Toyota Prius, transport, and the future.

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by ophic

Your explanation missed the crucial point, which is time.

Which you already conceded in your post at 12:20 was irrelevant to the discussion

[Sir Trev]

Originally Posted by CheGuevara

On the whole though, I'm quite happy about the existence of the Prius. I wouldn't personally own one, but they're nice enough to ride in as a taxi. I commend Toyota for bringing it to market though, and making it a relative success. Somebody had to do it first (on this sort of scale) and because of the general acceptance hybrid cars will continue to be developed, improved, and prices will drop. The Toyota Camry Hybrid sold in Canada has 187hp -more than the non-hybrid 4cyl version of the car, and it probably wouldn't exist if the Prius hadn't come before it.

Got to agree on this point. If we don't get the first few models into general use to get good feedback then the technology will not improve. I really do hope the Toyota, Lexus and Honda hybrids help move battery and electric traction forwards, as it will help in the long run when oil gets too expensive.

Got to disagree with the OP a bit though (sorry Billy). Cars are getting MUCH more efficient. I'm about to change jobs and get a fuel card so have been looking to see what to potentially change my car to in order to save some benefit-in-kind tax. A lot of manufacturers now offer diseasals with 160-odd HP for 130 thingies of carbon. Compared to my existing car, which is only four years old, this is way better.

Both points above equal the same thing - if there is demand then things will change. As long as people want to drive hybrids, and a few brave manufacturers provide them, they will improve. As long as road fund licenses and company car/fuel card BIK tax is based on carbon thingies we'll get more powerful cars with lower emissions...

[yorkie_chris]

Lower emissions or dodgy testing methods

[ophic]

Originally Posted by the_lone_wolf

Which you already conceded in your post at 12:20 was irrelevant to the discussion

If you're not in politics already, start

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by ophic

If you're not in politics already, start

You're second person who's said that to me today

The issue is at the moment we have no way of producing any fuel that will match oil for its enegry content/output however you want to put it. We are buring more than ever. No one has any answers as what will be next.

All the choices we have, points made don't answer this question we can argue about it all we like but it won't change that simple fact.

It should also be pointed out that every facet of modern live depends on oil, you know all that medical tech we have that will go with oil as well, not too mention the clothes of your back. Its has potential to casue many problems, when its all gone.

We can do things about it, for start get rid of MC D's and others like it they cause so much damage to produce food that I wouldn't feed to my dog let alone a human being. We get food brough into this country we can grow here. Eat less meat as well, don't rape the oceans and rain forest of their bio diversty.

People don't think for themselves, they get told what to think. Look that Cleb has a Pirius, hmm I should get one as they "help" save the Earth. This goes for everything.

I really hate to think what the children of today are going to be left with.

Education and science is the way to change things, however that doesn't suit those in charge, so really nothing will happen.

When was the last time nuclear fusion was talked about? Why isn't money being put into that? It is another possiable that requires far more energy than it makes, after all trying to copy how a star produces energy.

Don't think for one second that the Earth won't get rid of us, it will carry on but we as species probally not, we have been here for a short period of time the way are carrying on probally not for much longer.

[yorkie_chris]

Because nuclear power is the only viable prime mover that could produce your hydrogen, charge your electric car. BUT the hippies hate it.

[ophic]

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Because nuclear power is the only viable prime mover that could produce your hydrogen, charge your electric car. BUT the hippies hate it.

I thought it was only me that had this opinion. Everyone else just holds up crossed fingers and slowly backs away.

Originally Posted by BillyC

I do wonder, if the industrial era born of the 19th century, that was honed in the 20th century, is about to die in the 21st century. Just a blip on human history, a brief holiday to spoil our race. Soon perhaps, we'll have to return to more traditional lifestyles, drawing local communities back in upon themselves; and returning to more traditional forms of transport. Soon perhaps, the jets and jumbos will join Concorde in museums?

Oh god, you're a peak oil doomer.

This is the site for you. Or you can be a bit more positive and read this instead. I will confess that I too went thorugh a phase of thinking we were all going to die.

To paraphrase a quotation by an unknown author in an unknown book, "how many worlds in the universe where the inhabitants now toil a harsh, primitive existence amdist the crumbling ruins of a past industrial civilization, a civilization where they failed to use the time afforded to them by oil to move on to renewable energy and instead exhausted it and find themselves forever trapped on their worlds in a dark age."

Nuclear power is what we need. Nuclear power to electrolyse and produce hydrogen to fuel aircraft and cars, to generate electricity for electric trains and power ships. Heck, they made nuclear jet engines in the 1950s hoping to replace the B-52s.

Alas, all the eco-beardos and self-appointed do-gooders have successfully nimbyed nuclear power away. I wonder how willing they'll be to live like savages with no electricity, modern medicine and transportation?

[BillyC]

Originally Posted by Sir Trev

Got to disagree with the OP a bit though (sorry Billy). Cars are getting MUCH more efficient. I'm about to change jobs and get a fuel card so have been looking to see what to potentially change my car to in order to save some benefit-in-kind tax. A lot of manufacturers now offer diseasals with 160-odd HP for 130 thingies of carbon. Compared to my existing car, which is only four years old, this is way better.

Hmm. I don't want to be misunderstood. Engines over the past 15 or 20 years, have become, on the whole, considerably cleaner and more economical - hard to argue otherwise!

But cars, have managed to minimise this benefit. An example quoted to me a little while back... A basic Volkswagen Golf Mk I weighed just 790Kg; but a Mk V weighs 1,320Kg. And so, engines work harder, and the benefits that could be realised with their improvements, are negated by the lard that vehicles have put on.

While my 1994 Peugeot 106 delivered an easy 55-60 mpg; today's equivilent probably wouldn't get close.