But the fuel economy isn't the only point in building hybrid cars. It's not all about our wallets but the mother nature also - emission levels.

I know the following sheet is from the manufacturers site and based on Sol's data, are a bit optimistic. But keep in mind that this likely applies to both.




..and I managed to find also Micra 1.0 CO2 level (141g/km), but I couldn't confirm which model it was so I ended up to pick up the latest model. Both cars also passed Euro IV level, which isn't that significant though.


-edit--
and sorry about those translation errors in the pic

Hello Russraine,

The Prius is optimised for minimum environmental impact in terms of emissions, not low MPG.

I am reporting on fuel efficiency etc. at Bismarck's request.

I have written before in this thread that some (smallish) diesel cars have similar or even better fuel economy than the Prius, but they generate smoke that contains deadly micro-dust particles and makes historic buildings go black. I am sure that some (smallish) petrol cars have similar or even better fuel economy than the Prius, and may come close on emissions.

The official Prius data on emissions is as follows:

CO 180 HC 20 NOx 10 CO2 104
The official Micra (1.2 - 48kw engine) info from nissan.co.uk (I see no 1.0 model there) only contains the CO2 figure, which is 143 (for the 3-door model - it is 161 for the 5-door model). Also the Micra fuel consumption listed on the specs is much higher than for the Prius, but driving style is very important.

As for Toyota's claims vs reality, I am using more petrol than they claim. The Toyota Europe website contains the following:

Extra urban conditions L/100km (93/116/EEC)4.2 Urban conditions L/100km (93/116/EEC)5.0 Combined L/100 km (93/116/EEC)4.3
My experience is the opposite (and worse); I use more petrol on motorways than for city driving, and my summer average must be around 4.7 l/100km (winter around 5.0 maybe even 5.1). If work gets a little quieter over the summer, I may decide to drive a tank (mainly to/from office) through the city instead of taking the motorway to see whether I can improve - it's actually a shorter distance through the city).

Solar Hydro

P.S. As discussed above in this tread, I believe in hydrogen as a fuel and I have commented upon hydrogen cars (BMW 7 HL) and hydrogen fuel cell cars (Honda FCX) - my name isn't accidental. Also, these Hydrids are in fairly early stages of commercialisation even if the Prius is actually in its third generation. If no-one would buy hybrids, it's clear that there wouldn't be much incentive to develop them further.

Quote from Solar Hydro :

Today, I refueled the Prius for the first tim
e.

After having traveled 921 kilometres I managed to add exactly 43 liters.

That yields:

4.67 liters per 100 km (although the Prius meter shows 4.9)
60.49 miles per liquid gallon Imperial
50.37 miles per liquid gallon USA

Solar Hydro

OK, so that's slighty better that my Volvo 740 Turbo wagon with a Mustang 5 litre (stroked to 5.4 litre) engine. There are many Prius cars (and Smart cars) here. It's time to relegate the Volvo to occasional use only. Oh, and I think Europe uses a lower sulphur diesel, but here, if I'm behind a diesel powered vehicle with a low mounted exhaust, I can hardly breathe. I would consider biodiesel though.

we have a 1.0 litre micra, but most of the figures look similar enough, pherhaps a bit higher, nothing major.

I didn't think of the emmisions side, I'll have to look into it more but the car must have a better system after it burns the fuel not to create as much emmision, which is good.

On the other hand, if the plug charging idea took off then that could make the demand for elecetrity grow, this could be bad depending on how the electricity is sourced but that argument goes on.

A yes, Solar and Hydro, I didn't realise up to now, but yes that is clever

I can see what you mean about if people didn't buy the hybrids the technology wouldn't evolve, but they're just too expensive for mass market.

If they can produce a proper hybrid city car, then that would be it.

Over here the smaller cars, Micras, Ford Ka's, New BMW MINI, etc are in great numbers, a hybrid of this size and similar price would see the market share rise.

Quote from russraine :

On the other hand, if the plug charging idea took off then that could make the demand for elecetrity grow, this could be bad depending on how the electricity is sourced but that argument goes on.

And thats allso the reason we don't have hydrogen cars, the electricity. Or there are cars, but not for sale, or atleast not yet. As you might know the hydrogen is just for storing energy and it takes huge amounts to produce it. We should have very cheap and nature friendly energy (so it would be smart to use pollution wise, not just because the oil ran out), like they have in Island where they use the hot soil (heat from the ground...you know) to produce hydrogen...but they have *gough* few advantages, small country and not so much people and short distanses, so moving to hydrogen economy is easy. I hope the smart scientist will get the fusion reactor sorted out and working in few decades, that would really help. And if I had extra money I would invest my money to Toyota. They are going to make lots of green from beeing green in the future.

