"Green" Batteries

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Xist

Non-hybrid has a smaller engine than the hybrid, while both have turbos?! How does that make any sense?!

What size engine would you guys put in the hybrid?

Both are turbodiesel, it's not related to the current gassers downsizing trend. Well, the 1.6L one could be enought for the hybrid version too, and most likely to have a higher increasement in fuel savings.

Originally Posted by IamIan

If you want to do a complete life cycle vs complete life cycle ... or overhaul vs overhaul... OEM vs OEM ... or modified vs modified ... that would be better

It could be more accurate if the comparison was for the same criteria, but vehicles with different concepts might be compared at their differences to point out what are their respective advantages and disadvantages.

Many parts of the industry were far worse in the past than they are today ... more energy per pound of steel in the past ... more pollution to make each pound of steel in the past ... more pollution for each kwh of energy in the past ...

In an overhaul, all the improvements in the overall efficiency for industrial processes wouldn't be disconsidered.

more steel on the older heavier vehicle ... a vehicle that is less safe to drive ... that needs some maintenance items more often ... that is less aerodynamic

It all depends on which vehicle is going to be refurbished. I doubt that an old Volkswagen Rabbit might use more steel than a Prius. Safety is a valid concern, but it doesn't really belong to the "environmental performance" argument. Maintenance items are another point that is not so accurate, considering that some technical upgrades can be applied to an old beater if they really do require less maintenance.

that has larger more toxic and energy costly engine ... and engine that produces vastly more toxins out of it's tail pipe per gallon ... and uses more gallons to travel the same number of miles... etc...etc.

Some engines with older layouts, actually, can be less energy-expensive to manufacture and overhaul than a newer one. Also, due to the absence of highly-sophisticated electronics into an older Diesel, for example, there will be no e-waste to handle if the engine gets trashed. I won't get into the argument about tail pipe emissions, since the aftertreatment improvements in newer vehicles sure have to be counted as a positive aspect. But the fuel consumption, again, is also related to other aspects, not just an engine's age.

I just don't see a ~50lbs NiMH battery in some HEVs being a big enough hit to be able to counter all the other very large hits the other vehicle has added up over it's lifetime... especially when one tries to stretch it as far as a 7,700 lbs van vs a smaller lighter more aerodynamic , etc , etc ...

Considering the adaptability to alternative fuels, and old 7700lbs. GVWR van may still have some advantage over a Prius. Let's consider the Mercedes-Benz MB-180 D, fitted with a manual 5-speed transmission and the die-hard OM616 indirect-injection Diesel in a 79hp rating. Sure it's no speed-demon, but has a long lasting and good adaptability to biodiesel and even pure vegetable oil, including waste cooking oil, which wouldn't require major processings to be used as fuel, in opposition to the gasoline used in a Prius.

Sure its aerodynamics are far from outstanding, but taking into account the real-world MPG around mid-20s to low-30s and the ability to run on alternative fuels that can lead to a carbon-neutral balance they're far from a highly-polluting beast. Better than a hybrid 1/2-ton pickup (or SUV) with a gasser for sure, and can still fare decently compared to a hybrid gasser compact car while the cargo and passenger capacities and the ability to run on alternative fuels are taken into account.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

In an overhaul, all the improvements in the overall efficiency for industrial processes wouldn't be disconsidered.

No ... but it does disconsider those improvements for the base vehicle.

As soon as you leave the overhaul vs overhaul ... and try to apply overhaul vs new ... then the only way those industrial improvements are not disconsidered ... is if the older more pollution intensive to produce vehicle is given ... all the penalties it has over it's life time ... for it's production which caused more pollution , life to date pile of dirtier exhaust , the penalty for the overhaul itself , etc.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

It all depends on which vehicle is going to be refurbished. I doubt that an old Volkswagen Rabbit might use more steel than a Prius.

The comparison was not to a small rabbit ... but a 7,700 lbs Van vs the Prius ... and 7,700 pounds is significantly more steel and other things.

