Posted on 05/14/2002 8:35:09 PM PDT by Hillary'sMoralVoid
AOL Proclaims "HEVs are Hot"! Unfortunately, the treatment of the subject matter is so superficial that it ignores facts that AOL even provides links to. Here is a quote from a government publication: "Although a few production HEVs with advanced batteries have been introduced in the market, no current battery technology has demonstrated an economical, acceptable combination of power, energy efficiency, and life cycle for high-volume production vehicles."
The truth is, these are not economical, safe or environmentally sound vehicles. First, the economical aspect. If the quote in the previous paragraph doesn't convince you, the fact that the AOL FAQs on HEVs document that replacement batteries can cost between $3000 and $8000 ought to get your attention. These batteries are good for 80,000 to 100,000 miles, but their life varies based on the type of driving patterns and habits.
The AOL articles tout the high mileage that the hybrid vehicles get. What they don't tell you is that these are sub-compact cars. A fully gasoline-fueled version of the Toyota Prius, for example, could be expected to get comparable gas mileage with less weight and complexity than an HEV, and with more trunk space. The thousands of dollars you pay for a new battery effectively doubles the cost per mile. You do, however, get good GAS mileage with the HEV, just not good battery mileage!!!
In an increasingly graying population, comfort is winning out over fuel efficiency. With comfort goes size. The average size of vehicles is getting larger every year, and unless we can reverse the aging process, people will continue to want roomy, comfortable cars and SUVs.
This does not bode well for the HEVs, most of which are in the subcompact category. In collisions, larger vehicles almost always win, smaller vehicles invariably lose. No matter how many safety features are built into a subcompact car, you cannot compensate for the laws of physics. You simply are more prone to die or suffer serious injuries in today's HEVs.
Accidents pose another risk. Exploding batteries, containing hazardous components like mercury, lithium, and lead, pose serious cleanup challenges. Further, according to the U. S. Government, most new battery designs are not yet fully recycleable, meaning that discharged batteries will have to be stored and protected until a recycling strategy has matured. Its like nuclear waste dump II.
There are many other factors to consider, not the least of which is technical complexity. The biggest issue is the codependency of the two engines. The gasoline engine must provide the power generating capability that the electric motor needs, the electric motor must provide the torque that the gasoline engine lacks. If either system fails or is degraded, performance will suffer dramatically, and render the auto either inoperable or dangerously underpowered.
A final factor to consider is the simple mass in the form of a battery that is hauled around with little value added. As we've discussed previously, a gas-powered Toyota Prius could be expected to get comparable gas mileage as its HEV counterpart, particularily if the same level of research and development is utilized in the design. What we have created is vehicle that is nothing more than a battery-hauler, in which the battery only contributes to the cost and inefficiency of the vehicle.
AOL is pursuing its own agenda here, and it is not one that is either practical or smart.
PS "only a masochist would buy an Echo." I'm sure you meant Prius?
PS2 The Korean cars are gas guzzlers, the Echo might make sence for some people.
This is the most awesome car I've ever owned. Some say it is small, and sometimes when I'm walking to it in the parking lot I notice how small it is, too. But inside it feels as big as a barn. When I'm driving on the freeway I can speak in a whisper and my passengers can hear me. Since I became the driver of a Prius I no longer listen to rock and roll or country--classical only. My driving life has mellowed and I actually feel sorry for those poor souls who gun their engine and then slam their brakes on at the stoplight. I arrive home refreshed and relaxed. And best of all, this car isn't just a car, it's entertainment.
I can't recommend this car highly enough. My neighbor agrees. He just bought one, too.
As for the batteries, I'll just have to worry about them in 70,000 to 100,000 miles.
Signed, Scarlett : - )
Just like the Interstate Highway System?
Transportation infrastructure projects facilitate commerce and benefit everybody.
I also tried to rationalize owning a Pacer wagon.
Now I try to rationalize driving a Plymouth Voyager minivan.
Sigh...
So much time and effort wasted! The only car I really enjoyed driving was my tire screeching, fishtailing, gas sucking '67 Mustang convertable. A 289 with Holley on an Edelbrock, super sway bars and Koni's all around, WIDE ovals on racing mags. Hella fog and driving lights mounted correctly. With the top down and the Beach Boys on the radio I didn't need to hear birds chirping to enjoy the heart pounding, adrenalin rushing ride! Pure heaven for sure!
A car with personality unlike the toasters on the roads today.
When the BB's weren't on the radio it was country or classical. There's NOTHING that compares with driving 9/10ths in a tire smokin' four wheel drift while say, the Russian Easter Overture is cranking!
prisoner6
I rode the shinkansen in Japan, and I liked it much more than I like airplanes. The price of tickets was the same as an airplane ticket, for the Hiroshima to Tokyo trip I would make.
The principal distinguishing feature of train addicts is that they cannot add. Rail transport for citizens only succeeds or breaks even if the population density is high enough AND the demand for travel from A to B is sufficient to cover cost. There are perhaps, PERHAPS, 5 or 6 areas in the nation that meet both criteria.
Europe? I don't want to hear about Europe, for their example cannot be applied in the US; they've much denser population corridors, and the willingness of their gov'ts to subsidise expensive and losing public works projects is legendary, and worse yet growing.
The Interstate Highway System as an argument FOR your delusions? A good idea and necessary when proposed...almost 50 years ago, but now just another "forever" pork-barrel. Ask yourself why PA gets approx. 3.7 times the funding for interstates the average funding of all other states, adjusted for population and mileage. Answer? REAL simple, former Regresscritter Bud Shuster (sp?), who headed up the House Transportation Committee, and let exactly zero bills go to the floor unless they contained a transportation-related bribe for PA.
And, although I won't belabor the point, you somehow mystically think that some successor organisation of the original black hole, namely Amtrak, will operate efficiently AT ALL and somehow ALSO not be a perennial black hole and a permanent, persistent, insistent candidate for ever-larger subsidies?
Whatcha smokin', Clyde? You gonna trot out the old and laughably lame argument that THIS TIME, you'll do it right? Toke up, Jack, no one who can add will buy it. (Of course, given the condition of gov't schools...SO well operated and with such fine results...I might be wrong.)
Their federal gov't consumes 20% of GDP, while the US federal gov't also consumes 20% of GDP. However, you are correct in saying that the shinkansen is subsidized. Some of the rural routes were controversial because they would never make any money. These routes were forced thru the Diet by rural politicians.
That said, the same thing happens in West Virginia because of Robert Byrd. They have 10 lane highways that are hardly used at all, while other cities suffer bad highways and traffic congestion.
Inconvenient. A lot. There's both income taxes and a national sales tax (5%) on everything. In Tokyo, there's an additional city tax. The people who build the glittering infrastructure tend to be not particularly honest people and rob the system blind.
The trains, on the other hand, run on time. You can stand on a marked area beside the tracks and the doors will open right in front of you. Commuter trains are both inexpensive (much cheaper than commuting by automobile in California) and timely (during rush hour on the heaviest travelled line, almost continuously).
The Shinkansen is fast (~2 1/2 hours between Osaka and Tokyo) and comfortable (similar to business class on an airplane). A 16 car super-express has a capacity of 5x20 x16 = 1600 people.
Naw, I wanna see WillaJohns face!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.