NationStates Jolt Archive

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.
Well, the hybrid cars actually generate their own electricity as a byproduct of the gasoline engine's work.

they generate the electricity themselves. first they can absorb the energy from braking, second the combustion engine can drive a generator, but since the combustion engine can run at an optimal rpm value and has not to adjust to different speeds in unfavourable torque and rpm zones, it uses the gas much more efficiently.

then again, hybrid cars are a joke since oil is so dirt cheap, costs like 25cents per litre, the largest part of the cost is due to taxes. but as demand for gas declines, they will have to increase taxes on the gasprices in order to take in the same amount of taxes to maintain the roads. so the only thing the move to hybrids does is increase taxes.

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.

Actually no. My mom has the toyota one and it's excellent. She went from a fillup every week to about ever 3 weeks.

I drove it for a couple days and it uses the battery most of the time. You can tell because when it changes over you get a small jolt that feels like the engine stalled. Freaked me out a couple times ;)

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.

There are a couple of nuclear power plants in New Jersey, if I'm correct.

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.

Im with you

There are a couple of nuclear power plants in New Jersey, if I'm correct.
Three actually. Salem Creek, Oyster Creek, and Hope Creek.

they generate the electricity themselves. first they can absorb the energy from braking, second the combustion engine can drive a generator, but since the combustion engine can run at an optimal rpm value and has not to adjust to different speeds in unfavourable torque and rpm zones, it uses the gas much more efficiently.

then again, hybrid cars are a joke since oil is so dirt cheap, costs like 25cents per litre, the largest part of the cost is due to taxes. but as demand for gas declines, they will have to increase taxes on the gasprices in order to take in the same amount of taxes to maintain the roads. so the only thing the move to hybrids does is increase taxes.That won't last, however--oil is already getting more expensive. It finished at about $64 a barrel today, which isn't record high, but it's not far off the highs that came about after Katrina, and you'd expect there should have been at least some price recovery by now.

But at best, hybrids--much as I like them--are only a stopgap measure. We need alternative sources of fuel, and we need cleaner fuel sources as well, and we need them yesterday.

oil is already getting more expensive. It finished at about $64 a barrel todaywell, that still are only 33(euro)cents per litre, (i pay 55(euro)cents per litre of milk!) and imo there is allready a huge riskpremium included in the current oilprice, the actual cost to get the stuff out of the ground is much lower.

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.

A lot of western states use hydroelectric power rather than gas or coal.

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.
Well in someplaces, cleaner sorces of energy are used, like Hydro and Nuclear. Second, they are a joke. Who the fuck wants a car that ugly?

That won't last, however--oil is already getting more expensive. It finished at about $64 a barrel today, which isn't record high, but it's not far off the highs that came about after Katrina, and you'd expect there should have been at least some price recovery by now.

No, it won't recover yet. These moves have nothing to do with fundamentals; gasoline and distillates had builds 5x the expected amounts and oil closed up. What's happening is there is a lot of money coming in to the markets from mutual funds and that is driving up prices regardless of fundamentals. Once they're in to the market, prices are going to correct and sharply.

Hybrids are a great idea. Even if we use coal to generate the power, the US is the "Middle East" of coal and that brings thousands of jobs to us, uses our resources for our benefit, and reduces our dependence on the Middle Eastern tyrants for our energy security. Nuclear power uses uranium from Canada along with any extra natural gas we need.

I'm all for coal, nuclear, and natural gas because they reduce our dependence on the Middle East for our energy. Anything that reduces Iran's influence on our energy is the better.

A lot of western states use hydroelectric power rather than gas or coal.right, western nations like egypt or the chicoms.
just expropriate a few thousand people and forcibly move them to turn their homes into a reservoir.
in fact many hydroelectric plants release more polluting gases than coal plants from the flooded vegetation at the bottom of the reservoir lakes, that is rotting away.

right, western nations like egypt or the chicoms.
just expropriate a few thousand people and forcibly move them to turn their homes into a reservoir.
in fact many hydroelectric plants release more polluting gases than coal plants from the flooded vegetation at the bottom of the reservoir lakes, that is rotting away.

Western states as in US states. Like Oregon and Colorado.

in fact many hydroelectric plants release more polluting gases than coal plants from the flooded vegetation at the bottom of the reservoir lakes, that is rotting away.
That's interesting.
Do you have some figures on that?

My family has the 2006 Toyota Prius, and compared to our other car, a huge van, it's amazing. But anyhow, I think it's amazing. The only downside is that if you have loud music inside the car, you can hear it 30 feet away.

That's interesting.
Do you have some figures on that?

Especially interesting since as far as I know most hydroelectric plants are on relatively fast moving rivers.

That's interesting.
Do you have some figures on that?not putting much effort into this (because i dont believe in global warming and dont really care) a search (http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGGL%2CGGGL%3A2005-09%2CGGGL%3Aen&q=stausee+verrottung+klimaschaedlich&btnG=Search) with google returns as top result a document, that contains this:Stauseen produzieren
Treibhausgase

Wasserkraft kann klimaschädlicher
sein, als Kohlekraftwerke

Einer Meldung der tageszeitung (taz) vom 2. Juni
2000 zufolge, können große Stauseen erheblich
mehr Treibhausgas erzeugen als Kohlekraftwerke.
Die taz beruft sich auf Ergebnisse der Weltkommission
für Staudämme (WCD), die in einem
Bericht des Wissenschaftsjournals New Scientist
veröffentlicht wurden. Danach produziert etwa
der 1998 in Betrieb genommene Balbina-Stausee
in Brasilien in den ersten 20 Jahren seines Betriebs
im Schnitt das Achtfache dessen, was ein
Kohlekraftwerk mit derselben elektrischen Leistung
an Treibhausgasen in die Luft blasen würde.
Ursache dafür sind die vom Stausee überfluteten
Pflanzen. Bei der Verrottung wird das klimaschädliche
Gas Methan frei. Sein Treibhauspotential
ist 21mal höher als das von CO2.
Langfristig kann das Problem durch ständig weiter
eingespülte Biomasse aus den Flüssen aufrecht
erhalten bleiben. Doch nicht jeder Stausee
ist so klimaschädlich wie der Balbina-See. Je
nach Lage und Tiefe – je flacher, desto schlimmer
– variierte die Schädlichkeit nach Angaben
der WCD um den Faktor 500.
taz: Fax: 030/25 160 62, eMail: oeko@taz.de

not putting much effort into this (because i dont believe in global warming and dont really care) a search (http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGGL%2CGGGL%3A2005-09%2CGGGL%3Aen&q=stausee+verrottung+klimaschaedlich&btnG=Search) with google returns as top result a document, that contains this:
Well, I wouldn't quite call that "many", and it does say that it only can not that it will be more damaging than various coal stations.

But fair enough. Nonetheless, looking at the state of Chinese Power Stations (and the sheer depth of the three gorges dam once it's done), I think this one is better than building the equivalent of conventional power stations.

By the way...I've been wondering, where are you from? Where do you live?
Are you the first German US-Republican I've ever met?

One Babel Fish later for all the non German folk:

Artificial lakes produce greenhouse gases

Water power can be climaticmore harmful, than coal-fired power stations

For a message of the daily paper (taz) from 2 June 2000 according to, large artificial lakes can produce substantially more greenhouse gases than coal-fired power stations. Taz appoints itself to results of the world commission for dams (WCD), which were published in a report of the science journal new Scientist. Afterwards about the 1998 in enterprise taken Balbina artificial lake in Brazil produces the eightfold its that would blow a coal-fired power station with the same electrical achievement at greenhouse gases into air in the first 20 years of its enterprise on average. A cause for it are of artificial lake flooded plants. With the rotting the climaticharmful gas methane becomes free. Its greenhouse potential is 21mal more highly than from CO2. On a long-term basis the problem can remain upright received by constant far in-rinsed biomass from the rivers. But each artificial lake is not as climaticharmful as the Balbina lake. Depending upon situation and depth - the flatter, the more badly - varied the injurious character according to data

3 Things:

1: You don't have to plug in hybrid cars, so the point about where the electricity comes from is moot. It doesn't matter where your power on the grid comes from.

2: Oil and gas won't be around forever. There is a lot of differing research on how much there still is out there, but no matter who you ask they will tell you that it eventually will run out.

3: Hybrids save money at the pump, and the extra cost of having a hybrid will eventually pay for itself. It's a smart move for the consumer.

P.S. Coal will eventually run out too, and nuclear creates tons of hazardous waste. The real long term solution for power on the grid is renewables, especially wind and solar. The technologies are improving every year, and nations such as Denmark and Germany have had remarkable success with alternative energy. I believe that Denmark is 1/5th WIND powered and Germany is 1/10th WIND powered. Germany and Spain each install 2,000 megawatts of wind power every year. In terms of the future of car energy, Hydrogen seems to be the up-and-coming tech. It's still in need of some serious advances, but one day it will overtake gasoline as the fuel of choice for automotives.

One Babel Fish later for all the non German folk:

Artificial lakes produce greenhouse gases

Water power can be climaticmore harmful, than coal-fired power stations

For a message of the daily paper (taz) from 2 June 2000 according to, large artificial lakes can produce substantially more greenhouse gases than coal-fired power stations. Taz appoints itself to results of the world commission for dams (WCD), which were published in a report of the science journal new Scientist. Afterwards about the 1998 in enterprise taken Balbina artificial lake in Brazil produces the eightfold its that would blow a coal-fired power station with the same electrical achievement at greenhouse gases into air in the first 20 years of its enterprise on average. A cause for it are of artificial lake flooded plants. With the rotting the climaticharmful gas methane becomes free. Its greenhouse potential is 21mal more highly than from CO2. On a long-term basis the problem can remain upright received by constant far in-rinsed biomass from the rivers. But each artificial lake is not as climaticharmful as the Balbina lake. Depending upon situation and depth - the flatter, the more badly - varied the injurious character according to data


I wonder if they are measuring it over the lifetime of a lake or in years/months... (?)

I imagine that the rottign plants creating the greenhouse gasses don't get emmitted for very long as the plants wont rot forever. Probably doesn't even take a year.

2: Oil and gas won't be around forever.see your P.S., nothing is going to be around forever (not even the sun)nations such as Denmark and Germany have had remarkable success with alternative energy. I believe that Denmark is 1/5th WIND powered and Germany is 1/10th WIND powered. Germany and Spain each install 2,000 megawatts of wind power every year.arghftw&*ggs curse you! are you freaking insane? wtf is this "remarkable success" you are talking about? the result of this ideologically motivated energypolicy in germany was that it drove electricity prices up. the price in germany is at 22(us)cents per kWh, in the us it is 5(us)cents per kWh afaik, germans pay 4 times the price for electricity people in the us do, thanks to this "remarkable success".I wonder if they are measuring it over the lifetime of a lake or in years/months... (?)they projected it for the first 20 years, in that time it will produce 8 times the amount of gas a coal plant with the same poweroutput would in that timeI imagine that the rottign plants creating the greenhouse gasses don't get emmitted for very long as the plants wont rot forever. Probably doesn't even take a year.it says, that since more biomass is washed into the lake through the rivers, the effect does not cease, but continues.

sorry about the german article, thought nobody would care about this, since the thread is actually about cars.

Actually no. My mom has the toyota one and it's excellent. She went from a fillup every week to about ever 3 weeks.

I drove it for a couple days and it uses the battery most of the time. You can tell because when it changes over you get a small jolt that feels like the engine stalled. Freaked me out a couple times ;)

Than all the money you save from not buying as much gas you will have to use to buy an expensive battery after it gets drained.

Than all the money you save from not buying as much gas you will have to use to buy an expensive battery after it gets drained.
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/hybrid-car2.htm

For the last time:
Hybrid Cars like the Prius generate electricity with dynamos integrated into the braking system. They recharge their batteries themselves, therefore, barring a defect, you will not have to buy, or recharge the batteries. Ever.

barring a defect, you will not have to buy, or recharge the batteries. Ever.yes you will, their capacity will reduce as they age, you may also experience a memory effect, the voltage output will get lower, in cold weather it will be even worse.
you need to replace the batterypacks regulary.

yes you will, their capacity will reduce as they age, you may also experience a memory effect, the voltage output will get lower, in cold weather it will be even worse.
you need to replace the batterypacks regulary.
Perhaps, but the point is that they aren't really more expensive to keep than normal cars, which also need inspections, replacements and sometimes engine rebuilds, depending on the age.

