In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:54:41 -0700: Hi, [snip] >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] > >> While a 100 mpg is not to be sneezed at, don't forget that in some cases a >PHEV >will not use any gas at all. > >Well that is what I meant by "shenanigans" ... it is not credible to suggest >that the PHEV is a good alternative to biodiesel - when the dirty coal plant >that recharges the batteries is belching toxic pollutants out, megatons per >year with line losses and battery losses and core losses and transformer >losses and everything else... > >.... and that small diesel, in contrast, is very efficient and carbon neutral >and far lower in pollutants. Never mind that solar or wind "could in theory" >supply that energy necessary for recharging the PHEV - you have to go with >the percentages, and it is not a pretty picture because of coal. > >The small diesel, fueled with biodiesel, and running at constant speed with >an energy storage hybridized accumulator (batteries or hydraulics or >whatever) makes much more sense for transportation than anything else - at >least from where we stand in 2009 in terms of what is actually possible now. > ...but if you are talking about what is available now, then you also need to consider that biodiesel is not yet available in large quantities either.
I'm also a little leery of their claim to 85% energy reclamation during regenerative braking. When a fluid is compressed, it gets hot, and unless the stored energy is reused straight away (or almost), it cools off and loses that energy to the environment. Although I suppose that in stop start driving, the starting usually follows the stopping fairly closely. I agree that this is an interesting concept, however I don't think it should be adopted to the exclusion of everything else. I think all these new technologies should be encouraged. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