And every 1 pound of the steel and other things cost more pollution than the same 1 pound did today with modern industry ... even if was the same amount of steel ... it polluted more to produce it.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Maintenance items are another point that is not so accurate, considering that some technical upgrades can be applied to an old beater if they really do require less maintenance.

Many old vehicles all had ~3,000 mile oil changes ... today 6,000 is not unheard of from OEM manuals ... that = less pollution ... and less maintenance.

Regenerative braking reduces the rate wear on friction brakes ... = less pollution ... and less maintenance.

etc... etc.

If you want to admit the inferiority of the maintenance of the older vehicle ... than fine invest the additional costs of both money and pollution in order to try and improve it , by making those upgrades to the beater ... but don't forget to include their environmental costs of doing those upgrades ... to the whole life time pile the vehicle is producing.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Some engines with older layouts, actually, can be less energy-expensive to manufacture and overhaul than a newer one.

And each 1 kwh of energy used to be more polluting than it is today ... ie the less energy may not result in less pollution.

Not all of the old engine layouts are less energy intensive to produce ... that is one of the advantages of a HEV ... the ICE can be down sized and the vehicle can keep the same overall performance ... 0-60 times etc... and for the ones that are more energy intensive to produce ... they get hit twice ... by the more kwh of energy ... and by the more pollution per kwh of energy.

In addition to energy efficiency benefits of modern industry vs the 'good old days' ... the old industry was also more polluting ... even completely separate from the energy use and cost itself ... long ago ... waste was just dumped over the hill ... can't do that any more today.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

I won't get into the argument about tail pipe emissions, since the aftertreatment improvements in newer vehicles sure have to be counted as a positive aspect.

and it creates a negative pile of dirty for every mile the older vehicle travels ... from the day it was new out of the factory.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

But the fuel consumption, again, is also related to other aspects, not just an engine's age.

I agree.

But that seems to trivialize the obvious ... history is pretty clear on this ... despite increasing vehicle weight over time ... which should be a net penalty ... and additional non-motive loads ( AC , GPS , etc ) ... which should also be another net penalty ... the over all average of MPG have been improving ... = over all on average modern is producing better fuel economy than the old did.

Which is exactly what we would expect from the improvements in technology.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Considering the adaptability to alternative fuels, and old 7700lbs. GVWR van may still have some advantage over a Prius.

See ... no small rabbit in sight ... now take all the other penalties that go with that 7,700 lbs van ... dirtier per pound steel ... more steel ... worse exhaust emissions every miles ... more gallons per mile ... etc... etc.

Also alternative fuels are not exclusive to the old out dated van that comes with it's life time pile of pollution.

And if you already opened up the can to allow overhauls and modifications ... the Prius can be modified to run on alternative fuels as well... and it would still produce less toxic emissions per gallon ... and use less gallons per mile.

Or do a PHEV Prius charged with Solar Energy ... your emissions drop even more.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Let's consider the Mercedes-Benz MB-180 D, fitted with a manual 5-speed transmission and the die-hard OM616 indirect-injection Diesel in a 79hp rating. Sure it's no speed-demon, but has a long lasting and good adaptability to biodiesel and even pure vegetable oil, including waste cooking oil, which wouldn't require major processings to be used as fuel, in opposition to the gasoline used in a Prius.

So you think a 79hp engine is a good comparison to a 134hp current Prius?
Why stack the deck so much ... compare apples to apples ... where's the nearly ~134 HP diesel to compare vs the ~134HP HEV?

And if you get the exhaust tested ... even on bio-diesel ... you are very likely to find that it is still more toxic / dirty per gallon ... and is using way more gallons per mile.

As for bio-fuels ... sure you can invest in adapting that gas guzziler ... and someone else can adapt and convert a more efficient vehicle like a prius to bio-fuels as well.

Or go OEM ... unlike that old van ... Toyota started selling a Bio-Fuel running Prius in Brazil in 2012 Link

Re-using waste is a good thing ... but is not limited to only be converted to bio-diesel ... nor is waste restaurant oil the only waste that can be converted to fuel.

