Thread: EV general discussion

Yeah, I wouldn’t pay too much attention to those articles either - I’ve driven a Hybrid Camry for several weeks around a City with some country driving too clocking up more than 1000KM in it and averaged 4.8 litres per hundred - not sure how that is more polluting than a diesel but I’m all ears on the explanation.

Fuel volume burned doesn’t directly equate to emissions out its bum. Sounds counter intuitive, however it’s how dirty those emissions are that’s counted.

According to a few articles, emissions of these hybrids can be 2.5-4 times higher than advertised.

And the overall emissions required for TLOV is higher than many are reported to be.

It really does seem a game of smoke and mirrors.

Originally Posted by Tombie

Fuel volume burned doesn’t directly equate to emissions out its bum. Sounds counter intuitive, however it’s how dirty those emissions are that’s counted.

According to a few articles, emissions of these hybrids can be 2.5-4 times higher than advertised.

And the overall emissions required for TLOV is higher than many are reported to be.

It really does seem a game of smoke and mirrors.

Yeah - smoke and mirrors sound right - but by which side? I’d be interested in the comparison between a modern petrol burning engine and a modern diesel with adblue - I honestly don’t know which would come out on top overall.

Top gear ran a toyota prius at 100% tagging a BMW ice. The BMW was pottering along at barely 40% power or so and used much less petrol.




It did not in my thoughts say anything more than drive at 100% and you use more energy to me

Never wanted a hybrid as I hate the idea myself for my selfish reasons of course. I would take a FCEV (Hydrogen) with a Solid state big battery once they are ready for me. That hybrid would rock my boat once fueling points are more than one per state !


Took my Disco out for its monthly shake down last night. Oddly no regenerative braking meant I really had to watch my braking. The MG is not one pedal only yet its regenerative braking cuts the brake use by about 80% or so.

Originally Posted by Homestar

Yeah - smoke and mirrors sound right - but by which side? I’d be interested in the comparison between a modern petrol burning engine and a modern diesel with adblue - I honestly don’t know which would come out on top overall.

I suspect a lot of the confusion comes from what is considered "emissions". From a climate change point of view, for any internal combustion engine, almost all the carbon atoms in the fuel enter the atmosphere as carbon dioxide, whether we are talking about petrol or diesel. A larger proportion of the diesel is carbon than is the case for petrol, so for the same mass of fuel burnt, more carbon dioxide is emitted by a diesel. But the diesel will usually use less fuel than the petrol, everything else being equal.

The other type of emissions are those that are not carbon dioxide and water - these are unburnt or partly burnt fuel and oil and nitrogen oxides. In modern petrol and diesel engines these are very small, but vary much more between designs. The adblue is intended to deal with the nitrogen oxides, that tend to increase as combustion temperature is increased - which is what is needed to reduce unburnt and partly burnt fuel, as welll as to increase efficiency.

Originally Posted by NavyDiver

Top gear ran a toyota prius at 100% tagging a BMW ice. The BMW was pottering along at barely 40% power or so and used much less petrol.
..... .... .... ...

Surprisingly, Clarkson didn't use that result to bash the Prius, as he often did.

He didn't accept that the result proved that a BMW is more economical than a Prius. He was at pains to make the point that how you drive is more important than what you drive.

The Prius is at its best in slow, stop/start driving in other words, normal city driving. The BMW in that situation would be thirsty.

Driving style makes a big difference. Anyone who drives a hybrid in the city by quickly accelerating away from the traffic lights and slamming on the brakes at the next intersection will not get good economy. Almost all the braking will be done by the hydraulic brakes. Very little of the kinetic energy will be recovered through the regenerative braking.

I believe that the NSW Western District Health Dept made the mistake of buying Priuses. Out there most trips were long highway drives with little or no chance to recover energy through regenerative braking. Just like the Top Gear test, the little ICE was working hard almost all the time. West of Dubbo must be one of the worst places in the world for a Prius.

Even Jeremy Clarkson acknowledged that you can't expect good economy from a Prius if you drive it the wrong way in the wrong situation.

Originally Posted by vnx205

Surprisingly, Clarkson didn't use that result to bash the Prius, as he often did.

He didn't accept that the result proved that a BMW is more economical than a Prius. He was at pains to make the point that how you drive is more important than what you drive.

The Prius is at its best in slow, stop/start driving in other words, normal city driving. The BMW in that situation would be thirsty.

Driving style makes a big difference. Anyone who drives a hybrid in the city by quickly accelerating away from the traffic lights and slamming on the brakes at the next intersection will not get good economy. Almost all the braking will be done by the hydraulic brakes. Very little of the kinetic energy will be recovered through the regenerative braking.

I believe that the NSW Western District Health Dept made the mistake of buying Priuses. Out there most trips were long highway drives with little or no chance to recover energy through regenerative braking. Just like the Top Gear test, the little ICE was working hard almost all the time. West of Dubbo must be one of the worst places in the world for a Prius.

Even Jeremy Clarkson acknowledged that you can't expect good economy from a Prius if you drive it the wrong way in the wrong situation.

Not bashing Prius. I just see servicing a ICE engine as a Pain. Disco is due for time not distance again - Ouch

Noticed a grumpy non Tesla driver apparently upset with a Tesla using charge fox charger in Goulburn NSW. There are Tesla only chargers there. The Tesla driver is correct that Charge fox 350kWph charger is faster and cheaper than the Tesla only chargers others cannot use.

Odd mostly as not all of the charge points were occupied and note none of the Tesla only ones would be used as the are slower and cost more- Thanks Mr Musk Noting I would be happy to use Tesla if they allowed me to pay

Tesla Goulburn is 120kWph 1/3 the Charge fox speed. Colac Vic at the moment has 250kWh Tesla and none for this black duck really That makes me visit RACV Torquay or via Ballarat racv chargers. The pain of having a new generation short asses range MG of course. Zip in the fast lane in Port Fairy or Warrnambool yet if excluding Tesla only site.

Note many new options are being built happily.

I believe that the NSW Western District Health Dept made the mistake of buying Priuses.

All of the NSW Government departments were instructed to buy Priuses about 15-20 years ago.

NSW Agriculture where I worked sent them all to far flung rural areas where resentful ag officers did all they could to break them.
.
I got a very cold reception when I suggested to the Director General that he should trade his Statesman for a Prius for around town Sydney trips.(LOL)
Regards PhilipA