Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons
1586 messages, Last post on Oct 23, 2009 at 4:19 PM
You are in the Electric Vehicles Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Replying to: rorr (Aug 04, 2006 6:58 am) Discussions regarding emissions comparisons and energy production can be done in a (somewhat) level-headed means. Facts and data can be presented and mulled over. Agreements can be reached (I think) without too much animosity. However, if some individuals simply feel COMPELED to drag politics into this discussion, it can ONLY end up with one side wanting to pull the ears off the folks on the other side. If your INTENT is to run me off, then by all means let's have this discussion degenerate into whining about 'Big Oil' and 'foreign wars to stabilize oil fields'." I'm baffled by your response. I have no intention of getting into a political debate. It is a fact that we are heavily reliant on foreign oil. It is not a political statement. It is a fact that an electric car is the most fuel flexible vehicle made. No matter what is used to generate the electricity now or in the future (NG, coal, nuclear, hydro, biomass, solar, wind, fuel cells, whatever) an electric car will use it. That is not true for an ICE vehicle. That is an enormous selling point, and it's not political. I am pretty confident that you have no clue what "side" I am on politically, so your "side" would not know who to tear the ears off of. I could care less what side you are on. It's not an issue I care about. Being reliant on unstable and relatively unfriendly countries for a vital resource puts us in a weak position. All things being equal, if we can avoid that form of reliance we would be in a stronger position which would help national security. That is hardly a partisan political statement. Discounting the real and very strong benefit of reducing oil consumption as "political", has been a very common ploy to discount BEVs. How about I make the claim that battery range and recharging time is a "political issue", and refuse to discuss it when comparing BEV and ICE? How do you think that ICE would fare based solely on performance and cost per mile comparisons? Big oil is a valid topic for discussion, but it doesn't have to be political and it also doesn't have to be here. I don't blame big oil for protecting their interests. The question is where are we going to be in the future and how do we transition from where we are now (pure petroleum) to wherever we are going to end up in 10-30-50 years. Huge companies don't go away quietly. What will their role be in the future, and what will the transition be like? It's a fair question, and it is not political.
|
|
|
Replying to: rorr (Aug 04, 2006 8:48 am) How much electricity are they assuming an EV uses per mile/kilometer? For a Prius-like vehicle it should be about .25 kWh/mile. Also, not all hybrids are low polluting. A lot of times it depends on where you buy the vehicle. According to the EPA the Honda Insight is one of the most polluting vehicles outside California. http://www.epa.gov/emissweb/E-HONDA-Insight-06.htm The same is true for Toyota's Scion XA; a non-hybrid that gets excellent mileage. http://www.epa.gov/emissweb/E-TOYOTA-ScionXA-06.htm There are plenty more examples. My point is that unless you're talking GHG emissions small, fuel efficient cars aren't necessarily clean.
|
|
|
Replying to: prm2000 (Aug 04, 2006 8:51 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Aug 04, 2006 11:52 am) "How much electricity are they assuming an EV uses per mile/kilometer?" I wish I could tell you. Unfortunately, I haven't taken enough time to fully digest that study (particularly the electrical production side of it). To be honest, all I did was look at their assumptions for emissions from their 'average' ICE vehicle fleet and compare those assumed emissions levels to what I know is achievable with CURRENT technology in an ICE vehicle. Just my heavy-handed approach to refuting the assertion that production of electricity for EV use was always cleaner than ICE (regardless of how advanced ICEs may be, though this was not explicitly stated). Correct, not all hybrids are low polluting. However, since the technology DOES exist (and is currently being used in California), then it follows that all fuel efficient vehicles (which are naturally lower in CO2 emissions) COULD also be lower in other emissions. So, IF we are talking about the emissions aspects of hybrids compared to EVs, then my point is that the technology is currently in place and being used on a wide-scale (I consider use in all of California wide-scale) for very clean hybrids. |
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Aug 04, 2006 12:02 pm) Making the assertion that the only reason we 'fight foreign wars is to stabilize foreign oil fields' is a different matter. It basically translates to the old old old anti-war chant of "no blood for oil". And that IS a political issue. "Its like curing disease or reducing crime." Stating you are in favor of reducing crime is not a political issue. Stating that we should reduce crime by spending more money on (fill in the blank) Government program (or less money or whatever) makes it a political issue.
|
|
|
Replying to: rorr (Aug 04, 2006 12:39 pm) This is the Tesla Roadster thread so lets put it into that perspective. If a person was debating whether to purchase the Tesla Roadster or a Dodge Viper, IMO, the Tesla would be a better purchase from a US best interest point of view.
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Aug 04, 2006 1:11 pm) Curious about something concerning the Tesla: I know that the range is supposed to be pretty good; and the video was self-explanatory regarding the performance (  ). My question is, what kind of range do you get if you include 1/4 mile run like that? A seperate question (and this gets back into the whole EV vs. ICE question): how quick is a standard Honda powered Ariel Atom compared to the EV version (Tesla roadster)?
|
|
|
Replying to: rorr (Aug 04, 2006 1:18 pm) As fast as the Tesla Roadster is it could be quicker. When I first heard about this car I assumed that there were 4 separate electric motors driving each wheel. This is very doable with EVs. The Tesla car has one motor driving the rear wheels. Their claim of 0-60 in four seconds is probably limited by the point wheel spin occurs. An all-wheel drive EV will be capable of unmatchable acceleration. |
|
|
Replying to: michael2003 (Aug 02, 2006 2:35 am) As the electric car technology is refined, it will become relatively easy to add a small and very efficient internal combustion motor that will start when the batteries are below, say, 50% and start producing energy to recharge the batteries. The engine would run at WOT and at low RPMs, and would therefore be more efficient than if it were driving the wheels directly. |
|
|
Replying to: rorr (Aug 04, 2006 6:32 am) Here are a few more interesting docs to look at: This is an interesting Wheel-to-well analysis for Japan. Of course it is not apples to apples with US, because their power mix is different. I find it interesting that their numbers show a large advantage for BEV over FCV, but their conclusion states "BEV is a little better than FCV both in terms of required energy and CO2 emission, but still needs total evaluation including driving range per charge.". They have to discount their own numbers because BEV comes out to well! http://www.jhfc.jp/data/seminar_report/04/pdf/06_h17seminar_e.pdf This is a fairly recent large, very detailed Wheel-to-well analysis of energy use and emissions from Argonne National Labs and GM. They compare 18 different future vehicle/fuel systems. Guess which future vehicle/fuel system was not considered in the comparison? While there is some very good info here, this is the kind of government study that really pisses me off because government policy will be made based on it without accounting for the glaring omission. http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/339.pdf Here is a similar Japanese study by Toyota (just to show I am not biased towards GM!) It basically does the same thing. http://www.mizuho-ir.co.jp/english/knowledge/documents/wtwghg041130.pdf |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
