Re: Hybrid cars
 

Richard Bell wrote:
>
> Otto cycle engines achieve maximum efficiency when they are run at wide
> open throttle. At wide open throttle, they also have a most efficient
> rpm, based on the compromises made for the fixed timing. This engine
> speed ***may*** be the rpm for max power or max torque.
>

While ideally this is true, in practice the mixture at full throttle in
most car engines acts lean at low rpm because of lack of manifold
turbulence, and sudden rise in MAP hurts vaporization. So car engines
are programmed with a power enrichment that moves mixture richer than
stoic. As a result normal passenger car engines give best fuel
efficiency at somewhat less than FULL throttle, but still with more than
half throttle, so Richard's conclusions are still valid.

However, rpm is not DIRECTLY a function of throttle except under true
steady state conditions. It is definitely not true during transients
like acceleration. As my car accelerates through a given road speed,
the rpm is the same regardless of whether I am giving it full throttle
or partial throttle. Only once the system reaches steady-state, as in
highway cruise, does throttle opening determine rpm.

Re: Hybrid cars
 

If hybrids are so great, then why aren't they used in Japan or European
countries where gas is more expensive? Answer: poor return on investment.

1. They cost more.
2. They depreciate quicker (and will as hybrid technologh improves).
3. A high mileage car (like a Honda Civic or a Toyota Corolla or Echo)
will get comparable gas mileage with conventional engine technology.

So... Calculate the increased cost of buying a hybrid and compare it
with the gas savings and see how long it takes to break even.

Compare that with the cost savings you'd get by simply buying a good
mileage internal combustion engine car.

Then decide for yourself.

I get a kick outta the SUV hybrids. Add a bunch of girth and then try
to compensate by putting a hybrid engine in it. Sort of like buying
a Hybrid Humvee.

b.

Re: Hybrid cars
 

<barry@psyber.com> wrote in message
news:ca1f$43cfd33e$cc1d9013$30535@news.flashnewsgr oups.com...
>
> If hybrids are so great, then why aren't they used in Japan or European
> countries where gas is more expensive? Answer: poor return on
> investment.

Actually, hybrids are used in Japan and Europe.

>
> 1. They cost more.

It is true that they cost more than a comparable non-hybrid vehicle.

> 2. They depreciate quicker (and will as hybrid technologh improves).

I don't think this is necessarily true.

> 3. A high mileage car (like a Honda Civic or a Toyota Corolla or Echo)
> will get comparable gas mileage with conventional engine technology.

I do not think that the Corolla's fuel ecoconmy is as good as the Prius,
although the Civic and Echo are in the same ballpark.

>
> So... Calculate the increased cost of buying a hybrid and compare it
> with the gas savings and see how long it takes to break even.
>

At today's gas prices in the U.S., I believe that break-even is somewhere
around 7 to 10 years.
> Compare that with the cost savings you'd get by simply buying a good
> mileage internal combustion engine car.

I do not believe that many people are purchasing hybrids to save money.
More likely, they want the gee-wiz factor.


> Then decide for yourself.
>
> I get a kick outta the SUV hybrids. Add a bunch of girth and then try
> to compensate by putting a hybrid engine in it. Sort of like buying
> a Hybrid Humvee.
>
> b.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

Re: Hybrid cars
 

Ronnie Dobbs wrote:
> Anyway, ID is not science. Science is taking data and making sense out of
> it. ID is throwing your hands in the air and saying "I'm not smart enough
> to figure it out. Therefore, goddidit." ID is a cop-out, and
> anti-intellectualism at its most pungent. It is the opposite of science.

On the contrary, you must believe people are morons to believe the universe
just popped out of nowhere.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

Re: Hybrid cars
 

Don Stauffer wrote:
> y_p_w wrote:
> >
> > I believe an internal combustion engine does have a theoretical
> > Carnot efficiency. It's usually when it's being maxed out. However -
> > you then run into the real world where the motor is subject to friction
> > and attached to a car. There's increased rolling resistance of the
> > tire (I believe roughly linear) as well as aerodynamic resistance
> > (increases exponentially).
> >
> > Smaller engines are supposedly more efficient because they're
> > being worked harder and closer to their max efficiency. If you're
> > cruising at 70 on I-5 in a Prius, I doubt the electric motor has
> > anything to do with it getting 60+ MPG.
> >
> >
> The rolling and aero resistance are not tied directly to engine rpm
> because the gear ratio being used is indeterminant. Two cars of similar
> weight at the same highway speed will have similar rolling resistance
> regardless of engine speed.