Nooo, Im not greed for money. I hug trees (just kidding)

edit. And to just add, the finnish goverment sucks big time in these car economy and emissions things. The regulations of EU aren't made to happen and there is no use of buyig a green car, no lower taxes or anything. And buying a new (or any) car is wayyyy too expensive because the illegal payments and the taxes! And that's why we are driving with one of the oldest cars in europe. RRRRRR!

Quote from Blackout :

edit. And to just add, the finnish goverment sucks big time in these car economy and emissions things. The regulations of EU aren't made to happen and there is no use of buyig a green car, no lower taxes or anything. And buying a new (or any) car is wayyyy too expensive because the illegal payments and the taxes! And that's why we are driving with one of the oldest cars in europe. RRRRRR!

I'm positive about seeing a change to this, since we finally can buy "biofuel" (plant oil in it, or so). However, it's still more expensive than the regular one illepall so I don't think it will a success yet. It's a step to better direction anyway...

And the hybrid car prices aren't going down before the amount of sold cars is going up. So it's up to us, consumers. Hybrids is the thing day, hydrogen cars are just too far away in future.

I just see a a big problem in this biofuel thing, it really sounds much more better than it is. 1-2% of ethanol mixed to regular diesel doesn't sound much to me. The idea offcourse (just writing this so you can see Im not just ignorant bastard ) is that the plant where the booze is brewed only releases the same amount of carbon dixoxsides when it's burnt what it stored when it grew up. Well, ok, that 0% of carbon dioxide increase (atlest in theroy), but the problem is where we get that all material. I'd say no thanks to slavework ethanol from Brazil. And the goverment has just recently woke up for this EU regulations about biofuels. It's a step forward but it's not good enough from consumer point of view. Like Fiendi said, it's more expensive. Who would like to pay even more from your fuel?! To make that ethanol cheaper we need new factory... and there is a sligt change it would be placed here in my home...eeh...village, would give some boost here, for the community and surrounding, I'm gona move out in few years but what a heck But the fuel, It's expensive here anyway, blody taxes. Dammit you social security, free healtcare and education system, dam you!

Quote from Blackout :

Dammit you social security, free healtcare and education system, dam you!

:ices_rofl

Quote from russraine :

I can see what you mean about if people didn't buy the hybrids the technology wouldn't evolve, but they're just too expensive for mass market.

The oil companies do not want us to have "other" fuelled cars at the mass market yet anyway. Everytime a car is invented which will run on something else, the buy the idea out and then sit on it until such time as we have used all the fossil fuel they have!

Until then (which is most likely going to be too late for the planet) we are mostly stuck with what we have. I would love us all to move to a greener more friendly fuel, but it will not happen so quickly. I drive a 1.5 litre diesel (company car) - I don't think I had a choice of a greener car, but I will check next time for sure.

Plus, I bet if we did all move to another source of fuel (whichever one) - we would soon find other side effects that would mean that it still wasn't the perfect fuel. You can never get something for nothing in nature - every action has an equal and opposite reaction - if you take something to power something else - something will be gained (ie the car moving forward) and something will be lost (ie the waste). The waste might not be as immediately obvious as it is at the moment, but I would bet my life on something being found somewhere that was caused by the new fuel.

This is all just what I think on the subject.

Tim

journeytoforever.org/biodiesel.html

Hello t1ger,

My name Solar Hydro actually stands for Solar Hydrogen Alternative.

The concept is that we electrolyse seawater on a massive industrial scale, using solar power (this involves hydrogen transport, storage and distribution issues), or electrolyse other (waste) water on a local scale, using solar power.

Electrolysis is, using current technology, an energy-inefficient process (you have to put in more electricity than you get out), but Sun and Water are basically there, so do we really care about efficiency if those are the inputs? Absent those inputs, we're dead anyway.

So 'all that's needed' is to get the costs and the environmental impact down of producing solar cells (input is mainly sand, but some precious metals as well, and factories have to make them which affects energy and the environment as well), hydrogen transport and distribution infrastructure if we go for the industrialised/centralised option, and, if chosen as an option for cars and local heating, hydrogen fuel cells (direct hydro in cars is proven to work as well). Clearly this is no small challenge.

Nuclear fission for another 50 years, followed by nuclear fusion, both powering evolved plug-in electric hybrid cars AND electrical/hybrid engine/fuel cell usage for local heating may be a worthwhile interim option. If/once we get nuclear fusion under control, a priority will be to reduce it from 50+bn industrial plants to more localised/micro solutions, which may even become a solution in earnest if this can be achieved.

