General > General Technical Chat
Confused about PHEV, Hybrids, etc...
<< < (28/93) > >>
tom66:
That's not even possible with some of the newer trucks, the radar unit won't let you as it'll just trigger the braking system or reduce acceleration.

I guess if too many trucks drive close together then an overall power limit would be hit which could result in them slowing down so it would (kind of) self regulate.

It does frustrate me. Tailgating gets you nowhere faster and endangers other users of the road - I know Germany is one of the few countries that actually prosecutes drivers who do that so... more power to the Polizei on dealing with that.
gnuarm:

--- Quote from: Miyuki on August 04, 2022, 04:27:32 pm ---
--- Quote from: gnuarm on August 04, 2022, 12:40:10 pm ---But no matter how hard they try, they won't get the carbon emission down to zero.  This is why hybrids are pointless.  They are a solution to a problem we no longer have (non-CO2 pollutants) with the introduction of BEVs.

--- End quote ---
Tell me when US and EU (not saying about China and India) will have zero carbon electricity  ::)
It won't be in this or even next decade
--- End quote ---

You don't understand.  All electricity doesn't need to be zero carbon.  Many people have their own solar chargers, others buy energy from solar or wind farms.  Yeah, that's a thing.



--- Quote ---They are to bridge the gap, and with some bio/syn fuels to be used even then for cases when BEV won't offer the required range, because there always will be some minor cases where you will need more flexibility
--- End quote ---

"Bridging the gap" is meaningless.  There's no gap to bridge.  There's no logic in this statement.



--- Quote ---Plus another rare example, but sadly real. How would a massive amount of people run from disaster (like a natural one or a war), you will end up with plenty of people stuck at 100-200 km. Current cheap EVs have these ranges plus will be a big portion of people do not have them fully charged.
--- End quote ---

Silly argument.  If you have a disaster that stops charging of cars, you also stop pumping gas.  In the US, Florida is the poster child for mass evacuations.  Big hurricane comes north and everyone hits the highways.  Gas and electricity aren't the big problems.  Cars are.  Too many cars, not enough roads! 


--- Quote ---BEVs are great city cars and I will agree they shall be even mandatory in city centers (even as I'm libertarian) but with the current technology level, energy mix and state of society are not a silver bullet.

--- End quote ---

No one is telling you what to drive.  But in 15 to 20 years, if you are driving an ICE, you will be hunting for the remaining few gas stations open since 98% of cars on the road will be BEVs.  Gas will be $20 a gallon.  It really is that simple.  Watch and see.  Not many people are going to buy an ICE because they are worried about an earthquake or war. 

I hope I am still around then.  Because every time I hear a fire belching gas burner roar by I'll feel good knowing how dearly they are paying for the privilege. 
gnuarm:

--- Quote from: tom66 on August 04, 2022, 05:23:09 pm ---The BEV is the only technology CURRENTLY available where it is viable that they could be powered from emissions neutral energy.  There is no other technology.  Not hydrogen, not biofuels, not synfuels...  It just does not exist.

--- End quote ---

I don't follow.  Why can various manufactured fuels use only renewable energy?  Biofuels use some form of crops, but that carbon was just absorbed from the air, so releasing it again does no harm.  Hydrogen involves no carbon at all if you don't use hydrocarbons as your hydrogen source.  That can be water. 

Are you just making the point that these are not currently commercially practical?
tom66:

--- Quote from: gnuarm on August 06, 2022, 06:03:06 am ---I don't follow.  Why can various manufactured fuels use only renewable energy?  Biofuels use some form of crops, but that carbon was just absorbed from the air, so releasing it again does no harm.  Hydrogen involves no carbon at all if you don't use hydrocarbons as your hydrogen source.  That can be water. 

Are you just making the point that these are not currently commercially practical?

--- End quote ---

More or less.

Biofuels have land use offsets.  If you chop down parts of the Amazon rainforest to make bioethanol, then you released more carbon over ten years than you did just burning fossil fuels.  In the longer term biofuels can be carbon neutral, especially if they are produced on land that's otherwise not that useful.  There are still concerns about offsetting food, which is more essential than energy.  But I have doubts that in any case we could get enough biofuel production to replace all fossil fuels, without turning the earth into a dust bowl again.  Also algae biofuels, the former love of the likes of Exxon, seem to be making little progress.

Hydrogen is almost exclusively produced from steam reforming of natural gas and the emissions profile of a hydrogen car powered from said "blue hydrogen" is worse than a diesel/petrol car.  There are lots of additional costs with hydrogen for vehicles, the high gas pressures requiring cryo storage and pumping, the high cost of fuel cells, the low overall efficiency, and the relatively high cost of the fuel itself, despite subsidies.

Synfuels are just not produced at a large enough scale for practicality yet - and there is a lot to work out to get the process efficient and scaled up.  I would say synfuels are probably the most promising technology for applications where electrification is impractical, for instance aircraft, portable generation, etc. 

So of the technologies available I don't see passenger cars going anywhere but battery powered EVs.  There will be a greater proportion of hybrids in the future, and plug in hybrids will still be popular.  Hydrogen won't be any more of a technology demo.  For trucks and trains, it's harder to say, hydrogen could make some sense there but electrification is also quite likely.  For aircraft, maybe hydrogen will be investigated, but due to latency in the industry I expect the dominant technology will either be synfuel or biofuel for quite some time.
NiHaoMike:

--- Quote from: tom66 on August 06, 2022, 09:44:03 am ---In the longer term biofuels can be carbon neutral, especially if they are produced on land that's otherwise not that useful.  There are still concerns about offsetting food, which is more essential than energy.  But I have doubts that in any case we could get enough biofuel production to replace all fossil fuels, without turning the earth into a dust bowl again.  Also algae biofuels, the former love of the likes of Exxon, seem to be making little progress.

--- End quote ---
The majority of front and back yards are not used for growing food. Turning that into revenue streams for the owners would be a great thing.

Exactly what problems are algae based biofuels running into?
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod