4 ms·

I drive a classic Toyota Supra and agree that I don't want to see ICE-powered cars banned completely. Where the government screwed up was with diesels; other th

I drive a classic Toyota Supra and agree that I don't want to see ICE-powered cars banned completely. Where the government screwed up was with diesels; other than higher CO2 per mile, petrol-powered cars are actually quite clean, and we have ways (at least theoretical) for dealing with CO2. We have no idea how to deal with diesel emissions - NO2 and particulate matter are a big question mark. Hybrids are also very silly - while on one power source, the other is dead weight, which requires more energy to propel, dragging the efficiency down. They're a stopgap measure, nothing more. I agree that public transport needs to go pure-electric/zero-emission very soon - as soon as a bus pulls away, it spews a visible cloud of black diesel smoke, no matter how old it is or whether it's a hybrid. A major problem I see is that many young people (myself included) are totally priced out of homeownership and therefore dependent on renting housing, meaning I cannot get access to a charging point at home. Even as a petrolhead, I would be interested in driving an electric car day to day or purely as a mode of transport, keeping my Supra for recreation only. I checked the Supra's most recent MOT and it almost meets the 2008 (most recent) petrol emissions standards, with CO emissions off by a mere 0.2%. Larger, port-injected engines are clean enough to remain in use. Direct-injection petrols also suffer from higher NO2 emissions just like diesels, due to the higher combustion temperatures, so not only do these small engines use more fuel under boost (where they are most of the time), they produce worse emissions too.

Tade0 9y ago
> Hybrids are also very silly - while on one power source, the other is dead weight, which requires more energy to propel, dragging the efficiency down Overall though the efficiency is higher. I get around 47 US MPG or 5l/100km in the city. Loaded with five people and on the highway I got 40.5 US MPG or 5.8l/100km.
ZeroGravitas 9y ago
"Hybrids are also very silly - while on one power source, the other is dead weight, which requires more energy to propel, dragging the efficiency down. They're a stopgap measure, nothing more." Extra batteries are also a heavy load, whether full or empty. So it's not that simple a calculation. Also, the power sources do often work together, in various ways, so it's not always a question of two parallel systems, but rather considering it as a whole system working together, which in many case is better than either alone. As battery prices fall, and energy densities rise, and fast charge solutions are rolled out widely, then pure EVs will push out hybrids, but they'll be around for a while and have already saved a whole lot of money (it surprises me how little people consider efficiency when thinking about moving civilization forward and making everyone wealthier) as well as toxic emissions and greenhouse gasses.
- gargravarr 9y ago
  You're right in that it is indeed more complex, especially since hybrids use electric propulsion almost all the time. My point was that, while operating in pure battery-electric mode, the engine and fuel are nonfunctional and must be dragged around. An engine driving an electric generator is indeed more efficient than a pure ICE drivetrain, but versus the potential efficiency of a pure-electric power source, that's why I said 'dragging the efficiency down'. I agree completely, hence my comment about them being a stopgap measure. Once pure-EVs are able to offer comparable range and charge time to a tank of fuel, hybrids will be consigned to history.

Tade0 9y ago

> Hybrids are also very silly - while on one power source, the other is dead weight, which requires more energy to propel, dragging the efficiency down Overall though the efficiency is higher. I get around 47 US MPG or 5l/100km in the city. Loaded with five people and on the highway I got 40.5 US MPG or 5.8l/100km.

ZeroGravitas 9y ago

"Hybrids are also very silly - while on one power source, the other is dead weight, which requires more energy to propel, dragging the efficiency down. They're a stopgap measure, nothing more." Extra batteries are also a heavy load, whether full or empty. So it's not that simple a calculation. Also, the power sources do often work together, in various ways, so it's not always a question of two parallel systems, but rather considering it as a whole system working together, which in many case is better than either alone. As battery prices fall, and energy densities rise, and fast charge solutions are rolled out widely, then pure EVs will push out hybrids, but they'll be around for a while and have already saved a whole lot of money (it surprises me how little people consider efficiency when thinking about moving civilization forward and making everyone wealthier) as well as toxic emissions and greenhouse gasses.

gargravarr 9y ago
You're right in that it is indeed more complex, especially since hybrids use electric propulsion almost all the time. My point was that, while operating in pure battery-electric mode, the engine and fuel are nonfunctional and must be dragged around. An engine driving an electric generator is indeed more efficient than a pure ICE drivetrain, but versus the potential efficiency of a pure-electric power source, that's why I said 'dragging the efficiency down'. I agree completely, hence my comment about them being a stopgap measure. Once pure-EVs are able to offer comparable range and charge time to a tank of fuel, hybrids will be consigned to history.