Slashdot Mirror
Hybrids Beware? EPA Revises Mileage Standards
Shivetya writes "The federal Environmental Protection Agency announced a new system for determining the fuel economy of many cars and trucks. Hardest hit will be hybrids as all-electric driving is not considered. At the same time, many medium-duty vehicles will get rated, but not have to be published until 2011 This move to more realistic ratings will severely reduce the high numbers some cars have posted."
Chili Palmer: How many miles to the gallon to you get on those Hummers, about 12?
Dabu: Nine.
Now can we PLEASE start getting wheel horsepower ratings at stock? I don't care if my engine is making 300 if the wheels are only seeing 220 (yes I know they would be seeing more than 220, it was just an example)
Living With a Nerd
From the EPA site itself http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/420f06009.htm#fuele stimates
u estVehicle
u estVehicle
A site to enter your own observed information http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=addG
or lookup what others have recorded http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=addG
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Look, the reality of milage doesn't change because the EPA changes their testing methodology. Yes, the current EPA numbers are inflated. Sounds like the new ones will be deflated. Regardless, I get a real world 40 MPG out of my Prius and that's better than the real world high 20's, low 30's I got out of my previous cars with similar performance. What's the big deal? Why do so many folks go nutty over proving that hybrids are the greatest thing ever or the stupidest thing ever? All cars have different performance, comfort, efficiency, safety, appearance, and cost metrics. So you choose one you like.
By the way, I don't hate HUMMER owners.
Cheers.
If they all drop by the same percentage, then the MPG rating list is still very meaningful. The absolute value difference will be bigger for the hybrids, but that's because they have the higher numbers - duh.
This will only be a problem for zealots and the typical asshole, so I expect to hear a lot about this in the near future - there are LOTS of assholes.
I have Hyundai Sonata and the mileage quoted on the sticker at the lot is *exactly* what I've gotten. Aside from the hybrid variety, are certain cars more likely to get lower mileage than the EPA estimate?
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
Since none of them come from the factory with any way to recharge the battery pack other than driving or braking they are all just gas powered. They are more efficient because the internal combustion engine is sized correctly for charging the battery or maintaining highway speed not for rapid acceleration. People do add chargers and larger batteries but the EPA has never tested aftermarket modifications.
This won't affect the Insight at all; it doesn't have an all-electric mode.
It is, that said, an exceptionally stupid rule; the Prius gets a huge benefit from the all-electric mode, and that ought to be included in the mileage calculations, because it's the bottom line that affects a real user. If your car can do three miles of bumper to bumper traffic with the engine off, instead of burning a quarter gallon of gas idling, you have saved a quarter gallon of gas. That your engine didn't need to be on to achieve this is a feature, not a bug.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Getting the US off of the foreign oil tit should be a national security imperative.
The EPA numbers haven't been representative/useful for ages. Every car owner so interested has had to determine their own average mileage, usually via their gas receipts or instant-economy displays on their dashboard.
m l
The City/Highway system doesn't allow for the type of accurate planning that is needed, I'd rather see a Typical rating that is based off of some algorithm that averages city/highway driving on level ground and leaves the rest to the consumer. When I plot cross country flights, I have a known fuel burn-rate I can depend on. With my car, I have to drive until the gauge gets low.
For example, my 1999 Buick Regal has a Typical mileage of 22mpg. That's for my (now mostly) city driving with a touch of highway thrown in. If I spend a lot of time downtown, it might be 17mpg-ish. If I'm on a cross-country trip at a reasonable speed (eg, not 45mph) then I see 26-29mpg. These numbers are based off exact experience. While writing this, I googled to find my 'official mpg' and got this: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/15081.sht
This site does exactly what I'm suggesting. The official city mileage is 18, the official highway is 27. That's great, but the ACTUAL mileage that I see is the same as what these folks figured off of average spread: 21mpg.
I don't care what my theoretical mileage is, I care what the practical/typical mileage is. For my car, it's 21-22mpg. Dropping the City/Highway trick in favor of something like this gives a more USEFUL number, even if it's at the expense of losing bragging points from a theoretical highway-only number.
And in the end, what's more important?
A co-worker used to plug his electric pickup truck into an outlet in the parking ramp during the day. I am struggling to remember the company, although it said it right on the side. It was not one of the legendary Ford Ranger EVs. I believe it was a GM mini pickup.
Have you Meta Moderated t
I have a 1995 Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera. When I bought the car a year and a half ago, I was curious about the fuel economy. Most of my drive to work is on the highway, and over a period of a week I tracked miles driven and fuel consumed. My decade old car gets 32 miles per gallon. I find it stupid that many cars today brag about that kind of fuel economy on the highway. You would think that in a ten year stretch engines and cars would have become significantly more efficient - even the non-hybrid models.
On a totally unrelated note: SouthPark teaches us that hybrid cars may not contribute to smog, but they do produce a hell of a lot of smug.
Love sees no species.
I thought MythBusters covered this one.
The final thoughts were that no modern air conditioning system should vastly impact gas mileage.
They even tested it on some SUV and came out with very similar gas mileage. (Windows down actually caused slightly more loss).
I'm sure someone will chime in here and clear this up a bit. I was just a bit confused when the article claimed air conditioning was a gas hog. (Note, on an older car I had when I kicked in the AC I really did feel the engine jump to compensate, but this was ages ago.)
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
Sure, mileage for hybrids will drop with the new regulations but at the same time the mileage on all-gas vehicles will drop as well. Hybrids will still come out on top.
...remains the bicycle. But I ain't riding one, I've got whole cows to devour...
the mods may say you posted flamebait, but to me it's a flame that warms my heart. rock on, brother! --chebucto
My little 93 Geo Metro XFi would still get pretty much the same mileage as the old EPA ratings 51/58. I currently get 57 MPG driving it like a nut. There are a few metros on the road getting 70+mpg on the road right now.
average miles per charge using 0.00 gasoline: 80 miles
average hwy mpg after full charge depleted: 50 mpg
average city mpg after full charge depleted: 40 mpg
average time to full charge using household power: 8 hours
I usually travel less than 20 miles per day but I will not consider a hybrid until:
1) I can drive electric-only for a range limited by battery capacity
2) I can charge it at home each night
3) I can drive unlimited miles in gas-electric mode after the batteries are depleted.
But with oil-men in the Whitehouse I'm not holding my breath.
Honestly, this sounds like a ploy from the Big 3 automakers lobby groups and Big Oil to make alternative energy sources look less attractive. And, I don't care how you spin it, a hybrid car should always come out better; if not by government standards then by common sense. Common sense has to win over when you burn less gas because the hybrid car has the electric drive. Leave it to government to pass another non-sense law. We need to end our dependence on oil, period! Not just foriegn oil but all sources of it! This will take a more grass roots campaign as Big Oil and GM only pay lip service to alternative energies. It will take us as consumers to make oil unfavorable. After all, this is a market economy and if no wants oil anymore than Big Oil will need to find something else or go bankrupt. There is little to no insentive for the oil companies to invest in alternative energies. We as the consumer create the incentive. You can pass all the clean air initiatives you want and continue to tout the party line but nothing will change until Americans collectively scream, "We want alternative energy vehicles!" Right now, this is far minority.
Why are diesel cars unavailable in the USA/Canada?
A hybrid is a very expensive way to get the same mileage as a diesel. They are hard to start in Winter compared to a petrol engine, but the Europeans make do somehow.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
I really doubt Hybrids will be as markedly impacted by the new tests as suggested in the EPA's discussion. Rapid accelleration is a reason many car buyers buy their car - I own a Prius and I can't even list for you how many times someone told me about its 0-60 performance while I was considering buying it - as a selling point for buying the car! Even over on GreenHybrid.com where fuel efficiency is the point of the entire website, people made endless claims about the Prius' ability to take off off the line.
So bravo for these changes being added. Toyota and Honda are obviously the leaders in this field and they'll either make no change to their strategy and just keep having the highest EPA numbers, or adjust their strategy slightly to keep high EPA numbers but handle rapid accelleration with good mileage numbers - something that, by the way, the current Prius does not do, regardless of how many claims salesmen and Prius enthusiasts made. It gets its great numbers when cruising, or starting and stopping at low speeds - which is just what the old EPA standards tested.
Any environmentalist worried about the Prius dropping from 60mpg EPA to 44mpg should keep in mind 2 things:
The Hummer will probably drop from 11mpg to 9. Single digits won't improve sales. They might harm them. Might.
The 2008/2009 Prius has been claimed by Toyota to get 75mpg under the current standards - so it's entirely possible the new EPA measure will put it at... 60mpg.
So even if the new tests somehow favored gas guzzlers, which I doubt, Honda and Toyota have the technological lead and their MPG numbers are only going to continue to run away from the rest of the pack leaving GM and Ford's "hybrid" sub-30mpg numbers further and further behind.
I'm puzzled by the end of the linked article that says ``The new EPA mileage estimates won't harm automakers' ability to meet federal rules requiring an industrywide average fuel economy of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars and 21 mpg for sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks and vans. Those requirements are part of the corporate average fuel economy program run by the Transportation Department.''
Isn't the only worthwhile benefit here requiring the car manufacturers to innovate and create vehicles that steadily perform better in this department?
Changing the way the numbers are calculated WILL NOT change the way people drive or how the vehciles perform. Hybrids will continue to be more efficient than gasoline powered vehicles despite how the numbers fall out.
In fairness to the city/highway split, there are people who wind up driving more in one mode or the other. I had a commuter car that hit the highway mileage pretty consistently (32mpg) for most of 2 years. Then I switched jobs, and for the next 2 years got 20mpg, because I was no longer doing a highway commute.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
As the owner of a 2006 Prius, I'm glad to hear that the EPA won't consider the "all-electric" mode of hybrids when calculating mileage. They shouldn't, because the "all-electric" mode is somewhat unpredictable. Assuming the internal combustion engine isn't cold (~60F or higher), current hybrids will probably operate in all-electric mode between 0-25 MPH, assuming slow and constant acceleration, flat terrain, etc. If these conditions aren't met, the ICE will kick in.
Note that this isn't a flaw in design; rather, this is exactly how hybrids are supposed to operate. The electric motor powers the car where the ICE is least efficient, and power assists the ICE where the ICE is efficient. Priuses never got the advertised 60 MPG city because it's virtually impossible to guarantee that you'll always be all-electric between 0-25 MPH.
The revised EPA will still show that hybrids are more fuel efficient than gas-only drivetrains. However, with more accurate MPG numbers posted on sales stickers, a more accurate comparison between hybrids and gas-only drivetrains will be possible. This will help potential buyers evaluate whether or not the added up-front cost of a hybrid is justified in long-term fuel savings.
In order to get off the "foreign oil tit", as you put it, we'd have to do alternatives for lubricants, plastics, asphalt, jet fuel, diesel oil, heating oil, etc.
Sure, there are alternatives for may of those (biodiesel, corn-starch plastics, electricity generation fueled by something besides oil, etc), but the alternatives are often more costly (and less efficient) to create than the original... or can be worse for the environment (e.g. coal-fired electrical generation vs. oil-fired). Until oil is expensive enough to make those alternatives more attractive, we're kinda stuck.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Sure, it may more accurately reflect how the gas is used, but it will not accurately reflect how many miles a hybrid will be able to go on a single tank... and that's all most consumers buying hybrids really care about. At least the can be pleasantly surprised when they actually get more MPG than the EPA estimate.
the epa can do whatever they want and it won't change the "real world" results that most people get.
how many people do you know who always have their foot flooring the gas or brake? if people learned to use the accelerator and brakes effectively they would probably save 10 mpg on every tank.
i'll bet i get better mileage in my eclipse than a decent percentage of hybrid owners, simply because most people don't think about how they drive.
-- lol pwned
http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/26/news/companies/gm_ fuel.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes
t /index.html
Personnaly I am sort of happy to see GM get thier lunch eaten. They've been asleep at the switch for too many years.
Here an interesting article as well. http://www.cnn.com/2006/BUSINESS/12/22/toyota.reu
A choice quoute from the head of Toyota: '"The important thing is to be a leader in car-making, and that's done by improving products," he told a year-end news conference, adding that vehicle quality will be Toyota's top priority at a time of rising vehicle recalls.'
An American manager would have spoken some crap about "leveraging synergys for value added customer delight", in other words not admitting to a problem and just engaging in window dressing. American management seems to have lost thier way, focusing on image without addressing fundamentals.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
As a prius owner, what's really interesting is the effect of cold weather on the car. The car looses about 4 to 5 miles per gallon when the weather is below 32. The engine runs much more trying to keep the catalytic converter up to temperature. If you kick on the heat (which is free in a non-hybrid) it really keeps the engine running to warm up the passenger cabin. That's may be why you see prius owners bundled up in winter. (Honda's don't have this problem as the engine runs all the time.)