(Emissions from house/building heating are catastrophic throughout the northern hemisphere with very little by way of filtering not to mention catalytic conversion. This needs to be addressed as a matter of priority equal to cars and trucks but does not seem to be on the agenda of polcy-makers)

As regards biodiesel, I am very sceptical. Think about planting crops, putting manure AND chemicals on to make plants grow, tractors to harvest, transport to factories, factories themselves, transport to refineries, probably some further processing/mixing, transport to petrol/diesel stations, etc. Maybe it's a way of rejigging farm subsidies, and employing 1-2% of the population, but overall ENERGY-ONLY efficiency is doubtful, and I am afraid that it could be negative overall. AND this stuff will STILL AFFECT THE ENVIRONMENT, by emiting CO2 (even if considered neutral theoretically) and other noxious gases, spew out dangerous microparticles (because it will be mixed with petroleum and maybe even intrinsically), blacken historic buildings, etc. I read an article the other day which suggested that it would be a viable commercial business plan in Belgium to go round (in vehicles) to pick-up all the oil that is used by restaurants and homes to make french fries and other fried foods (nearly all homes here have a cooker for animal/vegetable fat/oil and throw away the oil once it is too soiled). Presumably they did not factor in the environmental impact of picking-up the stuff or transporting the stuff and focused on the money value.

Nevertheless, I am in favour of giving a shot to all progressive options, and it's pretty clear that until we have a properly totally or quasi-local/autonomous energy production solution worked out, multiple solutions will have to be used in parallel.

Solar Hydro

Interesting point of view here too:
(http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/27gwwarming.html)

Quote :

JONATHAN G. KOOMEY: A typical home in the South would use about 4,000 kilowatt hours for air conditioning. If we convert that to carbon emitted, we get about 800 kilograms of carbon emitted per year for a central air conditioner. And that's about 1,800 pounds, which is more than the weight of a small car like a Toyota Corolla.
NARRATOR: Since each pound of carbon entering the atmosphere combines with oxygen to form nearly four pounds of carbon dioxide, America's contribution to greenhouse gas build-up is even more striking.
Taking a shower each morning produces 550 pounds of CO2 in a year. Using a computer 40 hours a week produces 600 pounds of CO2. Lighting an average house for a year emits 2,000 pounds. Lighting an large office building not surprisingly produces much more, 2.5 million pounds of CO2.
And about one third of all American greenhouse emissions come from automobiles.
JONATHAN G. KOOMEY: People drive, on average, about 12,000 miles per year, and a typical new car gets roughly 28 miles per gallon. That means that you will use about 430 gallons per year. And so over the course of a year, the person driving this new car will emit roughly 2,200 pounds of carbon per year. That's roughly the weight of the car itself. Now, if you have an SUV, which only gets 14 miles per gallon, you're emitting 4,400 pounds per year, essentially the same as having two cars on the road instead of one.

Well, I like the electric idea the most, if the electricity can be generated cleanly.

Here's another cool electric car;it's the instantaneous torque that's so appealing.

Hi Solar,

When I first stumbled across you online (which I think was when I started with the OLFSL) I did notice your screen name and realised what it meant. I did not, however, realise the significance that this plays in your life. You clearly have reasearched and understand the things you are saying. I now feel a bit stupid as I am clearly nowhere near you on these counts. I appreciate that my ideas and thoughts on this are not based on anything other than that I hear from others and on the news and so can not be taken as anything like scientific. I don't normally join in on conversations like this, because I don't fully know what I am talking about. The main point I was making (which is entirely my own) is this:

Whatever we (the human race) do, it will have consequences. I don't know what these consequences are.

I personally do not like to give my opinion on anything unless I know the whole story, ie both sides, and understand them. This debate has too many unknown factors because of the above statement. I would love to make the planet last longer - but I do not (and will never) know for sure which option is the best, therefore I go along with the majority most of the time.

I appreciate your responce and find it very interesting. Some questions though:

1. Does the "electrolyse seawater" process comsume water?
2. If it does, is water not a finite resource to us, and if we use it all (as you say) we are dead anyway?
3. What are the catastrophic emmisions from house/building heating? How come I have not heard about this?
EDIT: sorry - just seen the answer to (3) from FienDi! Houses in the UK are generally not AirConditioned so we probably don't have this problem.

Good luck and speak to you soon.

Tim

ps at the moment there is a good chance I will see you in Event 6 as I am only a few places in front of you!

Quote from t1ger :

the answer to (3) from FienDi! Houses in the UK are generally not AirConditioned so we probably don't have this problem.

Well I don't think the air conditioning is the only issue. I still live in believe than in UK most electricity is produced with coal plants - which will unavoidably create CO2. I'll check about this, for this knowledge is from my school days (many years ago)

-edit--
Looks like I was still in year 1990 Here:

* gas – 39.93% (0.05% in 1990)
* coal – 33.08% (67.22% in 1990)
* nuclear – 19.26% (18.97% in 1990)
* renewables – 3.55% (0% in 1990)
* hydroelectric – 1.10% (2.55% in 1990)
* imports – 1.96% (3.85% in 1990)
* oil – 1.12% (6.82% in 1990)

But coal is still equal with gas..

Quote from Solar Hydro :

(lots of text)

Good post, my thoughts and ideas excatly. If I could put it to english like that I have few years to learn so...

Quote from t1ger :

1. Does the "electrolyse seawater" process comsume water?

3. What are the catastrophic emmisions from house/building heating? How come I have not heard about this?

1. I think not, because you release the hydrogen from the water. Im not any good in chemistry but you brake the H2O, and have the H, it comes out as a gas so you need to keep it in very cold to make it liguid (totally irrelevant point but heey). Onether thing what I can think is that when hydrogen is burnt, converted to energy, in the cells it's combined with oxygen, and it comes out as water out of your exhaust pipe. Soooo, I think there isn't much lost.
3. They are made when producing the energy, but I think you figured it out? And those numbers FienDi posted are guite horrible, lots of CO2 :/

Don't buy SUV, they don't save your children.

Quote from Solar Hydro :

(Emissions from house/building heating are catastrophic throughout the northern hemisphere with very little by way of filtering not to mention catalytic conversion. This needs to be addressed as a matter of priority equal to cars and trucks but does not seem to be on the agenda of polcy-makers)

I referred to actual emissions directly from home/building heating systems. Obviously the way in which electricity is generated (which is used also for airco) is also a major issue (USA and China are using coal for a very large proportion).

Solar Hydro

The plug-in hacks for the Prius are really becoming available in September (cost over €10.000), but perhaps I should rather get this:

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

But: "We will not sell a Tesla Roadster to anyone outside of the continental US."

The Tesla looks very interesting. They've done well to get 250 miles per charge, if that turns out to be valid.

Within the FAQs they do state "Tesla Motors is an American car company with a UK subsidiary". It's not clear if they're referring to Lotus as a 'subsidiary' (which obviously is not correct), or whether they do have a subsidiary that may sell the cars this side of the pond.

I suspect it won't be cheap, but it's definitely a step in the right direction. If only a big manufacturer was bold enough to make a mass produced version of this type of car, concentrating more on efficiency rather than the sporting credentials that Tesla are plugging.

I would really wanna see a VIP-styled black Prius that would be badass

The Tesla will cost between $80.000 and $120.000 depending on model.
I still want to get proper wheels for my black Prius; haven't gotten round to it.

Solar Hydro

17th refuel on the Prius today.

After having traveled 900 kilometres on this fuel tank, I added 42,5 liters (probably overpumped a bit again to reach a round number).

This was after A LOT of motorway driving (my usual commute, plus driving to the Belgian coast in a heatwave, some driving around there at 2x airco, and driving back in hot weather and a couple of thundershowers; I used cruise control almost constantly on the motorway in both directions, set at 121km/h).

I stopped by my office on the way back to purge my e-mails, with the Prius meter standing at 4.5 (which surprised me at 873km into the tank), but then I took my usual fuel economy killer motorway back home and I pitted early for a petrol station right after the motorway because I don't want to refuel early in the morning tomorrow on my way to an early meeting. The Prius meter was showing 4.6 again...

The Texaco price was €1.459/l (probably the most expensive yet, they have a temporary monopoly as the Q8 station across the road is being rebuilt).

The analysis of this fuel tank is as follows:

4.722 liters per 100km (Prius meter showed 4.6 = big difference especially since Prius meter was at 4.5 only 27 km earlier, admittedly 27km of the bad motorway stretch).

Converted to other measurements, this means:
49.81 MPG USA
59.82 MPG Imperial

Solar Hydro

P.S. I uploaded a few new pics, including a Prius pic, and a couple of exclusive beer pics, on:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/solar_hydro/

This picture is for Mr Hydro, the most friendliest (and slowest I suppose ) safety car ever, picture taken by me myself

Thanks Blackout. Was this from the event in Helsinki where Trulli drove the Toyota F1? (I referred to it on chatterbox).

Solar Hydro