I think these cars are a great idea, good for the consumer, who saves money, good for the people on the streets, because they blow out less smelly gasses and make less noise (I presume, I never heard one in isolation, they were always drowned out by bloody "Big Aussie V8s") and are good for the environment by not blowing as much crap into the atmosphere than they would if they didn't have the electromotor. And I think they get tax breaks as well (at least here).

Regardless of where on the spectrum you stand, and whether for whatever reason you choose to ignore the rest of the world on global warming, at least one of those reasons should appeal to you.

Hybrid cars are the automobile equivalent of the smoke all these tech heads have been blowing for the past several decades about being able to get one appliance that controls every other appliance and is voice compatible and affordable. It is all crap. Hybrid cars will never go anywhere until people stop fucking around with them and make them practical and affordable.

It is all crap. Hybrid cars will never go anywhere until people stop fucking around with them and make them practical and affordable.
http://www.japanesecarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2051128.002
http://autoweb.drive.com.au/cms/A_102397/newsarticle.html

What's the problem? I think the Prius fits the "practical" and "affordable" categories pretty well - and it makes Toyota a lot of money.

And the next generation Porsches will have Hybrid Engines as well (or at least the Cayenne..the others I haven't heard from yet, but I sorta expect it).

http://www.japanesecarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2051128.002
http://autoweb.drive.com.au/cms/A_102397/newsarticle.html

What's the problem? I think the Prius fits the "practical" and "affordable" categories pretty well - and it makes Toyota a lot of money.

And the next generation Porsches will have Hybrid Engines as well (or at least the Cayenne..the others I haven't heard from yet, but I sorta expect it).
Well, it works, but we need more. And it could look better.

Perhaps, but the point is that they aren't really more expensive to keep than normal cars, which also need inspections, replacements and sometimes engine rebuilds, depending on the age.but due to its complex constructionprinciple of having 2 motors instead of 1 a hybrid has an inherently higher maintenance cost.I think these cars are ... good for the people on the streets, because they ... make less noise (I presume..)they make less noise, but that is not a good thing. many pedestrians and cyclists tend to rely on their hearing to detect cars, because they are too lazy to really turn their head every time, when they know, they can easily hear cars. at the same time automobilists are used to pedestrians and cyclists being aware of them. now if you cut out the sound of the combustionengine and put in a silentrunning electromotor, that car will no longer be easily heard.
i read a first hand account of a driver of a fully electric car and he mentions, that he is having these problems.
i predict, that when silent running hybrid cars become more widespread, you will see a leap in traffic accidents where hybrids run over pedestrians and cyclists unless you add artificial noise to the hybrids maybe through a loudspeaker.

but due to its complex constructionprinciple of having 2 motors instead of 1 a hybrid has an inherently higher maintenance cost.they make less noise, but that is not a good thing. many pedestrians and cyclists tend to rely on their hearing to detect cars, because they are too lazy to really turn their head every time, when they know, they can easily hear cars. at the same time automobilists are used to pedestrians and cyclists being aware of them. now if you cut out the sound of the combustionengine and put in a silentrunning electromotor, that car will no longer be easily heard.
i read a first hand account of a driver of a fully electric car and he mentions, that he is having these problems.
i predict, that when silent running hybrid cars become more widespread, you will see a leap in traffic accidents where hybrids run over pedestrians and cyclists unless you add artificial noise to the hybrids maybe through a loudspeaker.
Not to be hostile or anything, but that is the worst arguement (that they are too quiet) against hybrid cars that I've ever encountered.

Not to be hostile or anything, but that is the worst arguement (that they are too quiet) against hybrid cars that I've ever encountered.

Dammit, you beat me to it.

http://www.japanesecarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2051128.002
http://autoweb.drive.com.au/cms/A_102397/newsarticle.html

What's the problem? I think the Prius fits the "practical" and "affordable" categories pretty well - and it makes Toyota a lot of money.

And the next generation Porsches will have Hybrid Engines as well (or at least the Cayenne..the others I haven't heard from yet, but I sorta expect it).
STOP KNOWING THINGS BEFORE ME!!!....now I gotta look this up...I was all focused on their Penske LMP car...

maybe, when you get run over by a silent running hybrid, that you didnt hear comming, you will be convinced.
i know i am right.

maybe, when you get run over by a silent running hybrid, that you didnt hear comming, you will be convinced.
i know i am right.

Maybe, you can walk on the damn sidewalk.
Maybe, you can wear reflective clothing at night.
Maybe, you can walk facing traffic like you're supposed to.
Maybe, you can look both ways...
Maybe, you can use a capital letter.
And maybe, just maybe, you can get a clue. Because you are NOT right.

maybe, when you get run over by a silent running hybrid, that you didnt hear comming, you will be convinced.
i know i am right.Most of the bike riders I see these days can't hear shit anyway because they're riding with earphones in, or they're gabbing on the phone. If you're a driver, it's your responsibility--legally--to watch out for them, not the other way around. They always have right-of-way.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/hybrid-car2.htm

For the last time:
Hybrid Cars like the Prius generate electricity with dynamos integrated into the braking system. They recharge their batteries themselves, therefore, barring a defect, you will not have to buy, or recharge the batteries. Ever.

Thank you for saving me the effort! :)

Hybrid cars are the automobile equivalent of the smoke all these tech heads have been blowing for the past several decades about being able to get one appliance that controls every other appliance and is voice compatible and affordable. It is all crap. Hybrid cars will never go anywhere until people stop fucking around with them and make them practical and affordable.

Yea that's why the Prius has a 6 month to a year waiting list.....

Most of the bike riders I see these days can't hear shit anyway because they're riding with earphones in, or they're gabbing on the phone. If you're a driver, it's your responsibility--legally--to watch out for them, not the other way around. They always have right-of-way.
Either watch out for them or drive up beside them and throw a stick through the spokes in their wheels for not paying attention.

Yea that's why the Prius has a 6 month to a year waiting list.....
Which also serves to prove part of my point. They are fucking around.