I summer, the AC puts almost no additional load on the engine. The late model Prius have electric compressors so the engine can be off and you still get A/C. I've wondered why they didn't configure the A/C as a heat pump for cooler days.
By the way, I really like the prius with one or two odd features.
51.4% of a barrel of oil goes towards gasoline according to the state of California.
Support a few technologists in Washington.
Just shows how slow the government is to correct any errors it produces. Hell, if it took THIS long to correct inaccurate gas mileage numbers, how long will it take to correct our deficit?
:(
Nevermind... I'm reaching
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
My '06 VW Golf TDI was rated for 37/44 mpg and I average 42mpg (70/30 mix highway/city), and I'm not going light on the gas pedal. (Yes, I do track every tank in a spread sheet)
It's good that they are revamping the test, but it's bad that it may not accurately reflect the real life experiences that full electric drivers will experience.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
5 Passengers and a load as well...
http://phoenixmotorcars.com/models/fleet.html
An electric vehicle has almost no parts which require servicing; no valves, no spark plugs, no oil to change, no air filter, no piston rings. Basically it'll last as long as the chassis is structurally sound and the bodywork remains reasonable. The only bits which'll wear out are the consumables, the battery and bearings. With a battery which can last for 20 years, there's no real reason the vehicle shouldn't do a million miles with bugger all servicing.
The battery:
"In addition to high power the Altairnano NanoSafe
batteries deliver:
Long life - potentially up to 20+ year life
Very fast charge - rechargeable in minutes
Extremely wide operating temperature range
from -50C/-60F to +75C/165F
Inherent safety - no risk of thermal runaway"
Deleted
When I plot cross country flights, I have a known fuel burn-rate I can depend on. With my car, I have to drive until the gauge gets low.
That's because your plane is running at the same flow rate virtually the whole time. On long distances, I know that my 2002 Camaro SS has a range of about 350 miles (at 24mpg) before I'm really pushing my luck, though I fill up at about 300 miles. For the vast majority of that trip, my cruise control is set somewhere around 75 to 80 mph. I'm only changing the RPM when I'm passing (or on occasion being passed when I have to duck between vehicles moving more slowly), or when getting back on the highway after either fueling or stopping for a rest break.
However, on short distances such as in city driving, the car drops to about 17mpg. I don't have much of a lead foot, and my shift pattern is usually 1-3-5. However, the LS1 is simply a thirsty engine, and idling and acceleration eat up a fair amount of fuel. Any car is going to be at least similar in the randomness of the fuel efficiency, though, even if it's a hybrid. The use is simply too random to work according to a fixed-flow scenario.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
1. Figure out which (probably American) car maker doesn't / can't produce a viable hybrid, but is influential enough to get an EPA rule changed.
2. Buy options on the stock (it's never a good idea to actually own stock in such companies: a government bailout a la Chrysler is not nearly as good a bet nowadays.)
3. Wait a quarter or two for their MPG to look enough better to trick a few less careful or overly patriotic buyers, triggering a rise in sales that, given some exposure in the mainstream media, should be followed by a stock price jump.
4. Profit!
*5. (Optional, later) Sell options (short the stock) for when reality kicks in again.
I had a 1978 Dodge Omni that got 36 to 38 mpg when it was out of tune and half dead, it got much better mileage new. I'm not talking EPA I'm talking real world miles. Based on the revised EPA estimates that 30 year old technology would compete with the hybrids. Something is seriously wrong here. For all the R&D they are going backwards.
Because I get real world 40MPG out of my Toyota Echo when it's properly maintained but when I looked at a Prius it's EPA rating was for 70MPG. Something not right about that. Especially since--as others have pointed out--hybrids use incredibly toxic batteries to achieve the same results as a well built pure-ICE vehicle.
Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
How do the hybrid cars do in bitter cold conditions? Do they run well? How does the heater work? I'm thinking of environments where the temperature is, say, -15 degrees Fahrenheit.
How do they do on really long hills? Up a 7% grade for 15 miles at 50 MPH?
These may be corner cases for some drivers, but one or both of these conditions exists on most of my road trips.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
All current hybrids use NiMH batteries, which have no cadmium toxicity issues (unlike NiCd). They're soon going to switch to Li-ion because the specific power (kW/kg) and energy (Wh/kg) are better with some of the new chemistries.
Li-ion batteries have few toxicity issues either, and the new chemistries like iron phosphate and titanium spinel have even less.
Of course, it still makes sense to recycle batteries instead of landfilling them. Lead-acid car batteries are already the most-recycled items in the USA, and the more valuable the materials in the battery (nickel, lithium, cobalt in the old Li-ions) the more attractive it will be to recycle them.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
My '96 Chevy Impala SS hit its estimates right on the head - 20/26 isn't bad at all for a corvette-powered 4-door.
Hybrids are a solution looking for a problem. That problem is motorcycles. It's not cars. Turbo Direct Injection (TDI) diesels provide better mileage than hybrids in pretty much every case. While people are getting real-world mileage of 40 to 45 mpg in their priuses as a rule, TDI Jetta and Golf owners are getting 45 to 50 mpg - and with a little conversion work they'll run on veggie oil, diesel fuel, biodiesel, or E95. Plus there's no batteries to produce or recycle.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Hyuandais are actually reliable now. You just happened to buy one when they were junk.
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
...is something like a Nielsen rating for mileage. Pay some people to put a black box in their car that records the mileage. For new models, you just publish the EPA "laboratory" mileage. For cars with a year or more of real-world driving, they could post "actual" mileage. One big problem however, is that you might not be able to get enough people to sign up. You need enough people to sort out the lemons (although if mileage lemons are produced, that's important to know).
Kudos to the EPA for taking this a step closer to the real world.
Now, it wouldn't carry the same weight as a controlled data-gathering or testing effort, but is anybody aware of a mileage website, where people just enter their mileage for various makes and models? Sounds like something GasBuddy could add as a feature.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Sustainability and energy independence essay
I still have to figure out why you American people like to drive big SUV which have lazy fat motors... with a fuel consumption which could make one think the tank is leaking. For sure, the gas price in the US is lower than in Europe. But here in Europe, we drive cars with smaller engines, which consume less fuel and... are more powerful! American cars often have a motor which is several decades old.
