Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
England Is Grinding To A Halt.
Deozaan:
Sure, we have the Prius, but it's mostly a gimmick. They put that out there for the people who make an extra effort to save the environment.-superboyac (March 11, 2011, 01:12 PM)
--- End quote ---
Don't you mean it's for people that want to make a show of pretending to save the environment?
-Stoic Joker (March 11, 2011, 01:18 PM)
--- End quote ---
I've never even heard of them before, but at 70+ miles per gallon according to wikipedia, and petrol being about 6 euro per gallon here, I'd be willing to make some sacrafices (are they really that slow to take off though lol)
-tomos (March 11, 2011, 02:25 PM)
--- End quote ---
Don't forget to calculate how much extra they charge you for the "Hybrid" technology into your "savings" plan.
Last I heard, the "Hybrid" model Prius costs something like $10,000 more than the non-hybrid model Prius. Do you think you'll save $10,000 in gasoline over the lifetime of the vehicle? Things like that make Stoic Joker right when he says people are just pretending to save the environment.
Also, Electric Cars save the environment in much the same way that buying your meat at the grocery store saves animals. Isn't one of the major environmental problems with coal power? How are you going to afford to charge your car when electricity rates skyrocket due to environmental laws limiting carbon dioxide emissions?
In the eyes of environmentalists, electricity (since the vast majority of it comes from coal) is just as much the enemy as oil.
Stoic Joker:
Don't forget to calculate how much extra they charge you for the "Hybrid" technology into your "savings" plan.
Last I heard, the "Hybrid" model Prius costs something like $10,000 more than the non-hybrid model Prius. Do you think you'll save $10,000 in gasoline over the lifetime of the vehicle? Things like that make Stoic Joker right when he says people are just pretending to save the environment.-Deozaan (March 11, 2011, 03:58 PM)
--- End quote ---
Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Give That Man A Prize! A few years back when the prices spiked, people were flocking to dealerships begging for an "Eco-tastic" vehicle (Prius). Problem was they were all jumping out of existing car loans and going radically upside down with a spiked interest rate (because of the banks "risk") to boot. An economist on the news said that with that kind of buy-in, they'd have to drive the car for 20-30 years just to break even!
I've got a Dodge Dakota RT with a 5.9L (360ci) V8 (oh hell yeah it's fast). It'll be paid off in a few months...and I'm keeping it.
Shades:
If you live near a harbor where cargo ships dock, forget about doing anything against pollution by legally reducing emissions in cars/trucks/buses. The engines of these ships run on the garbage of garbage from (any part of) the oil industry...and whenever "they" get the chance they mix it up with other dangerous materials to get rid of those as well.
See the link to this Dutch website (including video) that shows what happens with the fuel of those ships, even in a country that is quite strict on international regulations. The translated text from the site already will explains already a lot of it.
JavaJones:
Stoic, looks like a different test. I had assumed it was the same as the one I'd seen before, sorry about that. The one I read about previously was actually much more real-world and realistic though, which is more compelling to me. In any case the results are similar, just more horse power in your version. ;)
Hydrogen is not a "drop-in" replacement for gasoline by any measure. It's *less* energy dense in combustible form, it does not store easily in vehicle-portable tanks (it needs to be stored as a liquid) and is, as I said, volatile, etc.
For fuels, the energy per unit volume is sometimes a useful parameter. Comparing, for example, the effectiveness of hydrogen fuel to gasoline, hydrogen has a higher specific energy than gasoline does, but, even in liquid form, a much lower energy density.
--- End quote ---
So it's really not a direct replacement for gasoline at all. The closest we have to that is biodiesel, which again suggests more widespread adoption of diesel as a stepping stone. I continue to be dismayed at the lack of support for that option.
You might find this Wikipedia section to be an interesting reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_economy#Efficiency_as_an_automotive_fuel
Some choice quotes:
The energy that must be utilized per kilogram to produce, transport and deliver hydrogen (i.e., its well-to-tank energy use) is approximately 50 megajoules using technology available in 2004. Subtracting this energy from the enthalpy of one kilogram of hydrogen, which is 141 megajoules, and dividing by the enthalpy, yields a thermal energy efficiency of roughly 60%.[44] Gasoline, by comparison, requires less energy input, per gallon, at the refinery, and comparatively little energy is required to transport it and store it owing to its high energy density per gallon at ambient temperatures. Well-to-tank, the supply chain for gasoline is roughly 80% efficient (Wang, 2002). The most efficient distribution however is electrical, which is typically 95% efficient. Electric vehicles are typically 3 to 4 times as efficient as hydrogen powered vehicles.[45]
--- End quote ---
A study of the well-to-wheels efficiency of hydrogen vehicles compared to other vehicles in the Norwegian energy system indicates that hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles tend to be about a third as efficient as EVs when electrolysis is used, with hydrogen Internal Combustion Engines (ICE) being barely a sixth as efficient. Even in the case where hydrogen fuel cells get their hydrogen from natural gas reformation rather than electrolysis, and EVs get their power from a natural gas power plant, the EVs still come out ahead 35% to 25% (and only 13% for a H2 ICE). This compares to 14% for a gasoline ICE, 27% for a gasoline ICE hybrid, and 17% for a diesel ICE, also on a well-to-wheels basis.
--- End quote ---
- Oshyan
Stoic Joker:
Stoic, looks like a different test. I had assumed it was the same as the one I'd seen before, sorry about that. The one I read about previously was actually much more real-world and realistic though, which is more compelling to me. In any case the results are similar, just more horse power in your version. ;)-JavaJones (March 11, 2011, 05:48 PM)
--- End quote ---
Hm... Interesting, I'd be interested in seeing your's too if you can find a link to it. Especially if it was a more serious test with similar results.
Hydrogen is not a "drop-in" replacement for gasoline by any measure. It's *less* energy dense in combustible form, it does not store easily in vehicle-portable tanks (it needs to be stored as a liquid) and is, as I said, volatile, etc.-JavaJones (March 11, 2011, 05:48 PM)
--- End quote ---
Depends on what you're calling a "drop-in". They were offering kits to convert commercial vehicles (delivery van type stuff) to propane years ago (with limited success). So it is do-able. Granted performance may be affected...but it won't be crippled.
Now on the volatility issue... Hydrogen might be a liquid under pressure (like propane), but it don't come out that way. Fuel tanks exploding on impact (outside of the Ford Pinto) don't really happen out side of Hollywood. So if the tank did rupture on impact and the vehicle flipped, what would really safer? Gasoline which pours out all over the vehicle saturating everything including the occupants, and gathering in a vapor that hugs the ground which can spread out and be ignited blocks away? Or Hydrogen which escapes as a lighter than air gas and quickly dissipates (harmlessly...) into the atmosphere?
Yes I'm familiar with the term BLEVE (Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion) ... They are however quite rare and usually involve heavier than air vapor clouds that stay close to the ground where ignition sources can be found.
For fuels, the energy per unit volume is sometimes a useful parameter. Comparing, for example, the effectiveness of hydrogen fuel to gasoline, hydrogen has a higher specific energy than gasoline does, but, even in liquid form, a much lower energy density. So it's really not a direct replacement for gasoline at all. The closest we have to that is biodiesel, which again suggests more widespread adoption of diesel as a stepping stone. I continue to be dismayed at the lack of support for that option.-JavaJones (March 11, 2011, 05:48 PM)
--- End quote ---
Really? ...Good thing nobody ever told Jessie James about that: Land speed record of 199.712mph set by hydrogen powered car.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version