Maybe, you can walk on the damn sidewalk.on my way to work every morning i only walk about 15 minutes between the trainstations and my target locations, during that time i cross about 6 streets that dont have trafficlights.Maybe, you can wear reflective clothing at night.oh, the automobilist sees the cyclist/pedestrian, no problem, but the cyclist/pedestrian hasnt noticed the car, while the automobilist thinks he has, so the automobilist does not expect the cyclist/pedestrian to suddenly make a turn into his line.Maybe, you can walk facing traffic like you're supposed to.maybe, but few people do, because decades of lifeexperience have taught them, that they can hear a car coming.

Not to be hostile or anything, but that is the worst arguement (that they are too quiet) against hybrid cars that I've ever encountered.

If we got to stop them, then we have to stop those evil bicycles as well! ;)

Who is using just thier ears to cross the street? I mean, aside from blind people. But then there are safeguards for that, too...

This is the car for me (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10788292/).

It's a sports car, it's a hybrid, it's a diesel so I can use biofuels, and even then it gets 65 mpg. And it's a...Ford? Huh...

Found that looking for the Porsche hybrid, which I couldn't find a recent article on, but I stopped looking when I found this. It's not likely to see the light of day, Ford is hoping to see what customer reaction will be before deciding if it's discussed as an idea or 'put in the basement.' Ending the sentence that way (the Ford spokesman) leads me to believe that's where it's headed. But I'd buy it if I was in the market for a new car that would likely be kinda expensive...which I'm not likely to be...curse my lack of economic influence!!!

snip
Which also serves to prove part of my point. They are fucking around.
Or that they can't make them fast enough.

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.

the toyota highlanders generate their own elcectricity.

on my way to work every morning i only walk about 15 minutes between the trainstations and my target locations, during that time i cross about 6 streets that dont have trafficlights.
Look both ways before you cross the street. The only thing I was told to do more than that as a kid was "Don't touch that."

oh, the automobilist sees the cyclist/pedestrian, no problem, but the cyclist/pedestrian hasnt noticed the car, while the automobilist thinks he has, so the automobilist does not expect the cyclist/pedestrian to suddenly make a turn into his line.
Well, in the case of the reflective wear, presumably the pedestrian/bicyclist has noticed that it is now a lot brighter than it was a second ago and can resume being aware of thier surroundings like is their responsability...
maybe, but few people do, because decades of lifeexperience have taught them, that they can hear a car coming.
...so, because people walk with traffic we should make loud cars, instead of reminding people to walk against traffic. Which would be better for the rest of the planet? I'll give you some time...

Or alternatively-
People jump off bridges. We shouldn't build bridges.

the toyota highlanders generate their own elcectricity.
All hybrid cars generate their own electricity, that's why they're 'hybrid' cars instead of 'electric' cars. This whole thing started off on a ridiculous misconception about how the cars worked.

Hybrid cars are not a complete joke but they are neat and the day all cars are run on Sugar will be the day.
*Strokes Sugar Bonds gleefully*

i am not the only one, who is concerned about the silent threat, a search with google yields articles like this:Toyota Prius: Silent Menace to Society?

...

The quiet. When the Prius is running on battery power, as it often does in city driving it is very quiet. So quiet, you can't hear it from 5 feet away. Aficionados of the car refer to it as being in stealth-mode when it is on batteries. While I imagine this is a boon to the driver, it means the car is a menace to pedestrians. At least in my case, without realizing it, I generally use my hearing as much or more than my vision to guide me in crossing the street. Glance to the left, glance to the right, and go. I depend on my ears to tell me if a car is approaching the stop sign too fast to stop, or turning right on red without stopping, or crossing against the light. With the Prius, you don't get any warning -- the car literally sneaks up on you. After nearly being run over several times in the last month, and again this night on the way back from the Berkeley Cybersalon, I did a little research and turned up quite a few mentions of this problem, the scariest from a blind person's perspective, something I hadn't even thought of. I wasn't able to find any statistics on the matter, but I'd bet that the number of car-pedestrian accidents per mile driven is quite a bit higher for Priuses than most cars.orElectric Cars are Too Quiet

Electric cars are fun to drive and accelerate fast from a dead stop. This is because the have two speeds; off and on. They are nice too because they are quiet and peaceful; no noise pollution. How could this be a bad thing?

For safety sake the silent running electric vehicles will now be required to make noise; to prevent accidents of other cars, bicycles and pedestrians. Electric Automobile makers are using this as a marketing tool saying you can choose the sound you wish your car to make.

...

Sure you could drive your electric car in the library without disturbing anyone, but you are liable to hit someone using the computer or looking for a book using the old Dewey Decimal System. A little noise in this case is a good thing. Think about it.and first hand accounts like this oneI know of what you speak. Kat and I have had a Prius since 2001, and I'm now more concious of the fact I don't make as much noise when driving. When I have to drive another car, it always seems very, very loud. In "stealth mode" at even 30 or 40 MPH, the Prius is very quiet. I had a close call while driving in Great Sand Dunes, NP in Colorado several years ago. A guy was hiking along side the road, and it not being a frequently visited park, he just started crossing over to the other side without looking. It was almost his last mistake. He looked sheepish when I screeched to a halt, but also looked totally surprised that a car was within a mile of him.

i am not the only one, who is concerned about the silent threat, a search with google yields articles like this:orand first hand accounts like this one

Hmmmm blame the car for people not looking both ways when crossing streets?

The blindman arguement is weak. I saw a gas car almost hit a blind man because they did a rolling stop.....

i am not the only one, who is concerned about the silent threat, a search with google yields articles like this:orand first hand accounts like this one
Great, from your own source problem solved-
For safety sake the silent running electric vehicles will now be required to make noise; to prevent accidents of other cars, bicycles and pedestrians. Electric Automobile makers are using this as a marketing tool saying you can choose the sound you wish your car to make.


We can move on.

Hybrid cars are not a complete joke but they are neat and the day all cars are run on Sugar will be the day.
*Strokes Sugar Bonds gleefully*

Hell you aren't making money from the candy trade?

Just invest in the US! ;)

While the fact that hybrid cars are quieter than normal cars may initially cause difficulties with pedestrians and cyclists needing to adapt the way in which they check for cars, that's really all that's involved -- changing perception methods. People will adjust as they always do to new technology.

