Wanna save the world? Well DON'T BUY A HYBRID

boganbusman · Post by **boganbusman** » 03 Apr 2006, 13:01

PR Newswire Article

Apparently, studies have shown that the lifetime energy consumption of a hybrid vehicle is more than that of a comparable non-hybrid vehicle. So whilst a Hybrid will save you money on petrol, etc. in the short term, you're actually doing more harm than good on the environment.

To be honest I don't completely believe it, but it does make sense, and I always had a feeling that hybrids weren't more efficient than regular cars. There's no such thing as free energy

Fishwhiz · Post by **Fishwhiz** » 03 Apr 2006, 13:38

why is using less petrol more harmful?, how can it have a more lifetime consuption then?
it there an article to prove it? or are you just making this up because you hate hybrids?

Post by **GT3x24x7** » 03 Apr 2006, 13:47

Fishwhiz wrote:why is using less petrol more harmful?, how can it have a more lifetime consuption then?
it there an article to prove it? or are you just making this up because you hate hybrids?

boganbusman wrote:PR Newswire Article

The Gravedigger · Post by **The Gravedigger** » 03 Apr 2006, 13:50

Fishwhiz:
Jeez.... you're even more a fool than I first thought....
Did you even read the bloody article, by your post I'm guessing not

If you don't know how to read, then just don't post

And if you have got nothing else to say either, I suggest you keep quiet as well - T-Shine

jacoja06 · Post by **jacoja06** » 03 Apr 2006, 15:10

I cannot see how electric-powered cars can make an overall groundbreaking effect on the environment (we can always use wind farms for electricity)

...Even though they cost an arm and a leg to create

Not sure about the hybrids though. If they really are that terrible to nature, then why not burn them all? â€¦ It would be fun.

Edit: Was I off-topic with my electric car statement?

Koffy · Post by **Koffy** » 03 Apr 2006, 16:27

Hybrids are stil a work in progress. I don't think we should juedge them on so short time of developement. If we took the eficiency of the first 20 years of development of gas or diesel engines, they would probably be of very little economy and high polution.

Hecubus · Post by **Hecubus** » 03 Apr 2006, 16:39

It's an interesting idea, but to just write off hybrids is pointless. As it mentioned, apparantly an H3 costs less in energy than a Civic. Doesn't mean that if we want to save the world, we should just all drive Hummers.

And, although there's no such thing as free energy, the internal combustion engine is pretty wasteful, so there's always the potential to recoup a bit of that.

boganbusman · Post by **boganbusman** » 03 Apr 2006, 17:00

jacoja06 wrote:Not sure about the hybrids though. If they really are that terrible to nature, then why not burn them all?

Yeah let's do that. It'll be so great for the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . you feeling alright today? :p

Hercubus wrote:It's an interesting idea, but to just write off hybrids is pointless.

But why? If they are using up more resources than a Hummer, that really can't be a good thing. Even if they become more effecient as Koffy thinks, I still don't believe that they will become more economic than regular cars.

IMO Hybrid cars are a bit like Hydrogen cars: Simply not viable. But don't ask me what is, lol

Hecubus · Post by **Hecubus** » 03 Apr 2006, 18:42

boganbusman wrote:
Hercubus wrote:It's an interesting idea, but to just write off hybrids is pointless.
But why? If they are using up more resources than a Hummer, that really can't be a good thing. Even if they become more effecient as Koffy thinks, I still don't believe that they will become more economic than regular cars.

IMO Hybrid cars are a bit like Hydrogen cars: Simply not viable. But don't ask me what is, lol

Well, it depends on what the efficency problem is, right? I mean, one of the things it mentioned was something about distance employees have to drive. There's so many factors to consider, that we can't completely blame it on the hybrids themselves. Furthermore, I imagine as progress is made with the technology, and as it comes into higher demand, things will improve, possibly. Again, it's not to say that they're the way of the future, but they show enough potential that we shouldn't give up on them entirely (then again, I'm just paranoid at the idea where a Hummer is making a positive ecological statement).

Post by **TheStig** » 04 Apr 2006, 06:07

What I noticed was that they measured energy in USD....hmm along time ago when I was at highschool we never learned that the measurement for energy was $ weird..

I don't find the article really logical, why??

simple how can you make a calculation a cars lifetime if they are being used for lets say 5 years now???
Sure you know how much they cost in terms of production and planning cost etc. and you know what the cost will be do dispose of the product cause you know how much material there is in the car. so that you do know.

But what do we not know?
Right average lifetime of the car and the lifetime of the parts.
You can say it with old cars that are running a while now.

We know that a Hybrid costs more to build. you don't have to have a dregree in Economics for that. and same for the disposal costs. and for the Enviroment Batteries are not the cheapest and easiest thing to dispose in a propper way.

And like Koffy said, it is a new process, it takes time to perfect things like that.
Rome wasn't build in 1 day you know

ooh and about Hydrogen... that is a complete other reason has nothing to do with that it can't be used in big quantities.
The reason why they don't use it is simple:
The oil companies are doing EVERYTHING they can to slow down the competition untill the oil is gone, cause they will loose money if alternatives are a reality

boganbusman · Post by **boganbusman** » 04 Apr 2006, 06:32

The energy is measured in dollars because it accounts for all the resources that need to be used. So you cant just say '50 megawatts of electricity' or something like that, because electricity isn't the only resource being used.

A cars lifetime is fairly easy to work out/estimate by using statistics and averaging them.

