so im writing a research paper on how gas/diesel cars are better than hybrids

[untouchable]

and i need a little help. i realize this is going to be more of an uphill battle but im going for it anyway
BG, what is your opinion on this topic?
are hybrids the answer? or diesel?

[Gregorio]

I remember reading somewhere that the damage done to the environment to get the materials and create the batteries for hybrid cars is pretty extensive...I don't remember where, though. Or even how reliable the info was.

[untouchable]

I remember reading somewhere that the damage done to the environment to get the materials and create the batteries for hybrid cars is pretty extensive...I don't remember where, though. Or even how reliable the info was.

thats from the tv show Top Gear, and yes im gonna mention that in my research

[Blarg]

I'm guessing while the technology is new the hybrids won't be so amazing but since they are so new they are bound to improve a fair bit in the future.

[Slapper]

Wasnt there a study somewhere that showed you'd pay more for the replacement battery for a hybrid than you would for gas in a regular car in a 4 year span?

[Gregorio]

Oh and you also have to take into account the amount of "smug" that enters the atmosphere.

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...k-smug-313.gif

[Seraphise]

if you gimme your email I can send you a 100 page research thing on Alternative fuels :<

First 50 or so pages are how alt fuels are good, last 50 are how they are bad.

[Seraphise]

Wasnt there a study somewhere that showed you'd pay more for the replacement battery for a hybrid than you would for gas in a regular car in a 4 year span?

Thats because they never developed a full proof system to maintain lithium Ion batteries for multiple recharges. Thus it will inevitably cost 12,000$ to replace at some point in time. buuuttt On the con side, most govt fleet vehicles that use these batteries havn't needed them replaced

Originally Posted by Gregorio View Post
I remember reading somewhere that the damage done to the environment to get the materials and create the batteries for hybrid cars is pretty extensive...I don't remember where, though. Or even how reliable the info was.
thats from the tv show Top Gear, and yes im gonna mention that in my research

That depends on the alt fuel used. There are a multitude of fuels that really don't have much negative effects, the main one that is focusing on is ethanol. Ethanol takes up a LOTTT of land and also still releases a fair amount of Co2 emissions. Brazil went 100% alt fuel through ethanol and they said through their deforestation it was actually worse for the enviorment, but was infanantly cheaper

[untouchable]

if you gimme your email I can send you a 100 page research thing on Alternative fuels :<

First 50 or so pages are how alt fuels are good, last 50 are how they are bad.

i PMed you my email

[MyTitthias]

I love devil's advocate papers.
well if i were writing a paper on this subject, I would highlight these factors:
1. new technology - read expensive to service, replace, repair, longevity still in question due to its age. Most hybrid vehicles i have read about rely on a computer based system to switch between engines - i would subtly hint at the unreliability of computers due to malfunctions/weather.
2. our current motor vehicle infrastructure - designed to service gas based vehicles only. I can't see many mechanics learning about hybrid technology. A quick survey in your area of mechanics would give a nice glimpse into the serviceability of hybrids.

[Baha]

One of the more interesting things I read on biofuel recently was experiments with algae. The research was still in pretty early stages,but it does make for a good 'crop' on paper. They had the algae growing in clear pipes, which could easily be made to stack. At least it'd compete less for space with food crops that way.

Biofuel does seem more of a stopgap measure until battery/fuel cell/etc technology has sufficiently advanced though.

[Elesirdur]

Look up information on "Dust to Dust" or full life cycle environmental impacts. A Swedish or Argentinean university published a big study a year or so ago that looked into what the environmental impacts were that went into hundreds of different makes and models of cars produced at the time. This is an absolutely monumental undertaking; I think Volvo or VW tried to do something like this in the mid-90s and gave up because it got so complex.

Anyway, that university study found that a Hummer H2 actually had less environmental impact than a Toyota Prius when the full life cycle, from raw materials to the car being broken down for scrap and (hopefully) recycled. The heavy metals required to manufacture the batteries in the hybrid electric cars were of significant concern because of the energy required to mine, transport, and refine these metals, and the associated environmental effects of that process outweighed the effect of the excess fuel consumption in a H2.

The trouble with battery-powered cars is that the manufacturers need a reliable battery that can be produced in massive quantities to exacting standards. While there are batteries that perform exponentially better than those in the Prius or other gas-electric hybrids, the time it takes to get a product checked out as acceptable and in production takes a long time. That's why current generation hybrids use battery technology that's nearly a decade old (in its initial production stages).