Great, from your own source problem solved-


We can move on.i allready suggested that in post #31 of this thread:unless you add artificial noise to the hybrids maybe through a loudspeaker.reading helps

i also found a BBC story about a hydrogenpowered motorbike being too quiet:Revolutionary bike 'too quiet'
Hydrogen-powered motorcycle

The world's first purpose-built hydrogen-powered bike could be fitted with an artificial "vroom" because of worries its silence might be dangerous.

A prototype of the motorbike, which could cost more than $8,300 (£4,500), was unveiled in London on Tuesday.

The problem with the "fuel cell" bike, which produces no polluting emissions, is that it is too quiet.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4353853.stm

you can go on denying that the silence of electric cars is a problem, i am more convinced that i am right than before.

i allready suggested that in post #31 of this thread:reading helps

i also found a BBC story about a hydrogenpowered motorbike being too quiet:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4353853.stm

you can go on denying that the silence of electric cars is a problem, i am more convinced that i am right than before.
Yes, but it is a problem easily solved by a combination of noise makers and pedestrian/cyclist awareness, so who gives a damn?

While the fact that hybrid cars are quieter than normal cars may initially cause difficulties with pedestrians and cyclists needing to adapt the way in which they check for cars, that's really all that's involved -- changing perception methods. People will adjust as they always do to new technology.sure, but in this case during the learning process hundreds and thousands of people will be killed and maimed in these accidents. the number of traffic deaths in the us alone is over 40000 per year, introducing silent running cars and just waiting until people have learned to adjust will likely lead to thousands of extra deaths. are you willing to pay that price?

i allready suggested that in post #31 of this thread:reading helps

i also found a BBC story about a hydrogenpowered motorbike being too quiet:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4353853.stm

you can go on denying that the silence of electric cars is a problem, i am more convinced that i am right than before.
I'm going to go with the quote above you-
While the fact that hybrid cars are quieter than normal cars may initially cause difficulties with pedestrians and cyclists needing to adapt the way in which they check for cars, that's really all that's involved -- changing perception methods. People will adjust as they always do to new technology.
People getting hit by cars in general where a problem when cars came out, people adjust. It won't take long for people to become accustom to electric cars and remember to look before crossing the damn road, you know, like we should have been doing all the freakin' time.

I live in an area with a lot of electric vehicles (yay hippie surfer town) and we manage to not run over the larger amount of pedestrians and bicyclists. Crazy thing about humans, thier ability to learn...

sure, but in this case during the learning process hundreds and thousands of people will be killed and maimed in these accidents. the number of traffic deaths in the us alone is over 40000 per year, introducing silent running cars and just waiting until people have learned to adjust will likely lead to thousands of extra deaths. are you willing to pay that price?
As I just said, with a combination of awareness and noise makers (i.e. both the cars and the people doing their part to adjust) it's not a problem, so get over it.

EDIT: I would also add that a good idea would be to introduce noisemakers initially, then to taper off their use as hybrid cars become the norm, so people could become gradually accustomed to hearing less noise from vehicles.

sure, but in this case during the learning process hundreds and thousands of people will be killed and maimed in these accidents. the number of traffic deaths in the us alone is over 40000 per year, introducing silent running cars and just waiting until people have learned to adjust will likely lead to thousands of extra deaths. are you willing to pay that price?
Hundreds of thousands? Care to support that number?

Yes, but it is a problem easily solved by a combination of noise makers and pedestrian/cyclist awareness, so who gives a damn?noisemakers are a good idea (i had it) but that negates the car being quiet which Neu Leonstein proposed being a benefit and that it is not a benefit was the whole point of my argument.

Well, it works, but we need more. And it could look better.

It could also be bigger and have AWD or 4WD.

Hundreds of thousands? Care to support that number?hundreds and thousands. 100s+1000s not 100s*1000s

noisemakers are a good idea (i had it) but that negates the car being quiet which Neu Leonstein proposed being a benefit and that it is not a benefit was the whole point of my argument.
But it *is* a benefit in the grand scheme of things. Less noise pollution means that people living near busy roads will finally be able to sleep in on weekends. After a brief transition period, I think noisemakers should be eliminated and people should be expected to use their other senses.

sure, but in this case during the learning process hundreds and thousands of people will be killed and maimed in these accidents. the number of traffic deaths in the us alone is over 40000 per year, introducing silent running cars and just waiting until people have learned to adjust will likely lead to thousands of extra deaths. are you willing to pay that price?

Society's answer: HELL YEAH!

Case in point:
RMS Titanic, the Solomon Brothers, Versailles (post-WWI), &c.

hundreds and thousands. 100s+1000s not 100s*1000s
Okay, that's silly. Thousands contain hundreds so saying hundreds and thousands is redundant.

Still, support the number.

Especially interesting since as far as I know most hydroelectric plants are on relatively fast moving rivers.

Hydroelectrics alter the speed at which a river flows, making entire species of fish die out over night, because the water is no longer as fast, as cool, and they (barring a special construct on the side of a dam) cannot swim upstream, past the dam to their spawning areas.

After a brief transition period, I think noisemakers should be eliminated and people should be expected to use their other senses.i doubt they will be so easy to remove. imagine an automobilist, who has removed his noisemaker after a few years runs over a cyclist. the cyclists lawyer will immediately accuse the automobilist of having contributed to the accident by not using a noisemaker (in a way like he would if the accident had happened at night and the automobilist had not had his lights on). it will remain a liability to make noise while driving, if you dont have a noisemaker you will be acting negligent and the way the civil justice system in the us works you would not want to afford that.

3 Things:

1: You don't have to plug in hybrid cars, so the point about where the electricity comes from is moot. It doesn't matter where your power on the grid comes from.

2: Oil and gas won't be around forever. There is a lot of differing research on how much there still is out there, but no matter who you ask they will tell you that it eventually will run out.

3: Hybrids save money at the pump, and the extra cost of having a hybrid will eventually pay for itself. It's a smart move for the consumer.

