“A BMW must also remain a BMW, whether it is an EV, hybrid or conventionally powered vehicle”. Well, that’s reassuring. While this interview focuses...The post BMW’s Head of Engineering Peaks into the Future appeared first on MotoringFile. (visit MotoringFile for the full article) More...
THe problem with plug in cars is the power has to come from somewhere. Greenies that don't like our gas powered cars also don't like power plants. But they do love all their plug in gadgets. Sorry wind and solar won't fill the gap.
A friend of mine bought a Nissan Leaf. He would tell anyone who would listen how green it was with zero pollutants. When I asked him if he realized that the power plant that makes the juice pollutes he said he didn't live by the power plant so it wasn't his concern. ut:
The amount of energy and damage it takes to get the materials for the battery cells is not inconsequential, especially how they've gone about it in China. It also requires more energy in the first place to build a hybrid or battery powered car. A strong argument can be made that building these is environmentally a wash, or even worse. I'm for clean energy (except when I'm getting 7 mpg at the track, but then again I enjoy being hypocritical), but this isn't the long term solution.
I read an interesting article suggesting that bicycles were not at all green, since the average (I think it meant Western) bicycle travelled under 100 miles in its lifetime and so the embodied energy from producing it spread over that 100 miles made it no better than a car. No way to tell if that was true, but an interesting idea. My last bicycle did over 10,000 miles, so of course I am a paragon of responsible citizenry. But all those bicycles on garage walls aren't saving the planet. It would be nice to know which way battery and hybrid cars really go, but I think the answer is too politically significant for anyone to tell the truth, whatever they say.
Bicyclists aren't off the hook... The energy has to come from somewhere.. Vegan or not, there is still pollution involved that's required to pedal that crank... Those vegetables are still harvested by diesel tractors.... And if you are a beef eater.... Well well well, you are the equivalent of rolling coal... Cows are one of the biggest polluters of methane which is a far worse pollutant greenhouse gas than say carbon dioxide and then there is also the ammonia... Do cows pollute as much as cars? - HowStuffWorks
When gas was at $4/gal it took 8 years to break even with a Prius vs a standard economy car. At under $2 that's going to be a lot longer. C&D had an article a number of years ago that to make and run a Prius for 10 years made more pollution than a standard economy car. Then you would have to change the battery.
It's pretty clear that cars like the Prius are 'feel good' cars that don't have a clear benefit in reducing total pollution. The thing that's lost on those critical of "zero" emissions vehicles, hybrids and plug-ins is that they will offer, as technology advances, a significant reduction in total greenhouse gasses throughout the life of the car as compared to conventionally-powered vehicles. It is the future, and it will have a real, calculable reduction in pollution and greenhouse gasses. As alluded to above, the correct way to measure the environmental impact of a car is the total pollution produced, from manufacturing, through the use of the product, to the disposal of it. To make that calculation (really, estimation) you have to make a couple of assumptions: the most important of which is that the electric grid will be supplied by cleaner energy sources over time: the fossil sources will be processed more cleanly, supplemented by renewables. Bottom line is, whether you like it or not, it's the future. Perhaps you chuckle at early 20th century opinions that the horseless carriage was an inferior and less reliable source of transportation than the horse. Your progeny will chuckle at your rejection of electricity as the power of personal transportation. One last comment before I step down from this soap box: one of the biggest catch-phrases of modern times is: "We need to save the environment". This is bunk. The environment will be fine. The question is whether it will be fine with humanity as a part of it. The environment isn't at risk: we are.
What people don't understand is that we're all on the same spaceship - that pollution comes here too......its in our air as well as theirs. Eric is right, it's not the planet that's in danger, it's us. It's not a local problem, it's a global one.