That wasn't exactly what I was getting at. You would get a maximum
fuel economy with an engine that is maxed out for engine efficiency
AND where the aerodynamics and rolling resistance don't increase
to the point where they overcome any efficiency gains for being
maxed out. A smaller engine is efficient at highway speeds because
it's being flogged. A larger engine would be theoretically more
efficient at higher speeds in a vacuum with no rolling resistance. Of
course in the real world, that's where the aerodynamics take away
gains in efficiency.

Re: Hybrid cars
 

"clifto" <clifto@clifto.com> wrote in message
news:u875a3-jmv.ln1@remote.clifto.com...
> Ronnie Dobbs wrote:
>> Anyway, ID is not science. Science is taking data and making sense out
>> of
>> it. ID is throwing your hands in the air and saying "I'm not smart
>> enough
>> to figure it out. Therefore, goddidit." ID is a cop-out, and
>> anti-intellectualism at its most pungent. It is the opposite of science.
>
> On the contrary, you must believe people are morons to believe the
> universe
> just popped out of nowhere.
>

So where did God pop out of?

Re: Hybrid cars
 

"Rob" <rdbdriver@blomand.net> wrote in message
news:dqlj2a$cckl$1@news3.infoave.net...
>
> "Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:st6rs1poctb1r82gpvip0k3kavnes5kh8j@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> So the Republicans made sure
>> that the accountants were fired and now the big corporations suck the
>> money right out of the treasury.
>
> What on earth are you talking about.......The government has been turning
> many wastful government jobs over to the private sector for many years
> now, for the basic reason it will be much more efficient.
>
If you think big companies are effiicient, you have never worked for a big
company.

Re: Hybrid cars
 

"Art" <begunaNOSPAMPLEASE@mindspring.com> wrote:

>
> "Rob" <rdbdriver@blomand.net> wrote in message
> news:dqlj2a$cckl$1@news3.infoave.net...
>>
>> "Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:st6rs1poctb1r82gpvip0k3kavnes5kh8j@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> So the Republicans made sure
>>> that the accountants were fired and now the big corporations suck
>>> the money right out of the treasury.
>>
>> What on earth are you talking about.......The government has been
>> turning many wastful government jobs over to the private sector for
>> many years now, for the basic reason it will be much more efficient.
>>
> If you think big companies are effiicient, you have never worked for a
> big company.

If you think the government is less efficient than big companies, you've
never worked for both to compare the two.

Re: Hybrid cars
 

Don't forget that Catholics did not formally acknowledge a
heliocentric solar system until 1992, 350 years after Galileo produced
evidence supporting Copernicus's theory (for which Galileo was
condemned by the Catholic church):

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~nmcenter.../sci-9211.html

Christians have a tendency to cling to beliefs long after overwhelming
evidence refutes them. This is because their beliefs are based on
faith, not fact. Science is open to the scrutiny of facts and the
addition of new information that may support or refute current
theories. While scienctific theories are flexible and can be adjusted
due to the introduction of new facts, faith-based religions cannot- it
goes against the whole idea of believing the impossible (or highly
unlikely) without supporting factual evidence. Science DOES NOT
introduce unsubstantiated beliefs in order to explain observable
phenomena. There's no need for it; you just accept the fact that you
don't have all of the information necessary to sove the puzzle...yet.

Ironically, two of the most controversial scientific theories of our
time were both introduced by practicing or aspiring clergy- Charles
Darwin was *this close* to joining the ministry before accepting a
position on the HMS Beagle, and one of the main contributors to the
theory which would be later known as the "Big Bang" was a Belgian
priest named George Lemaitre.


