[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
United States News Title: If “Emissions” Actually Mattered . . . The only electric cars that make sense are being phased out in favor of those that dont. Hybrids are electric cars without the electric cars gimps or costs. They can run without burning gas but when you run out of electricity, you dont have to wait for a charge to get going again . . . because hybrids carry around their own chargers. They do have batteries but theyre smaller and so cost less. And because theyre used less hybrids alternate between gas and electric power for propulsion they last longer. And even if an aging hybrids batteries do wear out and wont hold any charge, youll still have more range than a new electric car with a new battery pack. They also emit less more on that below. Naturally, theyve got to go. Well, some of them. GM and VW just announced they are abandoning the practical, functional, economical and environmental in favor of the not. Henceforth, they will focus on electric cars exclusively. Our strong preference is to go all-in where the market is heading, VW CEO Scott Keogh told The Wall Street Journal. Except the market isnt heading there. The mandates are but thats a very different thing. Hybrids are falling out of favor because . . . well, because theyre sensible. Thats not said, of course. The stated complaint is that they still burn gas, damn them. But very little gas. And very little in the way of emissions, too since the gas engine in a hybrid is generally about 30 percent smaller than in an otherwise similar non-hybrid vehicle and so burns significantly less gas even when it is running. Its also not running at all much of the time and burning no gas. Mix the two and you get almost zero emissions. But not quite zero and that isnt good enough for the zealots in charge of the regulatory apparat which spews the increasingly unhinged mandates that have created the market for impractical, expensive, inefficient and environmentally offensive purely electric cars. Which are the only cars that meet the arbitrary zero emissions at the tailpipe regulatory standard even though they probably produce more of some emissions in the aggregate than hybrids. Carbon dioxide emissions, interestingly enough. Because electric cars are high-performance cars. They need big, energy-sucking batteries and motors to deliver Ludicrous Speed. Hybrids, in contrast, are designed for economy. Which is another way of saying efficiency. High-performance (an indulgence) takes a back seat to high mileage and by dint of that, hybrid emissions are extremely low . . . because a smaller engine that isnt designed to produce a lot of power doesnt burn much gas. If it doesnt burn much gas, it doesnt produce much gas. The archetypical hybrid Toyotas Prius isnt quick. It takes about 10 seconds to get from zero to 60 but it averages 54 MPG. Everything about the cars design not just its drivetrain is focused on maximizing efficiency which by default reduces the output of all combustion byproducts including carbon dioxide. The gas which is supposedly (but not actually) going to kill us all within the next 10 years or so. Or at least, drown some of us. The Prius doesnt deliver Ludicrous Speed, so it doesnt need a high-performance battery pack. Its smaller battery pack and smaller electric motor use less electricity and most of that is generated locally by the highly efficient and nearly zero emissions gas engine. Which only runs some of the time and never burns coal or fuel oil. All-electric cars like Teslas burn both and excessively. Its necessary if you want Ludicrous Speed. High-performance requires bigger batteries, stronger electric motors and these require more electricity. Which is produced largely by coal, oil and natural gas utilities emitting carbon dioxide in the process . . . more carbon dioxide than if the cars drawing the electricity from the grid werent energy hogs. The typical EV has more in common with a 60s muscle car than any modern economy car. The main difference is political. It is outre to burn gas even in very small quantities that results in the production of extremely low essentially nonexistent emissions, including carbon dioxide emissions. But its ok to drive a current-sucking EV because it doesnt emit any gas . . . directly. Even though more gas (C02) is produced remotely by the burning of coal, oil and natural gas to feed the high-performance EVs high-performance batteries. EVs are popular with the affluent who want to signal their virtue but not if it means driving something like an ungainly and far-from-speedy Prius. A Tesla is sexy and speedy. It blows Corvettes away and goes over well with their friends who drive BMWs and Porsches, also soon to be electrified. But their emissions arent zero. And unlike hybrids, they make as much sense for most people who need to think about things like cost and range and recharge times as driving around the block to cross the street. Itd be funny if it werent so sad. . . . Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics or anything else? Click on the ask Eric link and send em in! Subscribe to *Cars and Automotive* Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Whatever else can be said, one thing is true: Priuses are great little cars. Mine is 12 years old. Zero problems, ever. Seats four adults comfortably. Does everything any other car I've ever had needs to do. Sips gas. I'm driving it until the wheels fall off. Seems to me that that is the practical answer to so many things: drive Priuses.
The writer makes some terrific points here. I've thought much the same with the way they've terminated some very promising vehicles instead of pushing forward with hybrid cars, SUVs and pickups. I think that cars are unpopular with the public right now when gas is pretty cheap.
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|