Just look at the wonderful job they did deregulating their power systems. ...
DOH!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
saying "I have a bomb" on an airplane.
They hiss and spit and shun you. Because, as the movies have taught (sorry, wrong word.. CONDITIONED) them, nuclear = bad. PERIOD. All they need to figure out is how to shut down that damn "sun" thingee, and everything'll be right with the world.
So remember now. Nuclear power makes Baby Jesus cry!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
The blurb on the front page says,
"Hardest hit will be hybrids as all-electric driving is not considered."
RTFA, they *DO* include all electric driving.
"Hybrids will be hit harder because the new test eliminates some of the all-electric driving that helped them produce impressive results under the present system, Wehrum said."
*SOME* it says *SOME* not *ALL*.
Are there editors here?
And due to:
- The more optimal loading of the engine,
- The Atkinson cycle used by the engine, which recovers more energy of expansion, and
- The smaller engine made possible by the electric motor,
More of that energy gets to the wheels by whatever route.You could get 150 MPG using an ultralight car with a tiny engine (like a Loremo) but most people don't want to sacrifice performance, comfort or safety.
That would only be true if everything else was equal. However, claiming that they are equal is false, and anyone telling you so explicitly is a bald-faced liar.Sustainability and energy independence essay
"Almost everything else petroleum is used for is either comparatively easy to replace with alternative technologies or represents a comparatively small consumption."
Yup. But in a goodly number of these cases, the extra expense of replacing the petroleum-based product is out of line.
Replacing a $0.50 product with a $2.50 product or a $5.00 product isn't necessarily good economy.
Regardless of what the "save our planet" movement would like, we still have to balance economic viability, and a host of other issues with environmental impact. We can't simply use environmental impact as the ONLY benchmark.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Canada has tons of diesel vehicles, have for years. For instance, the Smart car sold in Canada is a turbo diesel. Tons of Volkswagens....
It very well may be included. The article summary omits a couple of words -- namely "some of"-- from the sentance in the article that says. "Hybrids will be hit harder because the new test eliminates some of the all-electric driving that helped them produce impressive results under the present system" The article is not specific about what driving will not be counted.
My guess (and it is a guess) is that they will try to end the test with the battery in the same charge state that it started the test and won't count 'borrowed' miles that come from running on the battery and not restoring the charge.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
The biggest problem I see with the EPA is that they use static tests that haven't been updated much in 30 years. Thus, there are two ways vehicle manufacturers can go about engineering for fuel effeciency. The first way is to engineer vehicles that are efficient in real world driving conditions (driving 65+ mph on the interstate, lots of stop and go driving less than 45 mph). Or, they can engineer cars to utilize the testing process to achieve the best possible numbers, which may or may not reflect real world economy. Either way is an acceptable way to conduct buisness. The problem lies in that manufacturers may only legaly advertise the numbers determined by the EPA. So, if they design their cars to pass the test, so to speak, you get inflated numbers. The inverse is true of vehicles designed for real world efficiency. Engineering a vehicle for real world results net deflated EPA numbers. And since you can only post those numbers, your negative difference from actual economy plus your competitors positive difference from actual ecomomy gives a severly biased comparison to window shoppers.
This sig only exists because you are observing it.
Right, because I always turn my air conditioner on when it's friggin 20-degrees outside, you know, I really wish it would warm up here in Florida, theese 20-degree nights are brutal.
I'm glad to see they're taking driving like a madman into consideration too, at least I know I can pay for my reckless driving ticket with all the money I save on gas.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
Your claim is refuted by the facts.
It would be quite difficult to run the US without imported oil, but it would be even harder to get all ground transport and electric generation off fossil fuels — but even that looks possible with current technology.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
The answer is obvious; GM soybeans that generate lighter oils. There are other plants that generate lighter oils, but soybeans are where it's at for oil production per acre. However, Greenfreaks would shit themselves at the idea of having most of the worlds farmland in GM soybeans.
I like my Echo. It's sad they don't make them anymore. I don't like the Yaris as much, although if I can get a diesel Yaris I'll do it. 60mpg!
I only get 40mpg doing pure level interstate driving, but it's an automatic transmission. 35mpg isn't bad for a $10k car that's roomy and fun to drive.
Man, you really need that seminar!
Okay, post data for something else. DATA.
The EV1 was essentially built by hand (only 1100 were made) and NONE were ever sold, only leased on closed-end leases.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
We don't care at all. My Prius gets around 52mpg, and drives like a fairly souped up 4 cylinder. It has nice space inside, and the GPS system in the dash is great. And I don't care if they make the batteries out of baby seals.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
How can the weight of the emissions coming out be anything other than proportional to the number of gallons of gas going in? Shifting the discussion from gas mileage to tonnage of emissions shouldn't change anything.
I own a 2005 Toyota Prius, and I can get 53-57 miles per gallon (or more) easily. This is not just measurements on local roads, but includes highway driving, some stop & go traffic, and all the things seen on my daily commute.
The above was calculated not just over short distances, but over the full 400+ miles I can get out of the ~11 gallon tank before I decide to refill it (typically, I put 8-9 gallons in, and calculate mileage both via the on board computer, and how much fuel I put it versus the trip odometer). Over shorter distances (40 miles or so), I have gotten potentially 60+ miles per gallon.
Granted, I am in somewhat ideal conditions (the warm Southern US (Air Conditioning is almost always on), lots of streets where I can go 40-50 MPH (one of the Prius' sweet spots), reasonably timed traffic lights...), and I am a reasonably cautious driver with a good insurance rate, so that may factor in a bit. Daisy-chaining short trips, or otherwise not just doing them, helps with the gas mileage a lot (a few short trips takes 2-3 MPG off a tank of gas' result easily).
So while I may be exceptional, it is definitely possible in my view to get the EPA mileage for a Prius. But I did not get it because it was an efficient car - I got it because it was a reasonably priced mid-size vehicle which fit my needs (and height!), and was comfortable to drive.
Dual drive axles, power steering, Bendix ABS, 80,000 pound GVWR. 6.9 miles per gallon average on #2 diesel. Pulling loads that average about 34,000 pounds (averaged over the 300,000 miles that are on it - some loads have weighed 45,500 pounds, sometimes I have to pull an empty trailer over 450 miles to get a load).
