|
 Post in Forums
Create a Profile
Upload Pictures
Make Polls
|
Keep a Journal
Meet Friends
Have Fun
It's FREE!
|
|
Sign Up!
|
|
|
Forum Index > News & Politics > Environment | >> Hummer is more energy efficient than a Prius | | |
|
stumblinthrulife
Points Whore Master
61547 points
Deleted
30/M/Lake Saint Louis, Missouri
Join Date: Oct 2005 | jmo said:
whats a prius?
Toyota Prius is one of the flagship hybrid cars on the US roads. It uses a combination of conventional internal combustion engine and batteries.
Boobie day's over, but breast cancer isn't. Help them catch it early - click for free mammograms - link [www.thebreastcancersite.com] |  | |
|
jmo
Shakebar
Bogey Man+
71988 points
20/M/Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Join Date: May 2006 | stumblinthrulife said:
Toyota Prius is one of the flagship hybrid cars on the US roads. It uses a combination of conventional internal combustion engine and batteries.
ahh ok, got ya! | | | |
|
jonnythan
Cucumber cowboy
Giant Donkey+
134459 points
100/M/The north,
Join Date: Aug 2005 | baker63 said:
So what now? Driving a hummer is not the answer. So what do we do in the intrim. Just keep driving SUV's or get educated and find what is has the lower fuel cost. Or are we just going to pretend that fossil fuels will last forever?
No. The point is information. Hybrid vehicles are not necessarily any more resource efficient than big gas-guzzing SUVs.
Hybrid vehicles, filled with big, expensive, extremely polluting batteries and all sorts of exotic metals with very polluting manufacturing processes are not necessarily the answer.
The answer is to keep looking for better things.
 | | | |
|
baker63
Debater
5339 points
Deleted
44/M/, United States (general)
Join Date: Sep 2005 | jonnythan said:
No. The point is information. Hybrid vehicles are not necessarily any more resource efficient than big gas-guzzing SUVs.
Hybrid vehicles, filled with big, expensive, extremely polluting batteries and all sorts of exotic metals with very polluting manufacturing processes are not necessarily the answer.
The answer is to keep looking for better things.
What are the better things that we are looking for? Looking at the total resources consumed from the conception to grave of a vehical is very imporatant. I think that one of the answers is an older technology: Mass transit. But that would involve a large commitment of public resouces, including the will to use. That is not there right now. we are too used to the freedom of jumping into our cars and going. I think that we will see smaller cars and more people riding motorcycles. But we are about $2.00/gal away for that major shift.
BTW I agree that the hybrid are not the answer, unless the total cost in fuel and environmental destruction can be analysed | | | |
|
jonnythan
Cucumber cowboy
Giant Donkey+
134459 points
100/M/The north,
Join Date: Aug 2005 | baker63 said:
What are the better things that we are looking for?
If we knew, we wouldn't have to look anymore would we? 
baker63 said:
Looking at the total resources consumed from the conception to grave of a vehical is very imporatant. I think that one of the answers is an older technology: Mass transit. But that would involve a large commitment of public resouces, including the will to use.
Mass transit is wonderful and we could certainly use a hell of a lot more of it.. but it's impractical for anything but intracity travel.
| | | |
|
stumblinthrulife
Points Whore Master
61547 points
Deleted
30/M/Lake Saint Louis, Missouri
Join Date: Oct 2005 | The thing is that most people aren't thinking of their environment, they are thinking of their pocket. So even if a "solution" does just outsource the pollution to the area of manufacture, they won't care as long as it get's them cheaper gas prices.
In the absence of good energy saving technology, our best bet is just to look at reducing engine sizes and reducing the "weight overhead" in the vehicles we use. For example -
I have two cars, a fairly light Celica, and a heavy Pacifica. When I drive the Pacifica, I am using the fuel required to move 4,383 lbs of vehicle, just to move 200 lbs of me! Now THAT is inefficient.
With the Celica, things get a little better, but still obscenely inefficient. Now I'm moving a 2,500 lb vehicle just to get me around.
You think that's insane? What if all I'm doing is returning a DVD? In that case, my 200 lb a** isn't important in the grand scheme of things, I'm just there to operate the vehicle, now I'm part of the overhead. Yes, to move an 8 oz (estimate) DVD and case, I now use enough fuel to move 4,500 lbs!!!!!
If we're serious about reducing energy consumption, we need to think a little more about how we transport ourselves. Sure, if you have 6 people + luggage to move, you're better off with the 4,000 lb SUV. But if it's just you going 1 mile down the road to drop off a DVD - on your bike! Commuting to work on your own? 10 miles into the city? Sounds like a job for a motorcycle or scooter, not an SUV.
But, of course, in this image, comfort and convenience obsessed world, none of us are going to do any of that. I'm about to jump in my SUV for my 7 minute morning commute to work, and I'll probably use it to take the DVD back tonight.
Food for thought though.
Boobie day's over, but breast cancer isn't. Help them catch it early - click for free mammograms - link [www.thebreastcancersite.com] | | | |
Top
|
Jul 19, 2006 @ 21:03:27