P.S. Coal will eventually run out too, and nuclear creates tons of hazardous waste. The real long term solution for power on the grid is renewables, especially wind and solar. The technologies are improving every year, and nations such as Denmark and Germany have had remarkable success with alternative energy. I believe that Denmark is 1/5th WIND powered and Germany is 1/10th WIND powered. Germany and Spain each install 2,000 megawatts of wind power every year. In terms of the future of car energy, Hydrogen seems to be the up-and-coming tech. It's still in need of some serious advances, but one day it will overtake gasoline as the fuel of choice for automotives.

Lets not forget the economics of the situation. According to your argument, wind and solar are the best way to go, but the sheer cost of constructing wind and solar that produce a mere fraction of what nuclear and coal. Be realistic, its clear the environment is high on your priority, but come on you can't make your judgement calls purely on the eco-friendiness.
Going back to the issue- Hybrid cars are an inevitable part of the future, and I agree with the concept of paying less at the pump. But the reality is that liberal forcasts for the maximum amount of oil porduction are somewhere around 2050. That does not mean we are going to run out in 2050 as people so commonly quote, it means after 2050 production will not increase. That gives us forty four year to find a long term solution. Hybrids are purely a short terms gimmicks, that do allows for smaller gasoline charge. If we were truly on top of this matter we would drill in alaska, which can be done safely, allowing for more time to be bought and more significantly stimulate a drop in already falsely infalted oil and gasoline prices. ( note record profits for energy companies)
BTW- Hybrid cars do look hideus

i doubt they will be so easy to remove. imagine an automobilist, who has removed his noisemaker after a few years runs over a cyclist. the cyclists lawyer will immediately accuse the automobilist of having contributed to the accident by not using a noisemaker (in a way like he would if the accident had happened at night and the automobilist had not had his lights on). it will remain a liability to make noise while driving, if you dont have a noisemaker you will be acting negligent and the way the civil justice system in the us works you would not want to afford that.

And the auto-driver will have to pay for not paying attention. The same as they do, now.

No hybrid gets better than 40 mpg. The EPA is even starting to revise how they estimate mpg recently. If you read Popular Mechanics you'll see in the most recent issue that they found hybrid mpg is often over-estimated and isn't much better than their all-gas counterparts. They still get better mpg than all-gas but you'll need to own and drive that new hybrid for years before you get back all that extra cos in the form of fuel savings.

If we wanted to do something really great we have three options.
A) Better all electric cars with lots of nuclear power plants so that we could handle the extra drain.
B) Sterling engines. The techs been around for a long time and can be made pretty damn efficient.
C) Steam driven turbine engines. It's what we use in our power plants and can be made pretty damn efficient.

The first will never work because the EPA has made it pretty much impossible to get a new nuke plant built in the US.

The latter two will never pan out because small companies have tried doing them before always get squashed before they get anywhere. If one ever did pull it off it'd be like that sock company that made stockings that would last for years; everyone buys one then nobody needs to buy anymore and the comapny goes belly up.

To keep an economy running smoothly manufacturers put little defects into their products so they can slowly "improve" on them over the years. Without "planned obsolescence" a company would die in a few years. Great example: IBM used to sell their computers intentionally hindered. They'd sell "upgrades" every few years and when you bought one an IBM guy would come to your house, open up your comp, flip a hidden switch or yank some plug and the comp would suddenly run a little better.

Don't believe me? Watch "The Man in the White Suit"
A marginal work of fiction that illustrates a very real problem.

To keep an economy running smoothly manufacturers put little defects into their products so they can slowly "improve" on them over the years. Without "planned obsolescence" a company would die in a few years. Great example: IBM used to sell their computers intentionally hindered. They'd sell "upgrades" every few years and when you bought one an IBM guy would come to your house, open up your comp, flip a hidden switch or yank some plug and the comp would suddenly run a little better.

Don't believe me? Watch "The Man in the White Suit"
A marginal work of fiction that illustrates a very real problem.this only works in markets with no or little competition. classic example: intel sells CPUs that could run at 200MHz as 166MHz modells, this made overclocking popular.

when there is pressure from competitors, you really cant purposely make an inferior product.

http://www.germancarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2050913.006/porsche/1.html
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=107234
http://news.techwhack.com/2047/130907-audi-vw-and-porsche-to-co-develop-hybrid-technologies/
http://money.cnn.com/2005/09/13/Autos/hybrid_porsche_cayenne/

Whatever you think of the concept, hybrid cars are catching on.
Add to that the second coming of the Diesel engine (Audi's racing a Diesel at 2006 Le Mans (http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=751&fArticleId=3034569)) and finally their replacement with Biodiesel fuels, and maybe in a few years the traditional petrol engine will be a thing of the past.

this only works in markets with no or little competition. classic example: intel sells CPUs that could run at 200MHz as 166MHz modells, this made overclocking popular.

when there is pressure from competitors, you really cant purposely make an inferior product.

Oh, yes you can. Because everyone has a vested interest in the Great Depression not occuring again. If everything you bought lasted forever, the economy would stagnate and the stock market would crash. All of the companies have an inherent interest in making whatever product you own last x years. So that they can get your money again (or one of their competitors can, but that's made up for by the fact that your competitors will also be losing costumers to you).

The economy, in most other matters, is given strength by 'trends'. What's cool, and what isn't.

Having said that, computers aren't likely to fit into the whole "built-in shittiness". Why? Because in a month there will be a much better computer on the market that you'll have to buy.

Oh, yes you can. Because everyone has a vested interest in the Great Depression not occuring again. If everything you bought lasted forever, the economy would stagnate and the stock market would crash. All of the companies have an inherent interest in making whatever product you own last x years. So that they can get your money again (or one of their competitors can, but that's made up for by the fact that your competitors will also be losing costumers to you).

The economy, in most other matters, is given strength by 'trends'. What's cool, and what isn't.

Having said that, computers aren't likely to fit into the whole "built-in shittiness". Why? Because in a month there will be a much better computer on the market that you'll have to buy.
What's that called? Moore's Law or something like that...

Anyway, hybrid cars aren't by a long shot sold on the 'lasting forever' philosophy. In fact they rely on the fact that for the most part cars have a shelf life because otherwise battery wear does become a problem.