Want to improve the average fuel economy of a hybrid? Put 10 of them on a trailer and pull it with an International (or Freightliner, or Peterbilt, or Kenworth, etc.)
"Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
When gasoline hit $3/gal in the US, I decided to buy a motor kit for a bicycle (that I already had).
i nanities/recumbent/moto_bike_page/episode005/episo de005.html
...the question of "environmental friendliness" is difficult as well.
I had decided to get a 4-cycle gasoline engine kit, as I presumed that the electrics wouldn't have the range I desired,,, but I kept reading where electric-owners claimed that although the electrics were more expensive to buy, they polluted less and cost less to operate over the long run.
When I compared cost-per-mile figures for one of the best electric kits on the market, I found that the cost-per-mile was between five and ten times higher than a comparable-power 4-cycle gasoline engine:
http://www.norcom2000.com/users/dcimper/assorted/
Seeing this result, I find it tough to believe that you can currently "improve" a gasoline engine by making it "a little bit electric".
~
It's not that complicated.
BTW the grandparent is wrong. You can't change HP with gearing.
Where modern engines fail is commonly called 'Guts', they make shit for torque and HP under 3 to 4K. Diesels on the other hand have lots of 'Guts' (but no balls).
If you want both there is no substitute for cubic inches. Give me a screaming small block Chevy.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Going up grade the car performs great. Last week I drove up to Flagstaff and had no problems maintaining 65 for the 5-10 mile stretches of 5-7% grade with 4 people in the car. The electric engine augments the ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) and that helps the performance.
On the A/C front, the Prius has a multistage compressor so the hit on the car is minimal under moderate heat. I see plenty of hot conditions out here and the milage doesn't seem to be effected much at all even at maximum cooling. If anything, the mileage is a bit lower in cold conditions due to the engine running longer to bring the engine up to temp for emisions management. It also is an ELECTRIC motor compressor so the power used is not directly from the gas engine. That should help with the new EPA tests.
Do I drive like a type "A" personality? No, that never did appeal to me to race up to a stop light to get one car ahead. I do drive to take advantage of the car I have. YMMV.
You need more justification?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Hi,
I did the hill calculation for going over Barlow Pass in Oregon (Mt. Hood..) before I bought my 02 Prius. Don't have it, but I remember how I did it: For your example...
calculating vertical climb horsepower.. assuming grade is rise/run proportion.
Given that 1 horsepower is 33000 pounds 1 vertical foot up in a minute.
50mph is 0.833 miles/minute. at a 7% grade up, its 0.05833 vertical miles, or 308 vertical feet/ minute.
3500 pounds of car and load, that's 1.08e6 feet*pounds lift per minute.
1.08e3/33000(ft*lbs/min)/hp gives about 33hp for the vertical climb, leaving 42 hp for friction (aerodynamic and road) I believe this car only uses about 14-15 horsepower for friction and windage at 60. Even derating for loss of power at altitude, (70% at 10000ft?) there's still margin to do this.
Huge horsepowers in modern cars (>100HP) are not needed for climb, they're used for acceleration performance.
Now.. accelleration 0-60 in the 02 Prius is not great. It's fantastic 0-20, okay 20-35 and terrible from 35-65. I believe the '04 version and up really improved that by doubling the electrical torque. The surge torque you get from the electrics are not affected by altitude, which can be nice.
A bigger concern might be the cold weather performance. I've noticed occasional starting issues in the 02 Prius under sub 20's F. Basically, if the car can't start itself on the first crank over it freaks out and lights up a lot of scary indicators. I've had this happen 3 times. I believe they've got a fix for this on the car.. I'm of the mindset to just not care as long as I understand why the indicators are up when this happens. Of course, I live in a valley where it rarely gets under freezing. I would be worried about sub zero F temps for this vehicle.
The Hybrid is started by the traction battery.. so in theory... they could give it far superior start performance in cold weather.
Cheers,
Alex
Just got back from an Xmas road trip. Display showed 50.3 mpg for the last 109 miles (since the last fill) on the '05 Prius. Mostly freeway at c. 72 mph.
I can suck it up and live with that.
But, yes, my city, which I thought was supposed to be even better, has shown under 40 about as often as not so a generalized guesstimate of 44 doesn't sound unreasonable.
As always, the response is "Compared to other people's mpg of......??"
I admit that it bothers me a little that hybrids get a free Carpool/HOV pass.
I thought the point of HOV lanes was to have fewer cars on the road.
Allowing hybrids there does not encourage fewer cars out there.
But, you say, hybrids are really efficient, and the allowances helps fight polution.
Well, hybrids, by design are the most efficient in stop and go traffics.
Braking charges the batteries.
But in the HOV lane, hybrids are slowing less, so using the gas engine more.
That's not what it says. It says the CO2 emissions are equal. Big difference.
Of course, that page also doesn't consider that the lifespan of a Prius (battery included) can easily exceed 300,000 km. Some in taxi service in Vancouver have gone close to 400,000 (over 230,000 miles) without anything more than scheduled maintenance. That was a while ago, they're probably a long way over that now.
The point is that the majority of the emissions (CO2 and other) from a car come from the fuel, both tailpipe and production. From this you can conclude that the net emissions (in ALL categories) will take a jump downward if the car is run partly on electricity, and some people are doing exactly that.
However true, that was totally unrelated to the thread of discussion where you inserted it.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
I haven't conducted any lab tests, but under regular usage (70 mile rt commute 5 times a week with no major hills and traffic only 1 direction) my 2002 Civic LX gets 390-400 miles on under 11 gallons of gas. Not quite 40 mpg, but 35+ ain't bad for 120k+ miles and not being a hybrid. When it was new and before I stopped caring for it properly it would regularly get 420-450 miles per tank (~38-40mpg).
My 2003 Prius hasn't given me any trouble in winter at 95,000 miles. The heater runs like it does in most cars, pulling heat out of the engine coolant.
Now, there is a twist; if you use the vents, defroster, or a combination of the two, there are electric heating elements that will give you heat within a minute or two, even when it is below freezing. Strange that the electric elements don't work with the floor heater...but that's the design, I checked the electrical wiring diagrams to confirm my heater controls weren't fubar.
Driving through the mountains in western Pennsylvania between Wisconsin and Washington DC was never an issue either; the engine would wind up pretty high and mileage uphill would suffer as one would expect, but I always had enough oomph when I needed it. It was also nice that going downhill was largely a no-gas scenario, but not as no-gas as often or as long as I would have hoped; maybe the road grade wasn't as extreme as I thought it was.
