2blu442

Good intentions gone awry.

I watched a news report on the local Public Broadcasting Station (PBS) and they were talking about "rare earth". What they said is that the ceramics used in the hybrid cars and the big wind power generators require rare earth compounds. I don't remember the exact number, but over 95% of these rare earth compounds are mined and processed in China. So our reliance on oil from unfriendly countries may be transferred to our "good buddies" in China. In addition, the mining and processing uses or creates some really nasty stuff. The mill workers were begin subjected to these harsh products and the local farmers interviewed said their wells were contaminated and it killed their crops. Yeah... the water was killing their crops

I'm all for taking care of the planet and giving our grandchildren the same or better quality of life that we have. But apparently this aspect of "enviro friendly" hybrids is not well known. Check out the report.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgAZOffMj5Y

OLD SKL 69

Wow, did not realize that. What a surprise that the environmental ****'s wouldn't publicize that little fact. Also, if they need these rare compounds to make these hybrids, how will we ever have enough of them to mass produce them?

rocketraider

I've believed for years that the enviro-*****' real agenda is to get people out of private cars completely as the freedom to go where you want, when you want is anathema to them.

They never stop to consider the ultimate costs of these schemes when they dream them up, much less the laws of unintended consequences, and it is utterly impossible to reason with them.

toro68

You hit the nail on head!
It seems the enviro-*****, enviro-chicks(the barely dress PETA broads), tree hunging, left-wing, pro-abortion, pro taxes, pro welfare, pro big-goverment, anti-automobile/ private transportion, pro union crowd are never happy (ever when they get "their way"). I noticed alot bitterness with the left-wing crowd.

2blu442

toro68 I agree with what you said... but please remember when threads get too political such that they may offend someone on this site they'll be removed.

I know my topic has political implications but I'd really like to get this information out to as many people as I can. When somebody bashes me for driving a vintage muscle car (which has happened!!!) I want to have the best reply I can to "inform" them of the true impacts of the hybrid car their driving.

toro68

2Blue, I was beening very tame. You can blame, Rocketradier, for the way I am (I've known him since March of 1986)!

OLD SKL 69

Someone bashed you for driving a vintage car? What happened?

They were probably jealous anyway that you were driving something cool and they had a turd.

2blu442

I've had suttle comments from co-workers about my energy use. But a young woman with a different value system than I once told me I was being irresponsible.... destroying the planet and a few other things I won't repeat here

Destructor

I love pulling in front of hybrid pukes and letting them inhale my duel exhaust. It's one way to get back at left wing communists.

rocketraider

Repeat- they are impossible to reason with. They also will not accept that others have different core values. That's what really burns my toast about them; they are inflexible and refuse to see anyone else's point of view.


Wasn't it ReDog who had such a great story about an encounter with an enviro-radical?


Last week, students at UNC-Chapel Hill staged a protest over the University's steam plant burning coal (coal-burning power plants REALLY send the enviro-radicals into shrieking orbit- don't ask me how I know this). They were prodded by the Sierra Club.

Now I can ga-ron-tee you one thing. If that little coal-burner shuts down to satisfy their misguided desires, and the dorm hot water and steam heat shuts off, and the University has to buy even more electricity from Duke Power and Progress Energy, and the tuition costs go up as a result, Jamesbo will be able to hear the squalling in Atlanta!

There's that law of unintended consequences thing again...

Lady72nRob71

Be sure to burn some rubber, also!

OLD SKL 69

x2

442much

I am a liberal and I support saving the planet. However I am not a radical. I don't agree with abortion for birth control, but I do if the woman's life is in jeopardy. I would like to see clean technology but not at the cost of all we have acheived.

We have to have the conscious knowledge to want to change. We simply cannot stay in the last century. It's only natural to take the road of least resistance. But I believe that as human beings, we have the mental capacity to be better than we are if we have the guts to get off our asses.

We can change. Since when have we been afraid to try? I'm against rainforest clearcutting (I guess I'm a tree hugger too) without a plan. Look at Bangladesh. They cut down all their trees. Now when the monsoons hit, all the top soil is washed into the Indian Ocean because there is nothing to stabilize the ground...like roots. Bangladesh would not be considered a "have" country today. In Canada, 53% of the land is covered by forests. Crews of 18 planters can plant between 3-5000 trees a day. We do this all Spring and Summer. We give back to the land more than what we take. Is that wrong?

Hybrid cars are a step forward however they are not without their problems. Making polution to make clean energy, expensive repairs because the infastructure is limited, batteries that can leak in an accident and cause an environmental hazzard is like taking two steps forward and one and a half steps backward. It looks good on the surface.

I am an environmentalist...to a point. When the federal government was thinking of imposing a $4,000 tax on cars that don't get X amount of MPG, I wrote the Environment Minsiter and said that the amout of time that I drive my car compaired to a brand new daily driver, my emmissions would not be as high. She wrote back and agreed. She said it was something they were studing and that my opinion would be taken into consideration. That was 15 years ago. In Canada we still don't have to pay anything more on our cars other than sales tax upon initial purchase. My letter was one of many car clubs that wrote to the Canadian government at that time.

So while I agree that there are problems with clean green technology, I for one am glad someone is trying to improve. One day we will be successful and we'll all be better for it.

citcapp

The batteroes are amptjer eco-problem what do you do with them when they are shot.

Electric cars still need to plug into charge and get their electricay from the coal fired plant. Energy is enegy and sometihing is used up in th process. Like it on not thats a fact.

The science from the space programs is needed here. Our solution is in the form of solor energy. Clean and free

jaunty75

Let's be a little careful here in our terminology. "Rare earth" means "rare earth elements," which is a set of 17 elements in the periodic table that came to have this name because they were originally isolated from hard to find oxide minerals ("earths"). But that's history.

Yes, the elements mentioned in the video, such as neodymium, are rare earth elements, but they're not rare. They are processed in China currently, but there is nothing unique about China, and China is not the only place they can be mined. They are more expensive and difficult to process, and doing so does impact the environment, so setting up a plant to do this in a country like the U.S., which has strict environmental laws, could be difficult or impossible, so that's they why they end up in a place like China. But that's politics and legalities, not abundance.

66ninetyeightls

Ken while I agree with most of what you said I do have to point out a few mistakes.

I work for an automotive manufacturer that is currently making hybrids. Not yet for sale in North America but they are all over the world and will soon be coming here. My job is to teach the technicians/mechanics to fix the vehicles.

What you said regarding the hybrids and leaking fluid from the batteries is not correct. There are very few if ANY hybrid cars on the market today that use lead/acid batteries as they are NOWHERE near efficient enough for hybrid purposes. Those companies that are using lead/acid are using glassmat technology so there is little to no acid to leak out.

The majority of manufacturers now are using Lithium Ion technology and the more advanced ones are using Lithium polymer. The fluid contained in a large vehicle with a V6-V8 would cause far more environmental damage to the surrounding area of a collision than anything contained in a Hybrid vehicle.

I am certainly not a fan of Hybrids as I feel they are more of a gimmick to shut environmentalists up while better systems can be developed. They are only needed because automobile manufacturers have been dragging their asses for so long. If GM hadn't scapped the EV1 project in the early 90's odds are battery technology would be years ahead of where it is now and GM wouldn't be in financial ruins.

I always get a good laugh from the people that use such terms as:

To me personally they just seem like they would rather stick their head in the sand and deny there is any problem rather than actually doing something about it. The only reason most people don't want to do anything is because they fear change or its just "too hard".

Now regarding the environmental taxes I'm afraid they have pulled the wool over your eyes slightly. Instead of charging the consumer a tax which would **** off all the voters they were nice enough to charge that tax to the automobile manufacturer whom just hides it in the overall price of the vehicle and passes it along to the customer quietly.

66ninetyeightls

Batteries are definitely an issue but more disposable batteries are thrown away in North America every day than Currently equipped in hybrid cars world wide.

As far as what type of energy is used to power the plug in hybrid vehicles that is an issue with the local government not supplying clean energy and not with auto manufacturers themselves. Even still there is a HUGE difference in CO2 output vs kilometres travelled when comparing hybrid vs gasoline powered vehicles even when using dirty power.


Now as far as solar power goes its awesome and there is more than enough of it. The technology just isn't anywhere close to where it needs to be.

2blu442

Ken, I believe the terms mentioned above refer to radical behavior. From what you shared, none of it applies to you.

Destructor

There is no free ride, no matter what form of energy one uses.

shermanator

The only good thing I see form these Electric/Hybrid cars is that they can't get out of there own way. Do you think the Modal T could get out of it's own way when it first came out? I see this as a new era for people to build hot rods with their brains rather than their wallets. Back in the 40's and 50's you couldn't go to Jegs and buy every part to build your hot rod. You had to use what you could find and engineer it to work.

Electic/Hybrid cars are SLOW; and there aren't any parts to make them faster. This is where hot rodding goes back to injinuity and creative thinking to make horsepower. I believe that in the next 15-20 years we will see someone with a 12 or maybe 11 second Hybrid. Guys will hotrod anything with moving parts.

Shermanator

jaunty75

The most important point of all! It takes a certain amount of energy to move a certain amount of mass around, and it doesn't matter whether that energy comes from a gasoline engine or a battery that got it's charge from a gasoline engine.

As a rule, hybrids don't gain you much in highway driving. Where they shine is in city driving because all of that energy coming from the regenerative braking that would be lost as heat in a conventional car goes to recharge the battery in hybrid. That's why you see EPA mpg ratings for hybrids with the estimated city MPG higher than the estimated highway mpg. The best thing we as a society could do with hybrids is have all our taxicabs and mail delivery trucks be hybrid vehicles. The problem, though, is the upfront cost of buying them all.

442much

Craig, thanks for the heads up on batteries...that's good to know.

I know where those costs go. But I have a chance to negotiate those costs. A direct tax is bacially "Shut up and pay." I have no chance. Added to the price of the car, I decide how much I pay depending on the cost of the car and my negotiating skills. Of course the dealer will have to be satisfied or my offer will not be accepted, but it will be less than the standard $4,000 that they were originally going to offer.

442much

John,

I'm too old to be radical.

Olds64

Craig, what happens to the Lithium Ion batteries when they don't hold a charge anymore? Just wondering. I knew that modern hybrids and electric cars didn't use lead acid batteries, but I've always wondered about the battery technology they use.

FWIW, I would never buy a hybrid or electric car. They are too expensive. Imagine the repair bill if the electric motor goes bad!

Why doesn't the automotive industry research technologies like bio-diesel, or the Stirling engine?

2blu442

Back in the 1990's I was reading up on burning hydrogen for a fuel. There were prototypes built but the problem they ran into is much less heat is created buring hydrogen than gasoline, thus much less power. But it was the ultimate in clean energy as the byproduct was water. I don't know a lot about it but believe the hydrogen powered experiments now are looking to use electricity for power from either breaking or combining Hydrogen and Oxygen gas from vapor to liquid form (water).

Yesterday I found the wagon web site after following a link Bluevista posted. A car guy there is experimenting with a hydrogen engine design I've not heard of. I didn't have the time to read up on it but woudl like to at some future date.

I do think that someday someone will come up with a new technology that will revolutionize the automotive industry. But even then I hope to be able to continue driving my beloved Oldsmobiles!!! John

Lady72nRob71

They are recycled at a chemical waste facility, much like expired LiIon laptop batteries. There is no liquid inside, more of a paste.
A coworker bought a silly hybrid and it seems to drive okay as a little commuter car. He punched it on the highway and offered no excitement, other than noise.
He gets an 8 year warr on the batteries, but if you buy used, there is no warr. As for the repair costs, I am sure they will be outrageous. There might be a label on the hood that says "No user servicable parts inside". I want to know the cost to replace batteries. My neighbor's 19.2V Dewalt drill was a $125 LiIon battery! Most LiIon batteries last a long time if charged correctly. Dell laptops are the exception, as the rapid charge feature limits the life to 1-2 yeads, at $200 bucks a battery!

The electronics used with LiIon batteries are very complex. My team at work designs parts and ICs for these types of circuits, and even a laptop battery is more complex than one thinks. You can barely replace the cells inside.
I would not own one a hybrid due to the complexity (not to mention appearance). Imagine you get struck by lightning while going down the road? Your car is toast.

OLD SKL 69

[QUOTE][I always get a good laugh from the people that use such terms as:
enviro-*****
To me personally they just seem like they would rather stick their head in the sand and deny there is any problem rather than actually doing something about it. The only reason most people don't want to do anything is because they fear change or its just "too hard"./QUOTE]

I certainly hope that wasn't aimed at me. I may have used the term but it does not describe me. I am very environmentally conscious and involved in local recycling programs to do what I can to stop the poisoning of our environment.

What I was describing in one sentence was that the tree huggers are all behind the gas-electric hybrid movement and act as if the technology to create these vehicles is not without a downside. That was the first time I saw media coverage of exactly what goes into this green technology and what issues come out of it. Destroying areas of the earth to mine these necessary raw materials is not exactly "green" and certainly is never mentioned. (Maybe there is a better way to do it but obviously the chinese haven't figured it out)

I am all for advancing green technology in terms of heating our homes and powering our autos, but the pros and cons of each technology should weighed against each other to find the best options.

jaunty75

As far as biodiesel, ethanol, and other "grown" fuels, I think that, despite all the hype you hear from Big Ethanol, the situation is ultimately hopeless because of the high energy cost in producing these fuels and the amount of land area that would need to be devoted to growing crops intended to be turned into bio-fuels. Only so much energy falls on the earth per unit area. Photosynthesis is only so efficient. Only so much can be grown per unit area of arable land based on the nutrients the land is able to provide. Only so much of the earth's land can be used for growing fuel-intended crops because we also need land for growing the food we eat, to live on (and build our houses, roads, and everything else we need), and some land is not suitable for growing crops.

Stirling engines are a more interesting question. I was just reading about them, and they do sound promising, but the problem they face is the problem that most any competitor to the gasoline-powered, internal combustion engine faces, and that's energy density. Gasoline is VERY energy dense. You get a lot of power from a small space, relatively speaking. State-of-the-art Stirling engines are still heavier, less powerful, and more costly than a comparable gasoline engine. They have advantages in some situations, and so we may see them more and more in other sorts of applications where these drawbacks aren't as significant.

But the day they're commonplace in our cars may be some ways off. Remember, the technology is not new, having first been invented in the early 1800s. After almost 200 years of existence and more than 100 years of the automobile, we still don't have Stirling engine-powered vehicles. I don't think it's because of some big conspiracy to keep them off the market. I think it's more because the technology is not there to make them practical. But maybe this will change as the cost of conventional fuels rises ever higher.

jaunty75

You have to remember one big thing about hydrogen. It is NOT an energy source. It is an energy STORAGE medium. But, as you point out, it is much less energy dense than gasoline, so to get any meaningful amount in one place so that you can use it to power a car for some reasonable distance requires compressing it to high pressures, which is in itself dangerous.

But the most important issue is producing it. Hydrogen gas does not occur naturally. Like you say, it comes from water, and it takes energy to break water down into hydrogen and oxygen. That energy has to come from somewhere. Most likely it's going to be a fossil-fuel fired power plant, so all you're doing in using a hydrogen-powered vehicle is displacing the point where the pollution occurs, not changing the fact that pollution does occur. There are efforts going on into finding a catalyst that will break down the water with less energy than is required by conventional electrolysis techniques, but until that happens, the "hydrogen economy" is just like hydrogen itself. Nothing but gas.

rocketraider

I deal with liquid & gaseous hydrogen on a daily basis, and the thought of the inexperienced general public fooling with it scares hell out of me. It'll make that explosion in Connecticut look like a balloon popping.

The "enviro-****" is just that. Intolerant, extremist and totalitarian in their viewpoint of how environment-related things should be. Being in the power generation business, I see and deal with environmental extremists often.

Have you ever had to run a gauntlet of them throwing rocks, eggs etc at your vehicle when you were just trying to get to/from your job? I have. When reason, common sense and compromise enter their vocabulary, maybe then some meaningful dialog will happen. Until that time, as far as I'm concerned they're a lunatic fringe.

66ninetyeightls

As others have said Hydrogen is not really a viable option because it actually takes more energy to produce it than you get out of it. There are countries like Iceland/Greenland I can't remember which exactly that do produce cheap Hydrogen but they are the exception because they use geo-thermal heat to run the generation stations.

Ethenol is just another gimmick in my opinion. Its actually very difficult and expensive to produce and has fewer BTU's than gasoline so gasoline that has any amount of ethanol in it is actually less efficient and you get worse mileage.

The big problem facing most of these fuel sources including BIODIESEL is the distribution network. There are so few stations making it avail. to the general public thats its not worth while for manufacturers to build vehicles for it. BIODESEL is also very corrosive in most cases. If you get a little on the paint it usually causes damage.

Olds64

Isn't Hydrogen the most abundant element in the universe... by a long shot?

Another thing I know is that the auto manufacturers are holding back on their fuel efficient vehicles. I saw an add for a new Chevy Traverse at the top of my web browser that mentions it gets 24 mpg. That is ATROCIOUS mileage! Wasn't CAFE set at 25 mpg back in the 70s?

66ninetyeightls

Hydrogen is the lightest and most abundant chemical element, constituting roughly 75 % of the Universe's elemental mass. However Hydrogen is actually VERY rare on earth.

Olds64

Yeah, I guess we do live on a ball of slicone, iron, and carbon.

jaunty75

Yes, but that's not the issue. The issue is that, on earth, it doesn't exist much as free hydrogen gas, which is the way it's needed if you're going to get electricity from it. Most of it is bound up in the water that covers the planet, and getting the water separated into hydrogen and oxygen IS the issue. That takes as least as much energy as you get back when you burn the hydrogen, so all that you're really doing is storing the energy that it took to separate the water into hydrogen and oxygen IN the hydrogen.

jaunty75

Be careful here. Hydrogen GAS, meaning the diatomic molecule H2, IS rare on earth. It's lighter than air and escapes from the atmosphere. But the element hydrogen is everywhere around us, mostly in the water but in a lot of other places as well, such as ammonia (NH3), methane (CH4), and every hydrocarbon you burn. Hydrocarbons, as the name implies, are all hydrogen and carbon.

jaunty75

Careful again! It's silicon, not siliconE. There's a BIG difference. One is an element, the other is a silicon polymer that contains other elements, like carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen, and it's used as a lubricant.

66ninetyeightls

Agreed however Hydrogen is only useful as a clean burning fuel when it is 100% pure. Hydrogen bonded with other elements is useless and the reason it’s so inefficient to extract.

jaunty75

Yeah, right. How do you know this? Remember, paranoia doesn't count!


The CAFE standards are AVERAGES. (That's what the "A" stands for in CAFE!) Auto manufactures are required to AVERAGE 25 mpg across all of the vehicles they sell. It doesn't mean that every vehicle has to get 25 mpg.

66ninetyeightls

I work for an automotive manufacturer and work with all the major manufacturers on a regular basis regarding fuel consumption and compliance. I can tell you for a fact that most manufacturers are scrambling just to try to meet the 2011 standards let alone the new CAFE target of 35mpg by 2016.