Small, fuel-efficient petrol and diesel cars tend to have low dust-to-dust energy and environmental impacts because they are designed to be fuel efficient, small and aerodynamic, and tend to come with very few features which reduces both weight (increases fuel economy) and just the amount of raw materials and energy required to make a complete vehicle. Cars like the Toyota Yaris, VW Jetta TDI, and in Europe and Asia the whole host of city and ultra-compact cars are great for this. Even base-model pickup trucks, large engine or not, aren't that bad because they are incredibly simple to build and often have very few features (think of the Mazda B series or Ford Rangers, those things are stripped down utility vehicles and not much else at their lowest trim)

[Seraphise]

One of the more interesting things I read on biofuel recently was experiments with algae. The research was still in pretty early stages,but it does make for a good 'crop' on paper. They had the algae growing in clear pipes, which could easily be made to stack. At least it'd compete less for space with food crops that way.

Biofuel does seem more of a stopgap measure until battery/fuel cell/etc technology has sufficiently advanced though.

Algae is hands down the most innovative and promising undeveloped technology in my opinion. With peak oil by 2040, be a great time to start putting more manpower into projects like these

[Amastacia]

Can also approach it from an economics perspective.

You can get a gasoline or diesel vehicle with comparable space, quality, and features at a significant enough cost savings that the period of time it takes to recoup the higher purchase price in fuel savings is longer than you're likely to own and run the car (and the car itself may not last that long).

I remember seeing one hypothetical side-by-side on a base model Prius and a Honda Fit Sport. Features and functionality were surprisingly close. Would've taken over a decade of running like 12,500 miles a year for the Prius to come out ahead, and that discounts the cost of a battery replacement.

[Seraphise]

Can also approach it from an economics perspective.

You can get a gasoline or diesel vehicle with comparable space, quality, and features at a significant enough cost savings that the period of time it takes to recoup the higher purchase price in fuel savings is longer than you're likely to own and run the car (and the car itself may not last that long).

I remember seeing one hypothetical side-by-side on a base model Prius and a Honda Fit Sport. Features and functionality were surprisingly close. Would've taken over a decade of running like 12,500 miles a year for the Prius to come out ahead, and that discounts the cost of a battery replacement.

I sent the author that report, its interesting, but its more or less a matter of superficiality. India has a fully working hybrid for around 2grand, course americans won't settle for that, but realistically those arguments are weak because its like buying a used hummer for 15k vs a 35k audi, sure the audi gets more gas mileage but overall you'll save a tremendous amount of money on the gas guzzling thunder cunt

[Zalius]

should just make a car w/nuclear fusion imo

[Plow]

should just make a car w/nuclear fusion imo

I know, instead of millions of small nuclear reactors in individual cars, we'll just create one massive one to power them all. Then we just need some kind of distribution system and a storage device to hand out chunks of that power to the cars.

[*Shinzon*]

To OP if you can try to alter your topic to Hydrogen/alternative fuels type of topic; I'm doing an argument paper for the same thing. You can basically argue Electric and Electric Hybrid technology is too inefficient to be used to it's fullest potential, and that especially here in America there isn't a real big infrastructure for it.

On the other hand hydrogen technology is ready to go and is much more effecient than electric and hybrids because it doesn't take 20 hours to charge your car and they can be set up just like gas stations in California.

If you can't change your topic continue to aim the paper at the inefficiency of electric and hybrid electric vehicles. Mention that gas consumption can be decreased by smarter driving and that the resources to produce electricity are no more green than standard gasoline.

Garage419.com on their page somewhere maybe an article or two down, have a test done of a Jetta TDI, Turbo Diesel engine which I believe they claim gets upwards of 200 miles to the gallon. Again the main thing here is infrastructure. We have access to clean diesel technology but it just needs to be implemented. Keep posting if you find anything interested I'd be willing to post my research again, since I'm doing a similar project.

[The Stig]

You can run a car on cow shit.

"We've" proved that...

[0ni0n]

Can you take the other side hah? It reminds me the debate where I was asked to advocate against free trade and outsourcing. It was impossible.

But if you insist then you could probably mention that because of the biofuel ethanol frenzy, a lot of farmers in south america chose to grow corns instead of food, contributing to a global food shortage and a spike in food prices. More people either suffered malnutrition or died from this as a result. Not to mention, although corn based ethanol is clean, it is woefully inefficient. I remember reading a few studies stating that even if we convert all arable farm lands to grow corns, we still won't have sufficient ethanol to power all the vehicles in the US, not to mention those in the rest of the world.

I think it would be better to focus on your essay on a short term cost/benefit analysis, demonstrating that the short term costs of hybrids outweigh the benefits and that many hybrid technologies are immature and expensive in the absence of a large, stable infrastructural support. In the long term, you can speculate that hybrid is an experiment that we execute out of frustration due to the environmental impact of our existing technologies. At the end, it's a gambit and a possibility that none of the hybrid technologies would work out.