Slashdot Mirror
The Hybrid Scooter
anthemaniac writes "Hybrid cars are all the rage. Now comes a hybrid scooter. It gets beyond ethanol and lots of batteries, though, running on a hydrogen fuel cell that charges a battery. During braking, energy is also harnessed. All this and speedy too, says inventor Crijn Bouman of Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. For now, however, the prototype lacks one crucial component: the hydrogen fuel cell! It's coming, Bouman says. Yes, just like $5/gal gas..."
I don't think we should kid ourselves. $5/gal gasoline is coming. Sooner than most probably hope.
Personally, I think the sooner it arrives, the sooner my fellow Americans will quit buying SUVs.
Take off every sig. For great justice.
It seems to me that this is not actually a hybrid, since it has only one method of propulsion, an electric motor. Perhaps the designer got a little buzzword-happy
eclecti.cc
It use the latest in bio-energy too. Arguably one of the most efficent machines on the planet, it's called a bike.
Remember all of those pictures of millions of Chinese riding their bikes to work? Now they are buying cars instead. Soon, many Americans will be wishing they could ride their bikes to work.
I'll really start worrying when I can't afford gas for my moped.
I'd say yes. Barring all emissions and fuel arguements, SUVs and trucks still aren't all that great vehicles. Right now I'm in the bush outside of Teslin, Yukon Territory, Canada, and were dependant on heavy duty or lifted trucks to move geological and drilling supplies around and these trucks (Silverado 2500HDs and such) are just getting at what they should be used for. In town (Whitehorse) they're horrible to drive, have huge blind spots, take forever to slow down, have very poor weight distribution, handle like complete junk and still manage to carry less than my dad's work van. A SUV or full size truck shouldn't be on the top of the list for people who aren't in desparate need to carry a few drums of diesel or require large amounts of ground clearence or an insane amount of towing capacity.
Moo!
because when it comes right down to it, they're safer. Sadly, the reason they're safer is they destroy anyone or anything not in an equivalent vehicle. So, you're a professional earning $40k+/year, why not spend the extra $200/month so that when your lousy driving causes and accident you walk away with a scratch and the other (poorer) guy bites it? Wish I could say I was trolling, but about once or twice a year I read a story on fark or rotten or even my local paper about some drunk SUV driver killing a family because he ran a red, and he doesn't even see a chiropracter. I'm one of the have-nots, and I'm driving an old station wagon, so I'm more than a little concerned.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
If before the war in Iraq the US would have taken even a small part of the money spent on it, the entire economy would have been well on its way to becoming hydrogen based. According to the US government itself, by 2010 $570 billion will have been spent on the "war on terror" (http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/051006/w100670.html). If one hydrogen refueling station were to cost $10 million each, each city on the continent could have at least one built by the government itself. Even adding the need for new electricity generation, it would still cost less than the "war on terror"
Then the dependence on foreign oil and its associated conflicts would have decreased significantly. And since the US is still the world's largest economy, this would have had a domino effect throughout the rest of the world, if only because of the economies of scale would be taken care of.
I know this is a naive way of looking at the issue, but it was still a missed opportunity. And it will keep happening untill there are no other alternatives. The oil companies are generating HUGE proffits due to high oil prices and our dependence on it. The domestic car manufacturers cannot afford the R&D costs associated to switching over to fuel cells. And the consumers themselves do not want change, and will continue driving V8 monsters for as long as they can afford it.
The current price is over $7.50 per gallon in most of Europe.
When will the price get down to $5.00 again ? I believe this will be after the hydrogen fuel cell, when demand for petroleum based products fall.
The US should add $2 per gallon in tax, and send that to research in better energy sources. Right now US is the western country that does the least to protect environment, and it completely ignores global warming.
Yes, because the problem with your argument is that it STILL uses more fuel. If those systems were in lighter, more aerodynamic vehicles we'd be talking 40, 50, or even 60 MPG. So it's still burning twice as much fuel as a more efficient vehicle, and driving up demand in the process, which translates into less fuel and higher prices for everyone else.
And that's not even getting into the additional CO2 emissions and energy-independence arguments.
Being responsible is being responsible. Period.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Okay, I know next to nothing about fuel cells, but charging them involves electrolysis or some other non-trivial process, yes? So you need a battery if you're going to take advantage of the energy to be gained back from stopping and such.
Perhaps you should check out some european or japanese diesel cars which can regularly top 50mpg and even the petrol cars can do 40+. Sorry my friend, but 30mpg in 2006 is a joke and it highlights just how bad a design SUVs really are for normal road transport. Sure , use them if you're a farmer or someone else who needs 4x4 everyday , but buying them purely as a one upmanship on other people or because you've got some sort of insecurity issues in the trouser department is just wrong.
