Save the environment, screw the Hybrids!

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Tango
I don't know Dave, I live in NYC so I don't have a car in the US and plan not to buy another one ever

Well there's the answer right there.

Well, it's just that I hate cars. In the last 15 years I have always been living in big cities, where there is 24/7 public transport. So I really see no reason for having a car. It's just a pain in the ass.

I used to drive in Europe when I went and visit my family who doesn't live in a big city. That's why I know the prices of gas and LNG in Europe. But even there, I now try to use trains as much as I can.

Europe is not that big and you can travel Paris to Milan (my most frequent Euro trip) in one afternoon with the TGV.

You sit and read a book, and no risk of car accidents.

Hey hey hey, all the P&N experts swear there is nothing different about the U.S. than Europe.

Well, as much as I love trains, I must admit the US are a big country, so probably traveling by train is not that convenient here.

I don't know... is there, for example, a train line San Francisco to Los Angeles? That would be the kind of distance that a high-velocity train would still make sense on. Or New York-Boston, New York-Detroit, New York-Chicago.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

There is no "natural gas" lines here where I live.

Beside Natural Gas is expensive and has constant price spikes making it altogether prohibitive for anyone on a budget.

For you and you're rich folk friends it doesn't matter of course.

You moved to the 3rd largest natural gas producing state in the US & you didn't pay attention to whether you bought a house that has access to a gas line?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

There is no "natural gas" lines here where I live.

Beside Natural Gas is expensive and has constant price spikes making it altogether prohibitive for anyone on a budget.

For you and you're rich folk friends it doesn't matter of course.

You moved to the 3rd largest natural gas producing state in the US & you didn't pay attention to whether you bought a house that has access to a gas line?

Have you been paying attention? Of course not.

I wouldn't want any part of the gas even if the main line went by my house.

The natural gas scam is even worse than the Big Oil scam because it is home grown.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

There is no "natural gas" lines here where I live.

Beside Natural Gas is expensive and has constant price spikes making it altogether prohibitive for anyone on a budget.

For you and you're rich folk friends it doesn't matter of course.

You moved to the 3rd largest natural gas producing state in the US & you didn't pay attention to whether you bought a house that has access to a gas line?

Have you been paying attention? Of course not.

I wouldn't want any part of the gas even if the main line went by my house.

The natural gas scam is even worse than the Big Oil scam because it is home grown.

How do you suppose some of your electricity is generated Dave?

Text

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
How do you suppose some of your electricity is generated Dave?

Text

Uh oh. :laugh:

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
How do you suppose some of your electricity is generated Dave?

Text

Uh oh. :laugh:

My power comes from the Dam downstream from me (Pensacola Dam) and a coal fired plant that REC owns as well.

No natural gas here.

Your looking at PSO which is controlled by state of Oklahoma.

I'm on private co-op which is part of Touchstone group.

Power bill has been running at $300 a month and they said in the annual meeting last week most will experience $400 bill by this time next year because energy costs keep spiraling out of control on them.

http://www.neelectric.com/

Today's news:

9-3-2007 Coal-fired plant stirs debate over environmental cost of electric power

Plans for a $1.8 billion, 950-megawatt coal-fired power plant in northern Oklahoma are stirring debate over the environmental costs of affordable electric power.

Oklahoma Gas & Electric Company, Public Service Company of Oklahoma and the Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority are seeking regulatory approval for the proposed Red Rock power plant adjacent to OG&E?s existing Sooner Power Plant in Noble County, about 80 miles north of Oklahoma City.

Utility officials say the massive power plant is needed to keep up with growing consumer demand for electricity.

Coal costs 85 percent less than natural gas.

They want to use coal as a fuel because it is far less expensive than natural gas
========================================================
They want to use coal as a fuel because it is far less expensive than natural gas
Coal costs 85 percent less than natural gas.
They want to use coal as a fuel because it is far less expensive than natural gas
Coal costs 85 percent less than natural gas.
They want to use coal as a fuel because it is far less expensive than natural gas
Coal costs 85 percent less than natural gas.
They want to use coal as a fuel because it is far less expensive than natural gas
Coal costs 85 percent less than natural gas.
They want to use coal as a fuel because it is far less expensive than natural gas
Coal costs 85 percent less than natural gas.
They want to use coal as a fuel because it is far less expensive than natural gas
Coal costs 85 percent less than natural gas.
They want to use coal as a fuel because it is far less expensive than natural gas
Coal costs 85 percent less than natural gas.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Does your car run on coal Dave?

 

[Thump553]

There is a kernel of decent information in that article, despite its biased, hysterical tone. I live in a state that applies the California standards (as should we all) and I'm in the market to replace my car. I've chosen cars basically on severalfactors: durabilty/reliabilty/abilty to the maintenance myself coupled with good to excellent gas economy. I generally buy a car new, keep it for a decade or so until it is a heap. My state doesn't collect sales tax on hybrids and ultra-high efficiency cars (a 6% savings right there) and a state law was recently enacting permitting towns to exempt such cars from the property tax rolls (my state is evil in that there is a property tax on cars, boats, campers, planes, etc. in addition to the house tax).

I'm very interested in hybrids, but am very concerned about battery life. I usually keep a car at least 200k miles and don't wait to pay to replace batteries twice. Perhaps one of these ultra-high efficiency cars is the way to go.