"It is necessary to repeat here what I said above. It is a duty for
theologians to keep themselves regularly informed of scientific
advances in order to examine if such be necessary, whether or not
there are reasons for taking them into account in their reflection or
for introducing changes in their teaching."- Pope John Paul II


On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:52:29 -0600, clifto <clifto@clifto.com> wrote:

>Ronnie Dobbs wrote:
>> Anyway, ID is not science. Science is taking data and making sense out of
>> it. ID is throwing your hands in the air and saying "I'm not smart enough
>> to figure it out. Therefore, goddidit." ID is a cop-out, and
>> anti-intellectualism at its most pungent. It is the opposite of science.
>
>On the contrary, you must believe people are morons to believe the universe
>just popped out of nowhere.

Re: Hybrid cars
 

Beautiful.

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:18:13 GMT, "Art"
<begunaNOSPAMPLEASE@mindspring.com> wrote:

>
>"Rob" <rdbdriver@blomand.net> wrote in message
>news:dqlj2a$cckl$1@news3.infoave.net...
>>
>> "Gordon McGrew" <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:st6rs1poctb1r82gpvip0k3kavnes5kh8j@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> So the Republicans made sure
>>> that the accountants were fired and now the big corporations suck the
>>> money right out of the treasury.
>>
>> What on earth are you talking about.......The government has been turning
>> many wastful government jobs over to the private sector for many years
>> now, for the basic reason it will be much more efficient.
>>
>If you think big companies are effiicient, you have never worked for a big
>company.
>

Re: Hybrid cars
 

Ray O wrote:
> <barry@psyber.com> wrote in message
> news:ca1f$43cfd33e$cc1d9013$30535@news.flashnewsgr oups.com...
> > Compare that with the cost savings you'd get by simply buying a good
> > mileage internal combustion engine car.
>
> I do not believe that many people are purchasing hybrids to save money.
> More likely, they want the gee-wiz factor.

The term is "early adopters". I bought my first DVD player in 1997
before they really took off. Cost me $1099, although it was for the
Pioneer combinational LaserDisc/DVD player. I bought another one
later that Fall (from Sony) for $600. These days a machine for
under $100 will perform at least as well and have more capabilities
that were added as the technology progressed.

I used to work in downtown Berkeley, California. I would park at
a city owned garage which was used for part of the city's motor
pool. City Hall and many city offices were within a block. I
think the city's policy used to be to buy American makes. There
were a lot of white Ford Tempos, Chevy Cavaliers, and Dodge
Ram pickups. Recently though, they've had several Honda Civic
Hybrids.

Re: Hybrid cars
 

"y_p_w" <y_p_w@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1137707923.502713.38560@z14g2000cwz.googlegro ups.com...
> Ray O wrote:
>> <barry@psyber.com> wrote in message
>> news:ca1f$43cfd33e$cc1d9013$30535@news.flashnewsgr oups.com...
>> > Compare that with the cost savings you'd get by simply buying a good
>> > mileage internal combustion engine car.
>>
>> I do not believe that many people are purchasing hybrids to save money.
>> More likely, they want the gee-wiz factor.
>
> The term is "early adopters". I bought my first DVD player in 1997
> before they really took off. Cost me $1099, although it was for the
> Pioneer combinational LaserDisc/DVD player. I bought another one
> later that Fall (from Sony) for $600. These days a machine for
> under $100 will perform at least as well and have more capabilities
> that were added as the technology progressed.
>

I enjoyed being an early adopter of automotive tgechnology a lot more when
it was part of the job and didn 't cost me anything. I am a little less
enthusiastic now that I have to pay for cars :-(

> I used to work in downtown Berkeley, California. I would park at
> a city owned garage which was used for part of the city's motor
> pool. City Hall and many city offices were within a block. I
> think the city's policy used to be to buy American makes. There
> were a lot of white Ford Tempos, Chevy Cavaliers, and Dodge
> Ram pickups. Recently though, they've had several Honda Civic
> Hybrids.
>

I lived in the Bay area from '78 to '83 and noticed that there were a lot
more imports on the road in CA than in the Midwest. I suppose that the
trend towards imports may even be stronger than it was back then.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

Re: Hybrid cars
 

Art wrote:
> "clifto" <clifto@clifto.com> wrote...
>> Ronnie Dobbs wrote:
>>> Anyway, ID is not science. Science is taking data and making sense out
>>> of
>>> it. ID is throwing your hands in the air and saying "I'm not smart
>>> enough
>>> to figure it out. Therefore, goddidit." ID is a cop-out, and
>>> anti-intellectualism at its most pungent. It is the opposite of science.
>>
>> On the contrary, you must believe people are morons to believe the
>> universe
>> just popped out of nowhere.
>
> So where did God pop out of?