Oh, yes you can. Because everyone has a vested interest in the Great Depression not occuring again. If everything you bought lasted forever, the economy would stagnate and the stock market would crash. All of the companies have an inherent interest in making whatever product you own last x years. So that they can get your money again (or one of their competitors can, but that's made up for by the fact that your competitors will also be losing costumers to you).companies are not the borg with a common goal, each of them will work to maximize only his own profit, not that of the collective.

companies are not the borg with a common goal, each of them will work to maximize only his own profit, not that of the collective.

A company that makes a product that lasts forever will not only drive his competitors out of business, but will soon be forced to close his own doors.

A company that makes a product that lasts forever will not only drive his competitors out of business, but will soon be forced to close his own doors.by that hypothesis tombstonecutters would all be out of business.


edit: or maybe there is a secret mason society, that is flying with cropdusters over cemeteries and spraying them with acid.

A company that makes a product that lasts forever will not only drive his competitors out of business, but will soon be forced to close his own doors.

It's a good thing that a product that lasts forever cannot be built then, isn't it?

by that hypothesis tombstonecutters would all be out of business.


edit: or maybe there is a secret mason society, that is flying with cropdusters over cemeteries and spraying them with acid.

They are.

They have machines that do that now.

And tomb stones are a helluvalot more expensive than, say, a refrigerator. Especially for the man hours put into them. Why? Because that extra money is what keeps them going.

Oh, and have I mentioned that you don't need a refrigerator for every person in your household, but you will need a tomb stone every single one of them?

(Audi's racing a Diesel at 2006 Le Mans (http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=751&fArticleId=3034569))
Now you're just pissing me off...though I think I had actually heard about this but didn't know it got this far. I thought it was akin to the first Panoz that was supposed to be a hybrid but didn't qualify. What a difference being a huge ass company makes...
and finally their replacement with Biodiesel fuels, and maybe in a few years the traditional petrol engine will be a thing of the past.
What's great is that there this is coming about largely from a grassroots movement that the big guys are having to catch up with as people snatch up old diesels and start running them without the big companies. (contrary to what I said in the earlier part of the post...) With companies like Greasecar.com and such, the people have gone and found thier own alternatives forcing the big guys to catch up. I dig it.

It's a good thing that a product that lasts forever cannot be built then, isn't it?

Yup. Nice to own those things that last forever. But it hurts the economy.

Edit: By forever, I wasn't speaking literally. I was speaking figuratively.

There is also now BMWs Turbosteamer (http://www.gizmag.com/go/4936/), which they bill as 'free' power (yes, nothings free, they're just using something that was previously being wasted). I thought it was interesting.

There is also now BMWs Turbosteamer (http://www.gizmag.com/go/4936/), which they bill as 'free' power (yes, nothings free, they're just using something that was previously being wasted). I thought it was interesting.
That does it--when I retire the Hyundai (not too soon, I hope), I'm coming to you for new car advice.

http://www.germancarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2050913.006/porsche/1.html
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=107234
http://news.techwhack.com/2047/130907-audi-vw-and-porsche-to-co-develop-hybrid-technologies/
http://money.cnn.com/2005/09/13/Autos/hybrid_porsche_cayenne/

Whatever you think of the concept, hybrid cars are catching on.
Add to that the second coming of the Diesel engine (Audi's racing a Diesel at 2006 Le Mans (http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=751&fArticleId=3034569)) and finally their replacement with Biodiesel fuels, and maybe in a few years the traditional petrol engine will be a thing of the past.

Peugeot's planning a diesel at Le Mans too.

http://www.peugeot.com.au/PEUGEOT/AU/me.get?site.sectionshow&FFFF1692

That does it--when I retire the Hyundai (not too soon, I hope), I'm coming to you for new car advice.
Considering my last two vehicle purchases ('67 VW Bus (that I'm converting to propane) and a Porsche 914 that I picked up for $900) I don't know how good I'd be...

With the Turbosteamer it seems we have about 10 years before BMW could add them to their whole line. That gives you some time with the Hyundai.

Considering my last two vehicle purchases ('67 VW Bus (that I'm converting to propane) and a Porsche 914 that I picked up for $900) I don't know how good I'd be...

With the Turbosteamer it seems we have about 10 years before BMW could add them to their whole line. That gives you some time with the Hyundai.
And if I start saving now, I might have enough for a down payment by then.

Peugeot's planning a diesel at Le Mans too.

http://www.peugeot.com.au/PEUGEOT/AU/me.get?site.sectionshow&FFFF1692
That's the one I'd heard of. Man, somewhere along the line I got behind the curve...

And if I start saving now, I might have enough for a down payment by then.
Maybe Colodia goes through Poli Sci, runs for president, wins, makes you poet laurette and then you can afford the BMW...wait, that would take much longer...

Yeah, I can't afford any of these things. Except an old used Mercedes diesel and the vegetable oil kit. Fortunately I like old cars...

Hybrid cars, like ipods, are a fad. In a decade or nobody will want to bother with them. Everyone will look down on those who bought hybrids when they first hit the market and think to themselves "sucker"

It's an expensive feature that takes years of use to get back any return. Mark my words! Someday we will look back on the hybrid craze and laugh, just like we did at the anime collecting crazes like pokomon or whatever the hell it's called.

Im with you

Congrats, you're wrong too.

Hybrids don't need charged, they generate their own electricity from energy that would otherwise be wasted.

Hybrid cars, like ipods, are a fad. In a decade or nobody will want to bother with them. Everyone will look down on those who bought hybrids when they first hit the market and think to themselves "sucker"

It's an expensive feature that takes years of use to get back any return. Mark my words! Someday we will look back on the hybrid craze and laugh, just like we did at the anime collecting crazes like pokomon or whatever the hell it's called.
As gas prices rise demand for the used versions of the cars will become desirable to those who could not afford them new, thus increasing thier re-sale value. So in addition to the savings that come from savings in gas, (and consider that people are willing to pay similar premiums for things like metallic paint, which is one of the only other option that increases resale value it isn't so hard to grasp that some people are willing to pay a slight premium to use less resources and have a cleaner car), and the savings in having a car with a higher resale value (right now a used Prius goes for more than a new one) it's not all that bad. It may be that the owners of hybrid cars will be laughing at the people in SUVs...well, that's already happening.

As well as the companies that have banked thier future on making SUVs...