BTW, I've been told by someone with VW that when they come out with their hybrid (next year apparently) it will have a lifetime warranty on the batteries. However, VW has come a long way since the days of my Beetle, but unfortunately most of it is downhill. I recently found out I couldn't even change the headlight bulb in a relative's VW without special tools.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: sandorski
""I'm driving a Hybrid for the environment" catch phrase that Sheryl Crow and her ilk love so much......."

They/They're saying that because it was/is(in many situations as the article points out) true. If an ICE can be made that clean, great, but don't be hatin on people for having opinions on ICE when it was certainly true to hold those opinions when they stated them.

..isn't she the one that says to use only one sheet of TP??

 

[Gneisenau]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: sandorski
""I'm driving a Hybrid for the environment" catch phrase that Sheryl Crow and her ilk love so much......."

They/They're saying that because it was/is(in many situations as the article points out) true. If an ICE can be made that clean, great, but don't be hatin on people for having opinions on ICE when it was certainly true to hold those opinions when they stated them.

..isn't she the one that says to use only one sheet of TP??

I don't remember who it was exactly, or which one said she wouldn't wash her hair anymore. All I can say is it would suck to be their BF. Having to wear noseplugs to get close is not my idea of a good thing. I wouldn't want to hold their hands either.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Does your car run on coal Dave?

:laugh:

Dave is always out there, but hes getting massacred this time.

Edit: i tried and failed to find a screenshot of that simpsons where homer is driving the coal powered car.

Its the one where they are on the reality show where they cant use anything from the 20th century or later.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: sandorski
""I'm driving a Hybrid for the environment" catch phrase that Sheryl Crow and her ilk love so much......."

They/They're saying that because it was/is(in many situations as the article points out) true. If an ICE can be made that clean, great, but don't be hatin on people for having opinions on ICE when it was certainly true to hold those opinions when they stated them.

..isn't she the one that says to use only one sheet of TP??

hehe, ya. I agree that she went kookie on that suggestion.

 

[Deudalus]

Heh, am I the only person who thinks it's ironic that a post mocking liberal environmentalists types is also complaining about the lack of availability of an engine that is only available in states famous for hosting liberal environmentalist types?

Also, you're not really making the argument you think you are making. Cleaner emissions does not mean the same thing as higher fuel economy.

Except for the fact that fuel economy is what the thread boiled down to when in reality fuel economy isnt the key issue.

A car that got 2 mpg and had literally no toxic emissions is overally better for the environment than a car that gets 40 mpg and has bad emissions.

You guys need to stop confusing "good gas mileage" with "low emissions" the two do not always go hand in hand.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: Deudalus

A car that got 2 mpg and had literally no toxic emissions is overally better for the environment than a car that gets 40 mpg and has bad emissions.

Well, that goes back to my earlier question? How would that rate with a PZEV: Partial Zero Emission Vehicle that gets 30mpg, vs a ULEV: Ultra Low Emission Vehicle that gets 70mpg? I would really like to know how the emission ratings are calculated, and is it based upon the amount of fuel burned over time, instantaneous emissions, or something else?

I think your 2mpg vs 40 mpg comparison is a little absurd though, as car that gets 2 mpg impacts the environment more before even burning the fuel.

 

[desy]

"You guys need to stop confusing "good gas mileage" with "low emissions" the two do not always go hand in hand. "

I'd think about NG vehicle as around here NG is set at a fixed price over the whole year and since I'm in Canada we pay a lot more tax on gas that puts us around $4 + a gallon next to the US which doesn't show up in NG.
It would have to be stricly a commuter tho as no NG stations about so I'd be working from the garage.
I'm no fan of hybrids as it doesn't make sense to put two powertrains in and have all the weaknesses of both systems compounded. All electric please or not at all

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: desy
"You guys need to stop confusing "good gas mileage" with "low emissions" the two do not always go hand in hand. "

I'd think about NG vehicle as around here NG is set at a fixed price over the whole year and since I'm in Canada we pay a lot more tax on gas that puts us around $4 + a gallon next to the US which doesn't show up in NG.
It would have to be stricly a commuter tho as no NG stations about so I'd be working from the garage.
I'm no fan of hybrids as it doesn't make sense to put two powertrains in and have all the weaknesses of both systems compounded. All electric please or not at all

I am suspect out of anything from Texas these days but:

9-4-2007 Startup Makes Bold Claim: Go 500 Miles On No Gas

An Austin-based startup called EEStor promised "technologies for replacement of electrochemical batteries," meaning a motorist could plug in a car for five minutes and drive 500 miles roundtrip between Dallas and Houston without gasoline.

EEStor's secret ingredient is a material sandwiched between thousands of wafer-thin metal sheets, like a series of foil-and-paper gum wrappers stacked on top of each other. Charged particles stick to the metal sheets and move quickly across EEStor's proprietary material.

The result is an ultracapacitor, a battery-like device that stores and releases energy quickly.

 

[OutHouse]

i watched Uncle buck yesterday, that POS car he drove would be fun to drive through Boulder. :evil:

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor
Hey! quit trying to beat the metro. Most owners loved their metro. Too bad they killed production.

Till 2 years ago I had the 1994 Geo Metro and it was a fine car. It had over 160K miles when I got rid of it and ran like a champ ON THE HIGHWAY. I've even gone long distance (Philly - NYC) on it a few times. Never had any trouble maintaining 70-75 on the highway.

2 things here:

1. IMO 70-75 is too slow for most highways.
2. I rented a mid-90's metro once. The only way it could maintain 70-75 was with a tailwind or downhill.