Thread: Shift to electric cars becomes inevitable

Sounds like a promotion for how green GMH is going to be and I disagree with some of the conclusions drawn.
Why would a small diesel not be more efficient than a small petrol or hybrid? No mention is made that Ford has had a dedicated LPG Falcon for at least 5 years.
No mention is made either of the fact that if you have more than 2 kids none of these "medium size" cars will accomodate them.

Regards,
Tote

I haven't read the article, but I can see a situation where electric vehicles could fill the role of the second car in some families in the near future. Electric vehicles will be the way of the future, but they've got to sort out an efficient way of generating the power like hydrogen fuel cells.

Prius's are just a car for people who want to be seen to do something. They do have some role in getting people used to the technology, but toyota have been so conservative with it it's not really a technology mover.

The article itself has the data that shows why electric cars will not become common. An electric car that has a range of 64km? And takes eight hours to recharge? For most people who commute only that distance with a bit of a safety margin, it is likely that public transport will be a reasonable option. Most living in the outer suburbs would commute further than that - I can think of few people I knew when I lived in the city who commuted that short a distance. Useful as a town runabout in smaller towns, yes, but most Australians live in the outer suburbs of the major cities.

And, it would have to be a second car, and the costs of motoring in Australia militate against a second car that has limited use, particularly one that is expensive - the major costs of owning a car are the fixed costs, registration, insurance and the real killer, cost of capital and depreciation. And can you imagine any government giving up the taxes on fuel and motoring in general without a whimper?

Then there is the question of where the power is coming from to charge these cars - all states are currently facing future problems in this area without factoring in the increased use from cars.

Hybrid cars may be the future, but I rather doubt it. Their fuel consumption rarely is any better than modern small diesels, and there is probably more scope for development there. (a diesel hybrid can do a bit better, but the difference gets smaller)

The problem is, look at the other engines that were "going to to replace the petrol engine" - Wankel, Sarich and others less known. What happened to them? The same as is likely, in my view, to happen to the hybrid, and to the electric car (to the extent it really is a competitor) - there is far more effort being put into improving the conventional engine than there is any of the competitors, and there is far more known about them.

The only thing that can bring an electric car to being a real competitor is a real battery breakthrough, and that has not happened, although there are possibilities.

As for hydrogen - what most people fail to recognise is that it is not a source of energy - it is a method of energy transport whose only advantage is the total lack of pollution at the point of use.

John

A Prius uses something like 4.4 - 5.0 l/100km. (depending how its driven )
A small conventional car like a Honda Jazz gets 5l/100km.
Our Pug 307, ( petrol ) with similar interior space to a Prius, does 6.5 l/100km - the diesel model does 1-2 litre/100km less than that.

So is that really enough of a differential to justify the Hybrid ? Some people claim that if you took out all the heavy batteries, the Prius would get similar economy running on the petrol engine alone.

The way I see it, Hybrids are a concession to the green lobby by the car makers, while still keeping their oil corporation friends happy.

I'd like to see a battery car with a range of say 200 - 300 km, that you could plug in to the 240V socket in your garage overnight, and use it to commute to work/shopping etc next day ( maybe even plug it in again to charge at work ). I reckon that would have a big market amongst city dwellers.
I was reading a report in the paper yesterday - a team at a university in South Australia have built a total electric vehicle using Lithium Ion technology ( same as the lightweight modern mobile phone batteries ) that will carry two people, room for luggage or shopping and has a range of 150km with 4 hour recharge.. The irony is they can't register it for road use.

Now the weigh up of carbon footprints etc of the brown coal burnt to make electricity as opposed to burning fossil fuels in your car, I'm not sure.

No, the interesting thing is that the lifespan of a Prius was measured against a HumVee...

The HumVee produced less emissions over its life than the Prius.

Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage
By Chris Demorro
Staff Writer

The Toyota Prius has become the flagship car for those in our society so environmentally conscious that they are willing to spend a premium to show the world how much they care. Unfortunately for them, their ultimate ‘green car’ is the source of some of the worst pollution in North America; it takes more combined energy per Prius to produce than a Hummer. Before we delve into the seedy underworld of hybrids, you must first understand how a hybrid works. For this, we will use the most popular hybrid on the market, the Toyota Prius.
The Prius is powered by not one, but two engines: a standard 76 horsepower, 1.5-liter gas engine found in most cars today and a battery- powered engine that deals out 67 horsepower and a whooping 295ft/lbs of torque, below 2000 revolutions per minute. Essentially, the Toyota Synergy Drive system, as it is so called, propels the car from a dead stop to up to 30mph. This is where the largest percent of gas is consumed. As any physics major can tell you, it takes more energy to get an object moving than to keep it moving. The battery is recharged through the braking system, as well as when the gasoline engine takes over anywhere north of 30mph. It seems like a great energy efficient and environmentally sound car, right?
You would be right if you went by the old government EPA estimates, which netted the Prius an incredible 60 miles per gallon in the city and 51 miles per gallon on the highway. Unfortunately for Toyota, the government realized how unrealistic their EPA tests were, which consisted of highway speeds limited to 55mph and acceleration of only 3.3 mph per second. The new tests which affect all 2008 models give a much more realistic rating with highway speeds of 80mph and acceleration of 8mph per second. This has dropped the Prius’s EPA down by 25 percent to an average of 45mpg. This now puts the Toyota within spitting distance of cars like the Chevy Aveo, which costs less then half what the Prius costs.
However, if that was the only issue with the Prius, I wouldn’t be writing this article. It gets much worse.
Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius. As already noted, the Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles.
The plant is the source of all the nickel found in a Prius’ battery and Toyota purchases 1,000 tons annually. Dubbed the Superstack, the plague-factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist’s nightmare.
“The acid rain around Sudbury was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside,” said Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin during an interview with Mail, a British-based newspaper.
All of this would be bad enough in and of itself; however, the journey to make a hybrid doesn’t end there. The nickel produced by this disastrous plant is shipped via massive container ship to the largest nickel refinery in Europe. From there, the nickel hops over to China to produce ‘nickel foam.’ From there, it goes to Japan. Finally, the completed batteries are shipped to the United States, finalizing the around-the-world trip required to produce a single Prius battery. Are these not sounding less and less like environmentally sound cars and more like a farce?
Wait, I haven’t even got to the best part yet.
When you pool together all the combined energy it takes to drive and build a Toyota Prius, the flagship car of energy fanatics, it takes almost 50 percent more energy than a Hummer - the Prius’s arch nemesis.
Through a study by CNW Marketing called “Dust to Dust,” the total combined energy is taken from all the electrical, fuel, transportation, materials (metal, plastic, etc) and hundreds of other factors over the expected lifetime of a vehicle. The Prius costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven over a lifetime of 100,000 miles - the expected lifespan of the Hybrid.
The Hummer, on the other hand, costs a more fiscal $1.95 per mile to put on the road over an expected lifetime of 300,000 miles. That means the Hummer will last three times longer than a Prius and use less combined energy doing it.
So, if you are really an environmentalist - ditch the Prius. Instead, buy one of the most economical cars available - a Toyota Scion xB. The Scion only costs a paltry $0.48 per mile to put on the road. If you are still obsessed over gas mileage - buy a Chevy Aveo and fix that lead foot.
One last fun fact for you: it takes five years to offset the premium price of a Prius. Meaning, you have to wait 60 months to save any money over a non-hybrid car because of lower gas expenses.

Bad news for Electric vehicles...

Oh, and on that note...

Considering the lack of power generating capability in Aust. just WHERE will we get all the electricity to charge pure electric vehicles once they become so popular?

More power stations?

Ahhh... So we'll just MOVE the emissions somewhere else...

Originally Posted by Tombie2

No, the interesting thing is that the lifespan of a Prius was measured against a HumVee...

The HumVee produced less emissions over its life than the Prius.
..........

The actual lifetime emissions of anything, be it a Humvee or a Prius, depends on so many guesses and assumptions, that you can get whatever answer you want simply by adjusting your assumptions. For example, the answer is very dependent on the life of the vehicle, and how much it is recycled after this. These are more important than the fuel used during that lifetime in many cases.

But having said that it may well be a correct conclusion, although I could point out that the assumed life for the Humvee may well now be dramatically lower with increased fuel costs, possibly reversing the conclusion.

John

What about the Genepax water powered car (tip in 1L water, you're good for 80 kms!)?

YouTube - Water fuel car unveiled in Japang - Genepax company

I think it'd be fantastic to get from my house to the local train station; or driving around the CBD in.

I understand it has drawbacks but with it's own fuel cell onboard, it negates the need for a network of hydrogen refuelling stations (as per BMW's 7 series H-powered car).


Also expected in 2010 is the Chevvy Volt.
YouTube - Chevrolet Volt Concept

Would be nice to lower fuel consumption by plugging in overnight, but with Australia's brown coal electricity production, it only becomes a 'green' car if you buy renewable, zero emission energy.

Interestingly, motoring writers in the UK are now advising *against* small, modern diesels. Dual mass flywheels are causing frequent breakdowns and significantly increasing running costs over the same petrol models.
Honestjohn: Frequently Asked Questions

I would of thought if they could get a production of those hydrogen cars going they would make a fortune. If all the components live long enough it would be a great vehicle, even if it had a huge price tag.


I'd buy one. It mightn't be perfect but not harming the environment and not buying fuel. I'll take it!

Xav