And yes, I know that oil companies are restricting the development of hydrogen refuelling stations, but the simple fact is that it takes more energy to create hydrogen then what you get back from using it. And this takes us back to my 'no free energy' thing.

It just seems like a big no-win situation.

Post by **TheStig** » 05 Apr 2006, 05:03

Ok then calculate the lifetime expectency of a current carmodel.

Because I like you so much I give you free choice of what car to choose, isn't that great.

It is a fact that the average lifetime of a car is growing back in the 70's your car did not last very long (exept in Cuba they are simply refusing to let go of the damn things

)
And steadely the lifetime is growing.
so in that way yes you can get a estimate of the lifetime of cars in general. but IMO you can't give a real lifetime expectency of a new car that started production this year or 2 years back for that matter. esspecially Hybrids cause they are with us for a short while and we simply don't know if they will last longer or shorter.
but if you can prove me wrong, please do.

About the No free energy, that is a simple fact.

Simply because a Perpetuum Mobile does not exist.

And the reason that making alternative fuels is to expensive and takes alot of energy to make is also has to do with the lack of development and funding for it.

But he with the current rate of oil consumption the estimates are that we won't be able to use oil for our cars etc. in a few decades.

SP4RCO · Post by **SP4RCO** » 06 Apr 2006, 16:39

I only know that petrol won't be gone till year 2050, so I will keep my car running for 45 years more or less

But I guess we will be nostalgic once the old school petrol cars are no longer usable.

"Dear greatson: In year 2000, when I was a kid....."

Post by **TheStig** » 07 Apr 2006, 03:47

The Oil may not be gone for a other 50 years (although estimates vary ALOT on that) but do you expect that you can easely buy a littre of petrol for your car in 40 years?? (using the 50 as end of oil year)
Have you noticed how the oil prices are growing? and they will continue to grow unless they find a HUUUUUUUUUUUUGE oil well that will give us oil for generations to come.

But because the chance of that is really small, you simply cannot afford to drive your petrol car in 40 years, I think with the rate the prices are climbing, for a lot of people using a car will not be possible in the near future.

xHaZxMaTx · Post by **xHaZxMaTx** » 07 Apr 2006, 04:33

Alternative fuels have only been an idea for a few years so there's bound to be a few 'bugs.' But as of now, it seems that gasoline/diesel is the most efficient fuel. If hydrogen weren't so damn hard to get I would be all for it, but it takes a lot of energy for electrolosis to occur, and that energy has to come from some fossil fuel so it doesn't really help much.

Fishwhiz · Post by **Fishwhiz** » 07 Apr 2006, 22:32

GT3x24x7 wrote:
Fishwhiz wrote:why is using less petrol more harmful?, how can it have a more lifetime consuption then?
it there an article to prove it? or are you just making this up because you hate hybrids?

boganbusman wrote:PR Newswire Article

geeze, he edited in there after i posted!!!!! you and gravedigger!
people are trying to make my look like a noob by pretending that i didnt read well enough by editing ther posyt to prove they said what i said they didnt say. boganbussman should have put the "EDIT:" thing there.

PSZeTa · Post by **PSZeTa** » 07 Apr 2006, 22:52

Lmao you just noobified yourself.

If bogan edits his post AFTER you posted, a time and date will appear at the bottom of that post.

EDIT: ZOMG TIME AND DATE APPEARS BECAUSE I EDITED AFTER xHaZxMaTx POSTED!!

xHaZxMaTx · Post by **xHaZxMaTx** » 07 Apr 2006, 23:25

He's right, Bogan never edited his post.

Nub.

SkeeteRX7 · Post by **SkeeteRX7** » 09 Apr 2006, 23:30

Has anyone here heard of the new idea of diesel hybrids? Mercedes-Benz is thinking of making the S320 Bluetec Diesel Hybrid.

Hecubus · Post by **Hecubus** » 10 Apr 2006, 01:41

It's not really that new an idea. If I'm not mistaken, Dodge had a diesel hybrid concept 8 years ago (the Intrepid ESX2).

Fishwhiz · Post by **Fishwhiz** » 13 Apr 2006, 03:07

xHaZxMaTx wrote:He's right, Bogan never edited his post. Nub.

yes, he did, probablty right after i posted, because it was never there when i first saw it.... oh, does it all of a sudden pop out of nowhere? or is my internet gay so i cant see hyperlinks?

boganbusman · Post by **boganbusman** » 13 Apr 2006, 08:41

Fishwhiz wrote:
xHaZxMaTx wrote:He's right, Bogan never edited his post. Nub.
yes, he did

No, I didn't.

It's not my fault you're blind.

Post by **GT3x24x7** » 13 Apr 2006, 11:13

Fishwhiz wrote:
xHaZxMaTx wrote:He's right, Bogan never edited his post. Nub.
yes, he did, probablty right after i posted, because it was never there when i first saw it.... oh, does it all of a sudden pop out of nowhere? or is my internet gay so i cant see hyperlinks?

Fishwhiz, you're wrong. Accept it and STFU.

xHaZxMaTx · Post by **xHaZxMaTx** » 14 Apr 2006, 10:09

Wait a tic... I thought hybrids made their own energy.

boganbusman · Post by **boganbusman** » 14 Apr 2006, 10:24

xHaZxMaTx wrote:Wait a tic... I thought hybrids made their own energy.

How exactly?

A hybid works by combining a petrol and electric engine. The petrol motor recharges the battery that powers the electric motor, and also assists the electric motor under load. The battery is also recharged by the brakes, which have intergrated generators.