In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sun, 24 Jun 2007 10:40:55 -0400 (GMT-04:00): Hi, [snip] >>Ok, agree to let them build a coal plant or a battery plant in your backyard >>then. Plug-ins and hybrids just transpose the pollution problem away from >>where actual consumption is taking place. > >That is incorrect for two reasons that we have often discussed here, and that >you will find at the plug in hybrid web sites: > >1. Plug-in hybrids and regular hybrids use far less energy per mile, so even >with coal-based electricity they produce less CO2 and other pollution per mile. > >2. In California, where the Google plug-in hybrid initiative is being >launched, they do not have any coal-fired electricity. It is all natural gas, >hydro, fission and wind. Therefore it produces much less pollution per mile. >At Google headquarters they will use solar electricity to recharge the plug-in >hybrids, so there will be virtually no pollution per mile.
There is another reason too. When fusion becomes viable (in whatever form), it may not be possible to put generators in cars (at least right away). Consequently it does no harm to introduce cars now that rely at least to some extent on battery technology. That gives the battery industry both incentive and opportunity to improve on their product, and the time may come when we need to rely on it more heavily. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