If you wanted that waste oil to be as good as the gasoline at the pump ... it would not be a simple process at all ... for it to work equally to the gasoline at all temperatures , etc... and then their is the issue of availability of this waste to fuel ... by all means tell me how many gas stations offer it for sale across the country?

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Sure its aerodynamics are far from outstanding, but taking into account the real-world MPG around mid-20s to low-30s

mid-20s to low-30s ... needs 2x or 3x as many gallons to travel the same distance ... all the while you admit it will have worse tail pipe toxic emissions for every one of those gallons.

This puts it further into the whole every mile you drive it.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

and the ability to run on alternative fuels that can lead to a carbon-neutral balance they're far from a highly-polluting beast.

carbon-neutral does not = low pollution.

Put that tail pipe exhaust emissions on a test ... and it will be more toxic per gallon ... while consuming more gallons per mile.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Better than a hybrid 1/2-ton pickup (or SUV) with a gasser for sure,

I don't think so... and the pick up or SUV is a long way from the Prius is was claimed it was better than.

It starts off being more polluting when it was produced ... more pollution was produced every gallon it used ... it used more gallons per mile ... more pollution was produced to overhaul / convert it ... and even after the conversion it is still very likely to be producing more toxic exhaust emissions every mile it drives... it's not getting out of the hole at all ... it looks like all it did was slow down the rate of the pile of dirtier it was building.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

and can still fare decently compared to a hybrid gasser compact car while the cargo and passenger capacities and the ability to run on alternative fuels are taken into account.

It doesn't fair decently vs the larger vehicles ... why would it / how would it be able to do better ... against smaller vehicles that will produce even less pollution?

[guudasitgets]

Originally Posted by IamIan

I don't think comparing overhaul vs new is a valid comparison.

If you want to do a complete life cycle vs complete life cycle ... or overhaul vs overhaul... OEM vs OEM ... or modified vs modified ... that would be better.

- - - - - - -
As for the anti-HEV clean rant ...

While it might be possible ... I see the odds are very much stacked against the old having a net total cleaner operational life ... as much as the idea is often romanticized ... gets debunked ... then comes back ... like some kind of zombie.

Many parts of the industry were far worse in the past than they are today ... more energy per pound of steel in the past ... more pollution to make each pound of steel in the past ... more pollution for each kwh of energy in the past ... more steel on the older heavier vehicle ... a vehicle that is less safe to drive ... that needs some maintenance items more often ... that is less aerodynamic ... that has larger more toxic and energy costly engine ... and engine that produces vastly more toxins out of it's tail pipe per gallon ... and uses more gallons to travel the same number of miles... etc...etc.

The HEV batteries are a negative that the old option didn't have ... No argument about that at all ... but the other option has lots of other things adding to it's giant pile of life time dirty ... I just don't see a ~50lbs NiMH battery in some HEVs being a big enough hit to be able to counter all the other very large hits the other vehicle has added up over it's lifetime... especially when one tries to stretch it as far as a 7,700 lbs van vs a smaller lighter more aerodynamic , etc , etc ... that heavy aerodynamic brick of a vehicle reeks of energy waste and pollution for the vast majority of U.S. driving population ... it only has a remote chance against some other overly large and overly heavy with crappy aerodynamics horribly low efficiency vehicle.

but that's just my 2 bits.

Ok I had to walk out to the garage and check the miles on my beater (96 Ford Aspire with a cd of .36, not a newer cars cd but certanly not a brick). My best mileage was 49 miles to the gallon and if I overhauled the engine (cost me $1200 in parts and machining) it can do better but it still runs like new. It today has 262,304.5 miles on the clock. I bought it in October of 2008 and have put on 50,000 miles on it in the almost 5 years I had it. I drove my SUV's in snowstorms or when pulling my sleds to northern Wisconsin. It has served me well after I fixed everything, new brakes twice, new shocks once, new tie rods and lower ball joints once, new wheel bearings in the beginning and two sets of tires. All cost me so far $1500. Thats it. I don't have to work at my job and contribute to pollution to pay off a $25,000 car. Or have a bank process a loan (more electrical energy) for my car. Ok here's where your argument doesn't add up to the beater.