Anyway, with double the mileage on average of my former vehicle (2000 Ranger with 5-speed manual on a 2WD, 4 cyl drivetrain), no complaints here.
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
They'd realise that what they're driving has too many wheels.
It's pretty obvious that when fuel costs are equal CO2 emissions are equal as CO2 is the output of burning gasoline.
With the number of suckers paying insane amounts of money just to save $1 on gas, we'd probably be better off with a total cost of ownership measurement.
When I say fuel cost, I am talking about cost to the environment as that is what this whole thread is about. When they become equal, I mean that the extra fuel cost (CO2 emissions) on building the vehicle has been overcome by the extra efficiency of the vehicle. However, if you don't drive as much (I drive less than 3000 Miles a year) it may not be environmental worth buying a new car as well as the fact that the other emissions take much longer for the Prius and the unnamed similar sized vehicle to equalize. Or you could also consider buying a smaller vehicle, as they cost less CO2 to build, and use less while driving, or one can learn to live without a car and rent one when needed (even if you are renting a caddy you are probable having a smaller impact on the environment than owning your own prius).
It would seem much more logical to expose a truly random selection of cars to exhaustive tests over a wider range of conditions for longer periods of time. Instead of averaging, you plot against a distribution and take the average of the distribution. This, however, is not the quoted figure for any car. It's merely the baseline for that model. Each car has to have some nominal testing - at least to see if the engine will start. Assuming that the distribution will be the same with merely the offsets being different, you then derive the effective MPG from the distribution and where that specific car is believed to be on it.
You now have an MPG per car, but it's still a single value and single values are useless. I'd therefore do the above with nine distributions, not one. One for 0-25 mph, one for 25-50, one for 50-75, and each of those for smooth traffic flow, heavy traffic and stop/go traffic.
Consumers tend to drown out lots of stats, though, and nine numbers - trivial to any geek - would be murderous on your average couch potato. On the other hand, colours tend to be workable. Simply do a rainbow spectrum, where violet is so far above average that driving round the planet uses less fuel than a typical hummvee uses to get out the parking lot, and where red is where you're escorted to the grocery store by an oil tanker. Nice and visual, though with hard data for those who actually want hard data to work with.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
IMHO I don't care if it's a hybrid, I want numbers. Cost (inc maint), and fuel economy, performance.
To do a meaningful comparison.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Last January, I bought a 2006 diesel Jeep Liberty. It is pretty good on fuel economy (20-21 city, 25-26 highway at less than 70 mph). I live in central Iowa and cold weather was not a problem last year. Then again, it was a fairly mild winter... It's also zippy as heck. The motor produces a ton of torque at really low RPMs so it feels a lot faster than it really is, but the feeling makes it a ton of fun to drive. My Jeep is the same. At stop lights, I can leave everybody behind me with very little effort. 295 ft-lbs of torque at 1800 rpm will do that... It sounds cool when its idling. I also love the smell of biodiesel (10%) in the morning.... Now it has 60k miles on it So, you are saying that it is almost broken in, right?
For people who keep their vehicles for more than a few years, diesels are a good value.
Hey there,
:-)
We just got 3+ feet of snow here. I bought the 4WD Escape Hybrid because that happens here. So, when it's beautiful, I'm getting 30+MPG, certainly not 50, but certainly not 14.
When it's crappy out like it is now, it is nice to be able to get out. I think it would be silly to drive my car out in California when the weather is so nice. But out here, normal cars are still snowbanks. 4WD lets you pull out and get to your family if they need something. And even in this cold, and with bad roads, I'm still 24-28MPG.
So, to play on your final sentence, I like the hybrid, and I like my truck.
If I end up moving to a warmer clime, I will be looking squarely at the Civic Hybrid.
My mom says I'm cool.
Enron-style accounting lives and flourishes at the Departments of Labor AND at the EPA!
Why am I not surprised?
Of course, lots of very powerful people will fight that tooth and nail.
..this: "forced induction"(turbo|supercharger|both)-> being applied to a hugemongous displacement engine.
2 liter, naturally aspirated and fueled, no boost=x bhp and torque
2 liter,efi, turbo, supercharger, high boost=x+2 (whatever)bhp and torque
6 liter (see above)
8 liter (see above)
See, it still works!
Turbos take time to spin up (lag). Bigger engines demand bigger turbos (or multiple turbos). Lot's of lag.
There's nothing like torque on demand.
Further turbos require lower compression ratios or better fuel. Which makes turbo engines even more gutless when compared to their bigger brothers.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The kinetic energy supplying regenerative braking still came from running the gas engine - either directly or indirectly. You only come out ahead when the amount of usable energy you save (shutting off engine) and recover (regenerative breaking, charging batteries during idle) is more than the extra energy you need because of extra weight (batteries are heavy) and inefficient conversion (electric generators and motors are not very efficient).
This company, http://www.alternatepropulsion.com/ looks promising to help change all of this. They claim to convert your old car to a hybrid, Plug-in, blah blah next year. That would be interesting . . .
Also, I guess if the auto companies rate a full electric car, the MPG rating would be zero, since they don't take that into consideration.
Consumer Reports testing says otherwise. The most fuel-efficient TDI, the Golf, gets less MPG than a Prius, even though the Prius is significantly larger. That's when driven through an identical test course designed to simulate real world driving.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
My father gets 59 MPG regularly in his Prius. How does he do it? He accelerates slowly when the light turns green to lengthen the time before the gas engine kicks in, he doesn't try to do hard acceleration up hills, and when he sees a red light in the distance he rolls to a stop (admittedly sometimes to the dismay of the drivers behind him, but it's a red light; why are they in such a hurry to get there?). People assume that when they hop into a hybrid that somehow some magical juju causes them to get better mileage, like some +20 chalice of efficiency. No. You have to learn how to take advantage of the car.
But the Toyota page (very imprecise, I might add - popular, not scholarly) was not written that way, and it was wrong of you to read it that way. Oil costs much more per unit of carbon than coal; highly refined oil (gasoline), even more so. If the embodied energy in the car is mostly from coal, it will be much cheaper in currency than the same energy from oil (even as its environmental cost may be greater).
You're using "cost" in an ambiguous, error-prone manner. I suggest you get out of the habit when writing "... for nerds, stuff that matters."