Well since we live in the land of needing to just get a bigger SUV than the neighbors have for this exact reason, it hardly matters. Teach people how to drive and the problem goes away, not make sure you're driving the biggest car out there. Given the choice, I'd much rather have a small car that isn't going to flip over if I try and dodge an oncoming idiot, Sure, it won't stop drunk drivers being on the roads, but I figure my best defenses are paying attention, knowing my driving abilities, and having a car that can get out of the way rather than having a car that's sure to do more damage to whatever hit it than it takes itself. Given how few people rely on their driving abilities now, I think they might be a bit annoyed if they end up upside-down after instinctually dodging the moron, rather than just bracing for the crash and knowing they'll come out better because they've got the bigger car.
It's called defensive driving. Worked fine for me since I got my license a few years ago, and being a male between the ages of 18-25, I definitely fall into the high-risk category. I absolutely hate driving our SUV when it's my only option - I'm sure I haven't put over 100 miles on it in total, but I don't like so much as backing out of our driveway due to how bad the handling is compared to our cars that are less than half the size. I always feel far less safe driving that thing than an actual car, because I know its design and handling impairs my driving abilities.
So long story short - sure, if someone t-bones me while I'm in a car and they're in an SUV, I'm probably screwed. But I present a much larger and much less manouvreable target when I too am driving an SUV. All in all, my odds are probably about the same, so I might as well save the gas money.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
On my trips to the US I've been amazed to find that there aren't any pedestrian walkways (pavement to us UK chaps, and I think "sidewalk" is what you US fellows call them). Because of the ubiquitous car (and that perhaps because of the cheap petrol) there is no (useful) public transport, and because there is no public transport, everyone uses the car, so why build cycle lanes or sidewalks, or foot-bridges over highways.
It's a bit of a catch-22. The problem is that the petrol is going to run out at some point - the light at the end of the tunnel isn't some unobtanium that's gonna replace petrol, it's a runaway train hurtling towards us.
But it's not a vote winner. Do you want $2 on a gallon of gas to put towards finding an alternative? Hell No! No Gov, local or otherwise, is going to impose that tax because they won't get re-elected, and when the problem does hit they'll all be nicely retired from the fray, so why bother now - right?
What we need is some government with some backbone to impose the tax, to encourage (nay, fund!) the research. There'd be a bunch of bleating about it now, but in 20, 30, 50 years, it'll sure be nice to realise we're ahead of the curve rather than sitting in the dark in our houses that we can no longer afford to cool in the summer or heat in the winter.
But then I was always a "do my homework as soon as I got it" sort of person, rather than the "stay up late the night before" chap.
Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
handmadehands.co.uk
Here are two ideas for you.
1. Buy a small car. (appologies for this, but I think in metric) 400 miles a week is 640kms. Pleanty of small cars can get 7 litres per 100kms. Thats about 45 litres a week. If your petrol is $3 a gallon, 3.8 litres to the gallon, 45/3.8*$3 is only $36 a week, not $100. Which is only 5% of you income before paycheck. A Prius can get 4.5l/100kms ($22 a week, 1.5% of your income). I just realised that to be spending $100 a week on petrol you car must be getting 21 l/100km which I am sure is a crime in some countries.
2. Move closer to your work.
Hybrid scooters are nice, but what the US really needs is better, more available mass transit.
Most people won't buy this scooter, but they will ride a train.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
walking from local mall to the local Holiday Inn/mini-Walmart takes 45 mins
So build your buildings closer together.
Here in Europe, living in the centre of the city, within walking distance of everything, is becoming more and more popular. As transport becomes more expensive, the suburbs will wither and die.
Nice, but I would never call this a hybrid, it's an electric scooter with a built in hydrogen fuelled fuel cell recharger, People over use trendy terms
Thankfully we live in a capitalist society, where only one type of person drives a SUV:
Those that both WANT to drive them and can pay for them.
Let gas prices change the equilibrium and reduce the number on the road...
So long story short - sure, if someone t-bones me while I'm in a car and they're in an SUV, I'm probably screwed. But I present a much larger and much less manouvreable target when I too am driving an SUV. All in all, my odds are probably about the same, so I might as well save the gas money.
Americans have a kind of passive view of safety: you put massive defenses around you and you will be safe. It's the Maginot Line theory. The SUV is the perfect example of this. Statistically it does nothing for the safety of its occupants, and makes others who have to share the road considerably less safe. But it is reassuring to have all that steel around you. We've lost sight of the fact the best way to survive a crash is not to be in one.
My friends who drive my late model standard transmission Accord sedan usually remark on how much fun it is to drive. This happens to be a 4 banger (I'm an eco-nut), so it's not sports car by any means. It's just a competent handling sedan with good tires. People have forgotten the pleasure of driving a car that handles well. It's s shame that the SUV has supplanted the sports car as the American fantasy vehicle.
The other thing they remark on how comfortable it is -- as if they expect driving a sedan is the automotive equivalent of wearing a hair shirt. There's a reason that sedans were the dominant body style for so many years: they represent the best possible compromise between comfort, covenience, safety and performance.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
What city is this? I'd like to know so I can avoid going there. It sounds pretty poorly designed.
I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants