Comments on: Industry Study: Hybridization to be Norm By 2020

By: Bryce

Bryce — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:01:46 +0000

I am all for PHEVs (I love the idea of the Volt, and even the cityZENN) but I don’t think every car on the road is going to be one of these in ten years. The change will be gradual because early on the technology will be a little more pricey. The combustion engine has a hundred years of development over them and it has been price omptimized to the max. Hopefully electrics will be just as competitive in short order. : )

By: ex-EV1 driver

ex-EV1 driver — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:20:11 +0000

"O yea, those wind turbines are a great idea, but that won't address transportation needs"
This is only because you refuse to let go of the idea that automobiles must be powered by liquid fuel. If we'd could just get full hybrids on the road that can run 100% off of electricity, even for short distances (but at full capability), then wind and solar power could address our transportation needs.
The only barrier to PHEV's is attitude. Hopefully GM, Tesla, and maybe a few others will persist on their current tracks and offer us a PHEV. Today, the auto manufacturers, almost as a block, are trying to water down the first generation of PHEV so that it must have the Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) running in order to actually go anywhere. While this helps reduce our dependence on oil, it does not allow us to end the dependence.

By: Bryce

Bryce — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 01:48:35 +0000

Well, we feed our people and a ton of people around the world plus we have a pretty consistant birth rates......so I guess we are fine. Sadly, birth control in areas like Africa where food production is a big problem isn't very popular. However an investment into their agriculture industries might give good returns. (that's assuming a fresh civil war of some sort doesn't suddenly start)

O and by the way, you could the entire worlds population into Texas with the population density of New York. There is no such thing as overpopulation.

By: steved28

steved28 — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 22:46:00 +0000

With regard to ethanol and food. No matter what happens, the world can only sustain so many people. It seems to me, a country that can not feed it’s people should, I don’t know, promote birth control?

By: Bryce

Bryce — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:41:19 +0000

Well indeed traditional ethanol would be detrimental to food supplies, however most ethanol plants popping up now are cellulosic plants that can produce the fuel from any bio matter. Anything plant matter would do. Saw dust, weeds, cactus. Any waste plant material would do. What we would need specially grown we could do with water conserving plants. (hell, we could use cannabis....lol)

And yes I know you are practical Chuckya, I won't forget that. : )

As for not drilling here.......is it ok to get the oil somewhere else then, say Canada, Mexico, or the gulf of Mexico, or are u simply not on board for any new drilling???

By: Skeptic

Skeptic — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:23:04 +0000

Ah, the Drill Here, Drill Now battalions have arrived! Thank goodness.

One thing, though: In ten years, when the US is importing more oil than it is today (raw numbers and as a percentage), and it costs 5x as much, and an additional 20000 US soldiers have died in Iran, will you all agree to, I don't know, become vegans?

I think that'd be a good bargain.

Or maybe never vote again. That might be better.

Idiots.

By: chukcha

chukcha — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:33:01 +0000

Bryce,
Ethanol for fuel is potentially a deadly mistake for us. The world population is growing very fast. Food shortages are already here. The mith of ethanol as "green" energy source could cost millions of lives in the next decades. I think this ethanol scam was proposed by some auto manufacturers in order not to switch to electric engines right away.
Don't get me wrong, ethanol is fine and has its uses, but we cannot switch our transportation fuel to it. Don't forget that crops require fresh water and LOTS of it. Water, believe it or not, is getting more and more scarce and expensive to desalinate. Desalination is a very heavy CO2 producing process. The amount of crops that you need to have to grow just for fuel is staggering and the amount of water that u need for those crops is at least staggering x 10. It's too hard on the wallet and way too hard on the earth.
As you've noticed in my comments I have a very down to earth and practical approach to life. I'm not the one who blindly fights for earth without thinking about the business aspect of it.
Ethanol as a petrol replacement, my friend, doesn't make business sense. (To me at least.)

..."so I figure some limited drilling would be ok, just releaving prices at the pump for those lower income families of America. There is no point in them suffering while the nation is "greened" up."

Absolutely not. Drilling for more oil here in north America wouldn't make a dent in the price of gas. The drilling companies would want to recoup the price of development of drilling platforms and that would just negate any savings you get. Plus, cheap GAS = more consumption. (more SUVs etc...) That means you fall in to the trap again.
It's like someone who is quitting smoking says "I'll just smoke one little sigarette. One sigarette wouldn't do anything to me..."
Guess what's next? that person would continue to smoke... He would fall in to the nicotine trap... Just as we would fall in to the oil trap if we continue to develop oil infrastructure instead of the much needed renewable energy infrastructure.

By: Bryce

Bryce — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:35:39 +0000

O yea, and that is true that transportation is not actuallu the largest source of emmisions. The majority actually comes from trees that are cut down and then subsequently burned or deteriorate. The other large emitors are factories, power plants, and cows. (yes cows, methane is actually a worse compound in terms of global warming than CO2 could ever be.)

Ethanol can be a temporary stop gap between the full elecctrification of the vehicle because the CO2 emitted by this fuel does not come from beneath the earth where old carbon has been stored and hidden away for eons. The carbon from ethanol, whether it be corn, sugar, or any cellulose from a plant matter is going to deeriorate or be eaten anyways. Same difference either way.

By: Bryce

Bryce — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:14:41 +0000

O yea, those wind turbines are a great idea, but that won't address transportation needs sadly, unless of course, the majority of automobiles switch to PHEV vehicles in the near future. That would be beautiful, but it is some time away. Gas is probably a part of our lives for atleast the near future, so I figure some limited drilling would be ok, just releaving prices at the pump for those lower income families of America. There is no point in them suffering while the nation is "greened" up.

As for those oil wells costing $100 million, that number is way too low. Those things can cost upwards to a couple billion for the really big ones. Give your wind a little more credit.

Wind is greatly expanding in Texas and California though. It should be interesting.

By: sean

sean — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:57:27 +0000

Wind energy is good. Solar is good as well. Deserts should be good places for solar power stations. Only need the transmission lines to the grid.