Sustainability and energy independence essay
NYC Hybrid Buses Improve Fuel Economy 45% Over Diesel, 100% over CNG
My Google search terms
Sustainability and energy independence essay
The displacement is the amount of oil moved, NOT air!
Engine displacement is defined as the total volume of air/fuel mixture an engine can draw in during one complete engine cycle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_displacement
Yeah 400 HP sounds impressive, but it's crap if it's in a 5000 pound behemoth. As most real sports car manufactures know, it's really about weight reduction which improves handling and performance. That's why a Porsche Boxster can go 0-60 in 5.0 seconds, and do a quarter mile in 13, AND can turn on a dime and can go from 60 to stop in 107 feet. Only 280 HP, but it weighs 2900 pounds
See also a Lotus Elise - a 190 HP motor in a 2000 pound car - but it will outperform more than 99% of the vehicles out there when it comes to acceleration/braking/turning/accident avoidance.
I'm sorry that I have a pet peeve about auto manufacturers talking about HP - it's meaningless, especially when the torque curve is lousy, and the HP is only available within 1000 RPM of redline.
When they load up their cars with all sorts of plastic airdams, large wheels, etc - al of which increase their weight and reduce performance.
..........FULL STOP.
What you need is hydrogen for Haber-process ammonia (nitrate) and carbon for conversion of rock phosphate to phosphorus (and thence to soluble phosphate); hydrogen usually comes from natural gas and carbon from coal, but there are substitutes. The amounts required are not large, and could be obtained from renewable sources. I took a shot at calculating the nitrogen numbers about a year ago. They work.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
Here's the real link (blast FireFox for omitting the prefix in history lists!)
Sustainability and energy independence essay
Seattle's results were poor because they took buses optimised for stop-and-go operation and used them on express runs. It makes one wonder if there was a deliberate attempt to make the technology look bad... perhaps to throw support to a failing rail project?
Sustainability and energy independence essay
Not too long ago, a brilliant discovery was made in engine design. It is now possible to build a clean and efficient two-stroke engine which runs on a variety of fuels. This engine is fully balanced, and stable enough to balance a golf ball on during operation. Furthermore, the engine is very compact, with a high power to weight ratio. (under 1lb/HP)
o ping_.html
For more information on OPOC engines, have a look at the following:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/05/fev_devel
http://www.propulsiontech.com/opocengine.html
http://home.arcor.de/hildst/EnEx99e.html
San Onofre?
Have already adjusted the mileage of my 2002 Prius, purchased about 6 months ago.
The on-board display routinely shows 45 - 50 average MPG, but every time I fill up, the pump & the odometer get together & tell me it's actually around 40.
So, either the odometer isn't working (unlikely), or the internal mileage calculator is a bit optomistic.
(Still, having put on over 18K miles in the past six months, the fuel savings are just about making the car payment, so it's a win-win. Plus, I have the satisfaction of knowing that even with all that driving I'm shoveling less sh*t into the sky...)
I track my gas mileage on gasaroo.com That site gives me nice graphs and comparison charts over time.
While more upmarket, they are the only other manufacterur I know of which sell diesel cars in 07
the e320 bluetec
and the r320 crossover, they also have two diesel suv's
I am looking forwards to the new low sulfer diesel fuel standards.
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
The silly thing is that cars currently track fuel level and miles driven - it would cost them about 2 cents per car to have another to calculate true MPG. Some cars do track a useless minute-to-minute gas mileage but it isn't terribly useful.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
Read about when it was built.
Mid to late 60's.
When did the whole "nuclear is Satan" cult start? Mid to late 70's?
In the last 25 years or so, people have been getting the "nuclear means bomb, period" indoctrination?
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Actually I think we need three figures rather than two. One figure would be the standard highway figure, only it would be based on a top speed of around 70 or 75 MPH instead of the current top speed used in the tests (which I think is somewhere around 55 or 60 MPH). The second figure would be like the standard city driving test used today, probably without much modification. That test probably simulates driving in a small town rather than driving in a major city or in a Southern California suburb. The third figure would reflect what I call California driving, which is where we have traffic lights every quarter to half mile on roads that have 50 or 55 MPH speed limits. In this test, instead of accelerating to 30 or 40 MPH and stopping roughly every half mile (the present city test), the car would accelerate to around 50 MPH between stops and stop about 3 times per mile. The 3 stops per mile instead of 2 would increase the kinetic energy component (the largest component at below highway speeds) of fuel consumption by close to 50% over the current city test, and the higher speeds would account for about another 50%. Sadly, the EPA is sticking with two figures.
But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
Do not charge this at home. TFA indicates a 250 kw charger for the 10 minute charge. Most people have 220v service to their homes. I=P/E . In other words, this charger draws over a thousand amps. I don't know about your house, but the cable feeding my meter isn't that big by a factor of >5.
The 220v charger takes 6-8 hours. That's why people don't drive electric cars. They spend more time on the charger than on the road.
Sure there is - it's called forced induction! The only reason why cubes get everyone tingly is because it can suck in more air and burn more fuel. If you want that power level with less cubes then simply force more air and fuel into it! I pushed 720RWHP out of a stock 3liter straight six with 32PSI of boost. That's over 2 atmospheres worth of air and it turned that 3liter into the equal of a 9liter N/A engine. Oh, and when not on boost it got the sorts of mileage you'd only dream of driving a 9liter engine :-) Yeah, a turbo engine making that kind of power has a peaky power curve and I was looking to put on a much smaller turbo for street driving on pump gas but it would still have made more than 500HP at the wheels and been responsive as all get out.
:-P Okay, big cubes AND blown FTW....
Cubes are nice but they suck, I'd rather be blown
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
Firstly--the bicycle (unmotored) and rider probably weigh 275 lbs together
I think I'm starting to see the problem...
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
55+ on my bike!
Forced induction is nice if you want to make lots of power with smaller engines. The downfall is that blocks/heads/etc have to be a lot beefier to take that kind of pressure, and the gaskets too, creating a little more weight. And if something goes wrong, there goes all your extra power and your air path is twice as long now. Blowers and turbos are great if you are into racing, for everyday use....I am not so sure. Been in a few cars that have had wastegates and impelers crack/break, no fun at all.
Insert funny smart-ass comment here.
Deleted
...remains the bicycle. But I ain't riding one, I've got whole cows to devour...