Not smart enough to figure it out? Hands in the air?

I'll try an analogy, though I've never encountered a leftist who could
understand the difference between analogy and testimony.

Picture a baby that dies at the age of two weeks. While he's alive, he
doesn't understand how he got there, who created his crib or the mobile
above his head, and the intelligence of those who put him on Earth is
so far beyond his that no one could explain it to him. His "creators"
were there before he was, and they will be there after he dies, and
he doesn't know why.

Now, I figure that any intelligence(s) who created the universe would be
enough above my abilities that it could be there before I or my ancestors
got here, could be there after the heat death of the Earth, and could be
so far beyond my mental powers that I'd never understand the story if
he/she/they explained it to me. Kinda like the baby.

The difference between the universe being created by an intelligent
designer, and the universe just popping out of nowhere, is pretty big.
And nowhere should it say that intelligent design prevents evolution.
In fact, if I were designing the universe, I'd put evolution in there.
And I figure whoever designed the universe is smarter than I, so I bet
he/she/it would figure that out too.

Feel free to have the last word. I'm back to autos.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

Re: Electricity - was Re: Hybrid cars
 

Richard Bell wrote:
> In article <john-6A3198.11433316012006@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> John A. Weeks III <john@johnweeks.com> wrote:
>
> Sadly, economical energy storage causes the intermittents to make even less
> economical sense, as it causes a race to the bottom in the electricity market.
> Anything that can economically store energy from renewable sources can store
> energy from base load plants. If there is enough of this storage available,
> all electricity is sold at the base load rate, so the only way to lots of
> money is through economies of scale. All other plants are shut down. Base
> load operators will love this because they sell more power. Consumers will
> love this because electricity is cheaper. The utilities will love this as
> it takes the bite out of the spot market. The only losers are generators that
> cannot turn a profit at the peak load rate. The environmentalists will also
> have fits because the only economical methods of generation are coal, nuclear,
> and (where geography permits) hydro.

agree. It's the base load that drives train ... but it's the peak load
that
drives required capacity because unless or until utilities are
permitted
to not deliver full adequate loads at peak - then they take the
economic
hit to add capacity ... which is in one way or other.. eventually
passed
on to consumers .. i.e. no business can be competitive much less
operate on a sustainable basis if it takes in less than it costs to
produce.

but I saw a presentation the other night from Dominion Power and they
showed a chart that indicated for the last 4 years almost the entire
added capacity is... provided by natural gas and guess what is
happening
to the price of NG? in a word - up... ergo higher prices for consumers.

.... but we all know what happens when something becomes more
expensive... it has a tendancy to moderate demand....

... NEW coal-fired plants have much stricter emission limits - so
that power is also going to be more expensive and the guy
from Virginia power said that there is already a gap window
too wide for new nukes and even new coal-fired...

Re: Hybrid cars
 

Ray O wrote:
> "y_p_w" <y_p_w@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1137707923.502713.38560@z14g2000cwz.googlegro ups.com...
> > I used to work in downtown Berkeley, California. I would park at
> > a city owned garage which was used for part of the city's motor
> > pool. City Hall and many city offices were within a block. I
> > think the city's policy used to be to buy American makes. There
> > were a lot of white Ford Tempos, Chevy Cavaliers, and Dodge
> > Ram pickups. Recently though, they've had several Honda Civic
> > Hybrids.
> >
>
> I lived in the Bay area from '78 to '83 and noticed that there were a lot
> more imports on the road in CA than in the Midwest. I suppose that the
> trend towards imports may even be stronger than it was back then.

The city population as a whole leans towards import makes, like
Honda, Toyota, Volvo, and BMW. The city itself has varying
incomes, and the tendency is towards American makes in some
of the lower income parts of town.

There's only a single new car dealer in Berkeley that still sells
an American make (a VW/Cadillac dealer). There used to be
dealers for Olds, Buick, and Chevy until business started waning
in the 90's. Reggie Jackson Chevrolet was the last to close. It's
now a bookstore.