stay away from hybrids. Saw one die in the middle of traffic - no
    power and creating massive backups.<<

    Yessiree. YOU saw one die, so we should all stay away from them. No other
    kind of car has ever died in the middle of traffic, with no power and
    creating massive backups...just hybrids.

    Thanks for today's Usenet entertainment.
     
    Sid Schweiger, Aug 3, 2005
    #52
  13. I don't have the source of the picture/caption I have (probably from
    something like Popular Science), but the sucker is complete with a large
    steering wheel (yes, a steering wheel), lots of analog gauges covering a
    whole wall (yes, gauges!), and a maybe 18" teletype tractor feed printer.
    It's also got a large TV mounted high on a wall.<<

    BZZZZZZT! Wrong...but thanks for playing.

    http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/computer.asp
     
    Sid Schweiger, Aug 3, 2005
    #53
  14. Jason

    jim beam Guest

    true, but from what i can see, a complete cessation of co2 production is
    unnecessary. parallel that with things like addressing deforestation
    and erosion, things that harm natural co2 absorbtion, and we have a more
    sustainable system.
    when federal tax benefits & grants stopped, yes. what are the technical
    problems? you're probably going to have a butane fuel cell in your
    laptop before long.
    because that's where the federal tax credits are. doesn't mean the
    decision to subsidize hydrogen research is based on good science.
    but again, that is eligible for 100% write-off is it not? whether the
    subsidy comes from a direct payout or from 100% write-off, doesn't it
    amount to the same thing?
    sure, hydrogen fuel cells work, and the by-product is water, but let's
    address the practical reality: hydrogen is, per kilogram, not as energy
    dense as gasoline, and somewhat more hazardous in both transportation &
    storage. what use is hydrogen if you can't safely transport or store
    it? the space shuttle, which uses liquid hydrogen, has to be fueled as
    closely as possible before launch to reduce risk & losses.
     
    jim beam, Aug 3, 2005
    #54
  15. OK I read it. Reminds me of why I usually skip Yates' editorials.

    Other than raising the red herring of battery disposal and drawing
    meaningless comparisons to electric cars, the "dark side" is entirely
    based on the well known and widely reported fact that these vehicles
    will not pay for themselves in fuel savings. According to Wards'
    analysis, gas would have to be $10/gal for a Prius to pay for it's
    higher cost compared to a Corolla.

    So what? Why must a hybrid be justified only on economic grounds?
    Why compare a Prius with a Corolla? Why not compare an Insight with a
    Corvette? Both have similar passenger and luggage capacity. In many,
    perhaps most circumstances the Insight will even be as fast as the
    Corvette. So how long will it take for the much more expensive
    Corvette to pay for itself?

    For now at least, hybrid buyers are not buying based on economics any
    more than Corvette buyers are. They like high milage bragging rights,
    environmental conservation and the message their car sends. However,
    to move into the mainstream, the cars will have to make economic
    sense. Economies of scale should bring down the cost. Or gas may go
    to $10.

    Hydrogen is a pipe dream. It might be a reality some day but we are
    going to conserve our oil if we are going to make it there.
     
    Gordon McGrew, Aug 3, 2005
    #55
  16. Well it may be a matter of semantics but the way I see it, they are
    bragging the technology and benefits of the hybrid, not the word
    itself. I think most of them understand the technology reasonably
    well. It would be a different story if they had no real clue what
    'hybrid' meant, or if hybrid technology didn't really do anything.
    Think Fahrfurnugen or Cab-Forward design. Got a Hemi in that thing?
     
    Gordon McGrew, Aug 3, 2005
    #56
  17. Thanks for the summaries. The 500 mpg of gasoline is a little
    contrived in that one could easily run the car on 100% methanol and no
    gasoline at all. The only problem is that recent analysis indicates
    that these bio fuels consume more fossil fuel than they replace.

    The plug-in hybrid is a good idea and will hasten the arrival of the
    day when hybrids do make economic sense.
     
    Gordon McGrew, Aug 3, 2005
    #57
  18. Jason

    SoCalMike Guest

    youd think burning the fuel directly in the car would be the most efficient
     
    SoCalMike, Aug 3, 2005
    #58
  19. Jason

    jim beam Guest

    not thermodynamically. or at least, not currently. formula 1 engines
    are pretty good because they run at real high combustion temps, the key
    to best yield, but to do that reliably for the mileage of the average
    family sedan requires expensive and/or different materials. i recall
    reading some stuff on ceramics in diesel engines, and they allowed both
    higher combustion temperature [with accompanying increase in efficiency]
    and a significant increase in service life. but as you may imagine,
    manufacturers did not show any interest in the last of these two. and
    to be fair, production cost at that time was very high. but if they had
    production runs in the millions, that situation would change pretty quick...
     
    jim beam, Aug 3, 2005
    #59
  20. Who, Nate Fisher?
     
    Sparky Spartacus, Aug 3, 2005
    #60
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.