gerry wrote:
> [original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
> On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 12:34:35 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
>>On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 17:48:29 GMT, "A. Sinan Unur" <1usa@llenroc.ude.invalid>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Robert Cohen" <robtcohen@msn.com> wrote in news:1143908876.004069.326200
>>>@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>>But if Hyundai could bring-one out for $10,000 less or whatever, there
>>>>would seemingly be a significant lessening of oil demand for awhile
>>>>(several years).
>>>
>>>Not by as much as you think though.
>>>
>>>Increasing the MPG reduces the cost of driving per mile driven.
>>>
>>>Therefore, if more people drove hybrids, they would drive more miles as
>>>well.
>>>
>>>The net effect on quantity of gas demanded is not clear.
>>
>>Not to mention that it probably takes many extra barrels of oil to produce
>>the extra batteries, electronics, and motors on a hybrid.
>>
>
> Also, they never mention that hybrids don't help on the highway! Batteries
> get charged (the energy benefit part) by electronic breaking. Hit the
> highway and the batteries add no benefit.

A hybrid does give some benefit on the highway as they can get by with a
smaller gasoline engine since the electric motor is there to back it up
when greater acceleration is needed, but the benefit certainly is much
less relative to the benefit in the city. Probably the greatest benefit
of hybrids is the learning they will provide with respect to energy
storage and engine control systems that will be needed some day for all
electric cars.


Matt

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 00:53:25 GMT, nothermark <trash@gnomex.cotse.net>
wrote:

>On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 19:59:29 GMT, Brian Nystrom
><brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote:


>>Why. Hybrids are really nothing but a stop-gap, not a long-term
>>solution. What we need is cars that don't run on fossil fuels or other
>>pollution producing fuels. Ideally, that fuel source would be cheaper
>>than gasoline, so it will appeal to the huge emerging markets in India
>>and China and help prevent the looming environmental disaster in those
>>countries (and worldwide) as they burn more and more fossil fuels.
>>
>>If you're going to make a long-term investment, it makes more sense to
>>put your money into alternative technologies.
>>
>>> A la Toyota makes U.S. mailsters & other government trucks & heaps so
>>> long as Toyota licenses its patents reasonably/cheaply/cost-effectively
>>> to its world competitors.
>>>
>>> Any constructive ideas are welcome, because massive distribution of
>>> hybrid technology is not unimportant in war 'n peace.
>>
>>That's a nice idea, but the reality is that hybrids are a technological
>>dead-end.
>
>Partly - it's getting real info on using electric cars and getting the
>public trainied to think about them. Replace the IC engine with a
>fuel cell and we may have something worth looking at.


Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
themselves.

The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?

I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
plant. Same is true with electric cars!

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 00:53:25 GMT, nothermark <trash@gnomex.cotse.net>
wrote:

>On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 19:59:29 GMT, Brian Nystrom
><brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote:


>>Why. Hybrids are really nothing but a stop-gap, not a long-term
>>solution. What we need is cars that don't run on fossil fuels or other
>>pollution producing fuels. Ideally, that fuel source would be cheaper
>>than gasoline, so it will appeal to the huge emerging markets in India
>>and China and help prevent the looming environmental disaster in those
>>countries (and worldwide) as they burn more and more fossil fuels.
>>
>>If you're going to make a long-term investment, it makes more sense to
>>put your money into alternative technologies.
>>
>>> A la Toyota makes U.S. mailsters & other government trucks & heaps so
>>> long as Toyota licenses its patents reasonably/cheaply/cost-effectively
>>> to its world competitors.
>>>
>>> Any constructive ideas are welcome, because massive distribution of
>>> hybrid technology is not unimportant in war 'n peace.
>>
>>That's a nice idea, but the reality is that hybrids are a technological
>>dead-end.
>
>Partly - it's getting real info on using electric cars and getting the
>public trainied to think about them. Replace the IC engine with a
>fuel cell and we may have something worth looking at.


Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
themselves.

The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?

I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
plant. Same is true with electric cars!

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 00:53:25 GMT, nothermark <trash@gnomex.cotse.net>
wrote:

>On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 19:59:29 GMT, Brian Nystrom
><brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote:


>>Why. Hybrids are really nothing but a stop-gap, not a long-term
>>solution. What we need is cars that don't run on fossil fuels or other
>>pollution producing fuels. Ideally, that fuel source would be cheaper
>>than gasoline, so it will appeal to the huge emerging markets in India
>>and China and help prevent the looming environmental disaster in those
>>countries (and worldwide) as they burn more and more fossil fuels.
>>
>>If you're going to make a long-term investment, it makes more sense to
>>put your money into alternative technologies.
>>
>>> A la Toyota makes U.S. mailsters & other government trucks & heaps so
>>> long as Toyota licenses its patents reasonably/cheaply/cost-effectively
>>> to its world competitors.
>>>
>>> Any constructive ideas are welcome, because massive distribution of
>>> hybrid technology is not unimportant in war 'n peace.
>>
>>That's a nice idea, but the reality is that hybrids are a technological
>>dead-end.
>
>Partly - it's getting real info on using electric cars and getting the
>public trainied to think about them. Replace the IC engine with a
>fuel cell and we may have something worth looking at.


Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
themselves.

The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?

I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
plant. Same is true with electric cars!

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

 

gerry wrote:

> Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
> themselves.
>
> The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
> hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?
>
> I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
> free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
> plant. Same is true with electric cars!

Very true. Unless we can find an economical way to use solar, wind or
wave energy to produce the electricity required to produce the hydrogen,
fuel cell powered cars simply relocate the problem.


Matt

 

gerry wrote:

> Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
> themselves.
>
> The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
> hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?
>
> I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
> free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
> plant. Same is true with electric cars!

Very true. Unless we can find an economical way to use solar, wind or
wave energy to produce the electricity required to produce the hydrogen,
fuel cell powered cars simply relocate the problem.


Matt

 

gerry wrote:

> Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
> themselves.
>
> The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
> hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?
>
> I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
> free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
> plant. Same is true with electric cars!

Very true. Unless we can find an economical way to use solar, wind or
wave energy to produce the electricity required to produce the hydrogen,
fuel cell powered cars simply relocate the problem.


Matt

 

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 21:00:06 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:

>Probably the greatest benefit
>of hybrids is the learning they will provide with respect to energy
>storage and engine control systems that will be needed some day for all
>electric cars.

Bingo! The knowledge and experience is priceless!
--
Bob

 

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 21:00:06 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:

>Probably the greatest benefit
>of hybrids is the learning they will provide with respect to energy
>storage and engine control systems that will be needed some day for all
>electric cars.

Bingo! The knowledge and experience is priceless!
--
Bob

 

On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 21:00:06 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:

>Probably the greatest benefit
>of hybrids is the learning they will provide with respect to energy
>storage and engine control systems that will be needed some day for all
>electric cars.

Bingo! The knowledge and experience is priceless!
--
Bob

 

On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:43:19 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:

>gerry wrote:
>
>> Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
>> themselves.
>>
>> The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
>> hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?
>>
>> I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
>> free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
>> plant. Same is true with electric cars!
>
>Very true. Unless we can find an economical way to use solar, wind or
>wave energy to produce the electricity required to produce the hydrogen,
>fuel cell powered cars simply relocate the problem.

I can see more nukes and coal in our future.

Actually, coal fired plants can be clean as a whistle. All the scrubbing and
such may cost 1 or 2% efficiency, but it's still much cheaper than oil.
--
Bob

 

On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:43:19 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:

>gerry wrote:
>
>> Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
>> themselves.
>>
>> The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
>> hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?
>>
>> I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
>> free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
>> plant. Same is true with electric cars!
>
>Very true. Unless we can find an economical way to use solar, wind or
>wave energy to produce the electricity required to produce the hydrogen,
>fuel cell powered cars simply relocate the problem.

I can see more nukes and coal in our future.

Actually, coal fired plants can be clean as a whistle. All the scrubbing and
such may cost 1 or 2% efficiency, but it's still much cheaper than oil.
--
Bob

 

On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 20:43:19 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:

>gerry wrote:
>
>> Fuel cells have an issue even if they solve problems with the cells
>> themselves.
>>
>> The cost of "fuel" is also an issue. Either limited supply of, say with
>> hydrogen, where is the electricity coming from to produce the hydrogen?
>>
>> I really get a kick out of the claims that hydrogen cars are pollution
>> free. The pollution is just relocated, say to a coal burning electric
>> plant. Same is true with electric cars!
>
>Very true. Unless we can find an economical way to use solar, wind or
>wave energy to produce the electricity required to produce the hydrogen,
>fuel cell powered cars simply relocate the problem.

I can see more nukes and coal in our future.

Actually, coal fired plants can be clean as a whistle. All the scrubbing and
such may cost 1 or 2% efficiency, but it's still much cheaper than oil.
--
Bob

 

re: air car

Apparently, the thing functions mainly by compressed air.

Nothing much has been publicized about it since it was brought-out
during the past two years or so en France.

I presume ..it's a bust (as in balloon); though one may infinitely
fantasize nevertheless.

 

re: air car

Apparently, the thing functions mainly by compressed air.

Nothing much has been publicized about it since it was brought-out
during the past two years or so en France.

I presume ..it's a bust (as in balloon); though one may infinitely
fantasize nevertheless.