As gas prices rise demand for the used versions of the cars will become desirable to those who could not afford them new, thus increasing thier re-sale value. So in addition to the savings that come from savings in gas, (and consider that people are willing to pay similar premiums for things like metallic paint, which is one of the only other option that increases resale value it isn't so hard to grasp that some people are willing to pay a slight premium to use less resources and have a cleaner car), and the savings in having a car with a higher resale value (right now a used Prius goes for more than a new one) it's not all that bad. It may be that the owners of hybrid cars will be laughing at the people in SUVs...well, that's already happening.

As well as the companies that have banked thier future on making SUVs...
And besides, if a product has a lifespan of a decade, it's kind of hard to call it a fad, isn't it?

Hybrids are a stopgap measure, to be sure. They're a bridge technology, because we are eventually going to get to the point where gasoline will no longer be a viable fuel for the majority of people in the world, even in a (one assumes, due to technological advances) hyper-efficient hybrid.

And besides, if a product has a lifespan of a decade, it's kind of hard to call it a fad, isn't it?

Hybrids are a stopgap measure, to be sure. They're a bridge technology, because we are eventually going to get to the point where gasoline will no longer be a viable fuel for the majority of people in the world, even in a (one assumes, due to technological advances) hyper-efficient hybrid.
Tru-dat, the only reason we'll be looking down on hybrids is because we'll have moved on to the next step, whether it's biofuels or electric cars or voodoo drives or x, the method that we haven't come up with yet, or Harlesburg's sugar drive, which technically would be a biofuel...

It may be that the owners of hybrid cars will be laughing at the people in SUVs...well, that's already happening.

As well as the companies that have banked thier future on making SUVs...

What we need is some sort of hybrid SUV... like the kind the government's been working on for years to replace the Hummer....

What we need is some sort of hybrid SUV... like the kind the government's been working on for years to replace the Hummer....
There's three that I can think of off the top of my head, the Ford Escape, the Lexus whatzit, and I believe the Toyota Highlander.

I remember hearing about the hybrid engine for the Hummer a while ago, as well as the military commissioning a diesel motorcycle, but I haven't heard anything recently, but I don't keep up with military tech that much...

EDIT: Fourth, the Chayanne that was mentioned...

Just because they use electricity part of the time instead of petrol doesn't make it any better. In NJ, that electricity is made from COAL. Other states also use coal or natural gas. I think Indiana or Illinois uses all nuclear, so hybrids there would be a different story. Hybrids may extend gasoline, but they still burn fossil fuels most of the time.
i dont think ive ever seen a thread based on such obvious misinformation before

There's three that I can think of off the top of my head, the Ford Escape, the Lexus whatzit, and I believe the Toyota Highlander.

I remember hearing about the hybrid engine for the Hummer a while ago, as well as the military commissioning a diesel motorcycle, but I haven't heard anything recently, but I don't keep up with military tech that much...

EDIT: Fourth, the Chayanne that was mentioned...
lexus rx400h, and theres also a fuel cell highlander (not production yet, but the japanese gov owns several dozen as well as UCLA.

Tad late for this, but...

Kossackja: Yer bein' stupid, buddy. Long personal experience as a pedestrian in a neighborhood with windy roads that make it impossible to see more than 50 meters: It's not the engine you hear on a car, it's the sound of the wind rushing over its surface and the wheels rolling on the ground; that can be heard from some distance away. The engine can't be heard until much later for most cars (those kept in proper working condition).

My area is redneck country; I recall one incident when I wanted to cross the street, when a redneck-mobile went by: old, beat-up pickup truck with flaking paint, rusting bumpers, and an engine loud enough to shatter pretty much all California noise laws. The echo from the bloody thing blocked my hearing for several minutes after the truck had left, limiting my ability to hear any other cars coming up the way. The same can be said of the motorcycles that ride through town once in a while; although they're pretty far away on the highway, the things are loud enough to interrupt most conversations and, again, limit my ability to hear quieter cars.

On to the thread's premise: As has been mentioned several times, hybrids produce and store their own electricity. No concerns about battery life- modern rechargable battery life can be measured in years, especially batteries designed for a car. Slightly higher maintenance costs vs. huge savings on gasoline... Tough choice.

And finally, regarding hybrids' appearance: Hate to tell you, but all modern cars look ugly, hybrid or no.

This thread has served to solidify my decision to purchase a hybrid as my first car. Thanks!

i know i am right.so there is no use for me.. to tell you what I think about it. ;)

Hell you aren't making money from the candy trade?

Just invest in the US! ;)
Nah the kids are all on Meth these days.

Brazil is 'the now' for Sugar Plantations.

cars that drink a liter of gas per kilometre are a joke

Actually, NJ does use some coal power... just not that much. (See http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/at_a_glance/states/statesnj.html for info.) And as previously stated, that's irrelevant to hybrid cars anyway.

I would consider getting a hybrid car... but would really prefer to wait and get into the next wave. I think tho auto industry will be like the computer industry here, if slower about its boom. (The fact is, it already is half way through that growth cycle. In the last 100 years its gone through a number of major changes and tremendous growth. I think its due for another jump soon.

Hybrid cars are the automobile equivalent of the smoke all these tech heads have been blowing for the past several decades about being able to get one appliance that controls every other appliance and is voice compatible and affordable. It is all crap. Hybrid cars will never go anywhere until people stop fucking around with them and make them practical and affordable.

Hybrid cars and their subsquent parts will become cheaper as the companies (like Toyota) build economies of scale... Thats already happening, as Toyota reported a great jump in sales for their hybrids this year. As well GM and Ford are slating in production several more hybrid models for their own lines. Hybrid cars are already there when it comes to affordability and practicallity (especially with todays oil markets) While battery packs are expensive today, as the hybrid market explodes (much as the SUV market did) the prices will plumet, making hybrids that much more sensible

What we need is some sort of hybrid SUV... like the kind the government's been working on for years to replace the Hummer....
Who wants to bet if the government actually did create a hybrid SUV to replace the Hummer it would still get worse gas mileage than a regular SUV.

Who wants to bet if the government actually did create a hybrid SUV to replace the Hummer it would still get worse gas mileage than a regular SUV.
It likely won't be the government but a company contracted by them that will develop one, as was the case with the diesel motorcycle.