Yes, but you have to consume food to have energy to ride one. And guess how the food you buy from the grocery store is delivered? On gasoline-powered vehicles. And the any processing for that food may have required oil. Packaging for the food that is plastic was made from oil.
Just how efficient is the human body?
Depends on how much power you want to make. V8s weigh too and a 4banger with a turbo can make plenty of power (I've tuned a stroked Honda to over 600WHP on race gas but talk about peaky!). 10PSI isn't too much pressure for a pretty much stock N/A engine to take unless it's compression was crazy to begin with. It's a myth that a turbo automatically means the car is a ticking bomb, if you can keep the greedy owner from turning the boost to the Moon it will be fine on a reasonable tune.
:-)
Maintained well a turbo car is not much different than any other. Good oil, good air filter, there's no problems. I daily drove a 6banger that made about 600RWHP for 2 years with no issues. I blew an intercooler hose once or twice but it was a problem area and something I solved with a better clamp and a flared pipe. Yes indeed it sucked to drive the car without the turbo the rest of the way home but it got out of it's way at least as well as any other commuter car around me.
The biggest problem is that most people do NOT maintain their cars. Many people don't change trans fluid, oil gets changed with cheap crap only when the dash light comes on, the list is endless. If you're going to drive a performance car you cannot use 10cent spark plugs and crap oil unless you want lots of problems. These days I drive a diesel VW and while it's no speed demon (upgrades exist....) it gets 38+ MPG in bumper to bumper. Yup, it's a turbo with a little VNT sucker under there whistling away. I pretty much drive it like a N/A 4banger and ignore the fact that it's turbo except when it comes to oil changes - then it gets GOOD oil. Turbo wheels should last 100K miles unless crap goes through them . Ask an over the road trucker how they would feel about taking the blower or turbo off of their rig to save on maintenance and see if they agree it's a good idea.
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
I have. Turbo lag from hell.
The cubic inches of exhaust match the cubes of input. Requiring a big honking turbo with the inherent lag of a large spinning mass.
Why do you think modern large turbos are mostly twins?
As to your point about more power high compression vs blown low compression. Which do you think makes more torque at 3K? The supercharger perhaps, but the turbo? Only if it's been sitting at 3K for 30 seconds. Boost at 2K? Maybe .0001 psi of boost or a turbo designed for a motor the red lines a 4.5K.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
In fact, the reason few people get the EPA estimate (for any car) is that few people drive like this. I compared the top graph on that page to my own commute (which covers a longer distance and has close to the same number of stops). But the EPA test covers about 30 minutes; I can make my trip in 20 to 25 minutes, but given the longer distance, if I drove a similar pattern to the test, it would take me about 40 minutes. Most likely, driving like the test would get me 55 to 60 MPG, but I don't have the time to waste and I would irritate a lot of other drivers (as it is, I get about 40 MPG). Timing traffic lights so that people could drive a constant 45 MPH would have four effects:
1. Less gasoline usage by the entire population of a city.
2. Less pollution.
3. People would get where they are going faster.
4. People would be a lot less irritated.
You truly are lucky to have those factors on your side.
But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
So remember now. Nuclear power makes Baby Jesus cry!
Isn't that in California: "Nuclear power makes Malibu Barbie cry!" ?
As to your "everyday use" comment, when would you ever NEED a supercharger or turbo? My car has roughly 375 engine HP NA. That is already far more then enough for everyday use. With my supercharger pullied to 12# of boost, it is way more then enough (450 RWP as messuered). If I drive "normal" I never even see the boost gauge move and get the benefits of relatively durable and strong engine. Basically, I have a 5.0l engine most of the time but when I get on it, I have an effective use of roughly a 6.5l or larger engine. I don't know if you consider 5.0l small or not.
;)
The downfall is that blocks/heads/etc have to be a lot beefier to take that kind of pressure, and the gaskets too
That depends on what engine you are starting with but your statement is not true across the board. Chevy and Ford (and I'm sure several imports have their certain models as well) make quite a few engines that can safely take years of 5-15# of boost without ever touching the engine itself. Sure, you will need a larger fuel delivery system (pump, injectors etc) and some type of timing retard system but the engine internals will not be the limit for some time to come. My example 5.0l mentioned above is one of them. Of course, that Borg Warner T-5 manual transmission is a little shaky at those power levels
The only Li-ion chemistry which catches fire is the one with cobalt oxide cathodes; cobalt oxide + carbon -> cobalt metal + CO2 + heat. The lithium iron phosphate and lithium titanium oxide (spinel) cathodes can't do that; Valence Technology even does a demo where they fire a bullet through one of their cells and it just sits there.
Sustainability and energy independence essay
I think a lot of them have changed over to soybeans. Not enough to make it the dominant crop in the midwest, perhaps, but enough for beans to be a huge cash crop in many parts of the country. I think a lot of the resistance is because of the investment in harvesting equipment for corn, plus accumulated knowledge about its growth and production.
I doubt sugarcane would be suitable for most of the North American agricultural belt. Given that it was being grown in the West Indies at the same time that the U.S. was being settled, if it was practical to grow here, I suspect it already would be. I think the problem is rainfall; sugarcane requires much more rain than most places in the midwest get, and you wouldn't want to have to irrigate heavily enough to support it. Temperature/sunlight and season may also play a part.
I have heard that other fast-growing grasses, like switchgrass and even bamboo, would be suitable for biomass production in N. America, but I don't think sugarcane would do it.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Vac hasn't controlled the A/C in ages. The clutch is turned off when the EFI computer sees a TPS signal that tells it the throttle is about a set amount. The amount may vary by manufacturer or model but it is most certainly based on throttle more so than on any vac signal. Older cars, especially ones with carbs, DID use a vac signal because they had no computer to do this like we have now - you're information is dated.
In any case the A/C does shut off in order to give a greater amount of power to the wheels in specific circumstances. The A/C DOES impact fuel usage but then so does electric cooling fans and headlights - Mythbusters be damned. Power to run those things isn't free but the cost can be low enough that the average driver doesn't notice. I can tell you that when the A/C kicks on and even when the cooling fans kick on the EFI computer raises the amount of air into the engine at idle - I know this having had to program it myself on many cars while tuning their fuel injection systems. Not doing this properly would cause the cars to stall. EFI computers will raise idle air when the A/C is on, when system voltage drops, when the engine is cold, and under other circumstances I've probably forgotten - raisnig air intake also means raised fueling, no getting around that so yeah it eats more gas....
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org