Essay Over Problems with Alternative Energy Vehicles, etc. (Now for all members)

[Eric.]

Notice: This was in the Premium forum for the last week for initial thoughts. Now I'm sharing it with the rest of you.

Some of you could probably care less, but I think some may be interested in reading this.

Its the most recent essay we had to write in English 4, which is really English 1101 (dual-credit class also counting for college credit) we were to discuss a strong belief that we have and focus on what has made you feel that way over time. Note that the requirement was only 2-4 pages. This is 9 including the sources.

Let's just say that I feel the teacher grades way too harshly, as I've normally earned all A's or a high B on essays before this class. Since the beginning of the school year I have made two Cs, two Bs, and a single A on the five essays. This is the A. 97%. She even asked to use it as an example next year.


If anyone wishes to use part of this in their own essay or whatever, just ask for my permission and let me see what its in. Other use is considered plagiarism. Don't repost it anywhere, etc.

'Tis a Word document. If someone really needs an RTF version I can convert it.

Let me know what you think. I was re-reading it a minute ago and noticed a few errors here and there. I didn't bother fixing them or the things she pointed out in her comment boxes (not on this copy).

Enjoy, Premos. (and now everyone else)

 

[Keef]

Good job. You hit on the main points of each type of fuel which have always bugged the hell out of me, including battery and electrical circuit production, clear-cutting land for corn crops, and an entire country's worth of fuel infrastructure to support Hydrogen cars.

And I was also just pondering: If you took the batteries out of the Prius, it would probably save, say, 300 pounds. I bet that information can be found. And I also bet that the Prius would get the same gas mileage and be just as quick and fast without those batteries and electric motors. Who's with me?

 

[Eric.]

Good job. You hit on the main points of each type of fuel which have always bugged the hell out of me, including battery and electrical circuit production, clear-cutting land for corn crops, and an entire country's worth of fuel infrastructure to support Hydrogen cars.

And I was also just pondering: If you took the batteries out of the Prius, it would probably save, say, 300 pounds. I bet that information can be found. And I also bet that the Prius would get the same gas mileage and be just as quick and fast without those batteries and electric motors. Who's with me?

I'd bet against it being as quick, since the motor does have a lot of torque. But I think it actually only works up to 30mph or something. The biggest place where the Prius excels is in city traffic, though. That's really the only benefit of a hybrid when the gasoline motor isn't used much, if at all.

Edit: And thanks. 👍

 

[exigeracer]

At what point would ecological and economical savings balance out and switch the ratio versus battery production volumes?

 

[Eric.]

At what point would ecological and economical savings balance out and switch the ratio versus battery production volumes?

I'm not quite sure what you are asking here. Could you elaborate?

 

[exigeracer]

Right now conservatives argue that production of a hybrid's battery creates more net emissions than its petrol equivalent (yet this identifies an existence of a negative global effect: emissions). These emissions are not calculated by individual battery production, but rather the manufacturing plants that create them. If production capacity increases through the same amount of plants, the net emissions created by each battery would be decreased, which would then, according to conservative logic, make hybrids more ecological than their petrol counterparts at a certain point.

How many hybrids will it take?

This is problem solving. You've isolated the problem, the next step is solving it, and if looking at the huge negative reaction from GTP members in the Auto News section whenever a new green car is announced, nobody is willing to try and solve this problem.

 

[Eric.]

Ah, I'm definitely the wrong person to ask on that.

And as far as hybrids are concerned, they are only a temporary fix. They still need whatever fuel the nonelectric side uses. Batteries aren't the solution because they still have to be charged, and I don't see any sort of rapid charge "stations" being created any time soon. So like I covered in the essay, I think we need to stop focusing on these as a solution and start brainstorming how to get infrastructure for hydrogen fuel cells. No worries about a foreign supply, either.

 

[Vasco]

Right now conservatives argue that production of a hybrid's battery creates more net emissions than its petrol equivalent (yet this identifies an existence of a negative global effect: emissions). These emissions are not calculated by individual battery production, but rather the manufacturing plants that create them. If production capacity increases through the same amount of plants, the net emissions created by each battery would be decreased, which would then, according to conservative logic, make hybrids more ecological than their petrol counterparts at a certain point.

How many hybrids will it take?

This is problem solving. You've isolated the problem, the next step is solving it, and if looking at the huge negative reaction from GTP members in the Auto News section whenever a new green car is announced, nobody is willing to try and solve this problem.

Wouldn't you need some hard data (which would come from within the companies and not be released outside) to calculate this? There's probably a lot of variables involved too...

 

[Philly]

And as far as hybrids are concerned, they are only a temporary fix. They still need whatever fuel the nonelectric side uses. Batteries aren't the solution because they still have to be charged, and I don't see any sort of rapid charge "stations" being created any time soon. So like I covered in the essay, I think we need to stop focusing on these as a solution and start brainstorming how to get infrastructure for hydrogen fuel cells. No worries about a foreign supply, either.

Both of those raise the issue of where the power (either for the batteries or hydrogen) is going to come from. If we are going to keep using coal- and oil- fired plants, both of these solutions are ecologically useless.

Wouldn't you need some hard data (which would come from within the companies and not be released outside) to calculate this? There's probably a lot of variables involved too...

Sounds like a min-max problem relating emissions saved per battery compared to how we could most efficiently produce batteries.

 

[Keef]

I wonder how much emissions are created by all these people doing all this research. See, when people work they require more food for more energy, and when we poop we release carbon dioxide and methane and so do the animals that we kill and we have to harvest food for us to eat and refine it and that makes the farmers work more and then they require more food and then they eat more and poop more and then we should all kill ourselves because we make more pollution every time we try to figure out who what why where and how we get more pollution.

I think my cousin's dog is contributing heavily to global warming. His farts can seriously clear the whole frickin house. Somebody send him to the moon.

 

[Philly]

#1 source of Methane emissions:

Save the Earth! Eat more steak!

 

[Keef]

I think we should strap tanks to cows' asses to capture all the methane. Then we could make methanol. And that would mean faster cars and really clear flames that nobody would realize were burning. Sweet.

 

[Eric.]

I think we should strap tanks to cows' asses to capture all the methane. Then we could make methanol. And that would mean faster cars and really clear flames that nobody would realize were burning. Sweet.

You should work on the schematics for such a device and give us some renders.


Also, I'm gonna throw this out to the public...

 

[Jim Prower]

And I was also just pondering: If you took the batteries out of the Prius, it would probably save, say, 300 pounds. I bet that information can be found. And I also bet that the Prius would get the same gas mileage and be just as quick and fast without those batteries and electric motors. Who's with me?

Add the 2ZZ-GE, (or a 3S-GTE...) and it'll Fly. I'd love to put one of Toyota's ridiculously powerful motors in a Prius.

Interesting Article. I wonder if the current Propane infrastructure could be used as something as a startup for Hydrogen. Propane is a liquified gas stored under high pressures, much like Hydrogen would be. The other problem would be fire risks, yes, and the added weight of the tanks...which would likely be less than Hybrid batteries.

EDIT: Okay, I do have one more thing to add...Hybrids, in an automotive sense, stink. But, If we apply them to a Railroad setting, where we're already taking Fuel, producing electricity, and turning it into forward motion, is a logical step. General Electric already has a Hybrid demonstrator, as does a small company called RailPower Industries. This could prove a viable home.