"Many parts of the industry were far worse in the past than they are today ... more energy per pound of steel in the past ... more pollution to make each pound of steel in the past ... more pollution for each kwh of energy in the past ... more steel on the older heavier vehicle ... a vehicle that is less safe to drive ... that needs some maintenance items more often ... that is less aerodynamic ... that has larger more toxic and energy costly engine ... and engine that produces vastly more toxins out of it's tail pipe per gallon ... and uses more gallons to travel the same number of miles... etc...etc."


Say you want a Prius, that has to be built NOW, today. Mines already built, doesn't matter what the efficiancy of manufacturing was then, it's built already. For the Prius raw materials have to be processed, tooling designed and ordered, machining centers ordered and programed assembly lines fired up, cars freighted over here, cars then rail freighted to my city. Then set up by the dealer. Then (arguments with the wife on the color) then picked up, then start the payment process, more cost for insurance.

I'll probably let the Aspire go till 300,000 miles then do a rebuild (incedently I found out Isky Cams will grind a Metro XFi grind on my cam) No it isn't much to look at and I get free car washes every time it rains. Interior cleaning is easy once I open both doors and fire up the leaf blower But it still runs good and doesn't use a 1/4 qt of oil before it's time to change it.

Now the weight and safety, my car weighs 1350 lbs, does the Prius weigh that? More wieght = more waste to build, doesn't matter what MPG it gets.
As for Safety the Aspre was the first subcompact car that came standard with airbags not exactly a 76 Cutlass

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by guudasitgets

My best mileage was 49 miles to the gallon and if I overhauled the engine (cost me $1200 in parts and machining) it can do better but it still runs like new. It today has 262,304.5 miles on the clock. I bought it in October of 2008 and have put on 50,000 miles on it in the almost 5 years I had it.

MPG is not the complete pollution profile for the vehicle's life.

In 2008 when you bought it ... you had other cleaner , less pollution to operate vehicles to choose from ... you chose to buy that more polluting per mile vehicle instead ... there can be 100% valid other reasons to buy or not buy a car ... but when talking a out pollution ... more pollution is more pollution.

And your own personal life time pile of pollution is going to be larger due to a choice like that.

Originally Posted by guudasitgets

I don't have to work at my job and contribute to pollution to pay off a $25,000 car.

Financial argument is 100% valid to the choice making ... but is not about the pollution argument ... Price not = pollution.

Originally Posted by guudasitgets

Say you want a Prius, that has to be built NOW, today. Mines already built, doesn't matter what the efficiancy of manufacturing was then, it's built already.

The Re-Use is valid ... but the efficiency of Manufacturing is 100% valid to the total pollution and energy efficiency of the vehicle's operating life time.

And there is still a break even point for the newer cleaner per mile becomes better than older dirtier per mile ... even with the initial hit of production.

Back in 2008 you had better options to reduce your own personal life time pile of pollution.

Originally Posted by guudasitgets

For the Prius raw materials have to be processed, tooling designed and ordered, machining centers ordered and programed assembly lines fired up, cars freighted over here, cars then rail freighted to my city. Then set up by the dealer. Then (arguments with the wife on the color) then picked up, then start the payment process, more cost for insurance.

And all that had to also happen for the old vehicle also ... but many things polluted more to produce 20 or 30 years ago then they do today.

Originally Posted by guudasitgets

More wieght = more waste to build, doesn't matter what MPG it gets.

Not necessarily.
The per Pound system is cleaner today than it was in the past for many things.

Yes , That initial pollution is not effected by MPG.

But every mile you drive is effected ... it is polluting more per gallon it uses ... and it is using more gallons to travel the same distance ... that pollution of usage ... is real ... and 100% matters to the total cleanness of the vehicle.

- - - - - - - -

If you know how bad ... like the specific amount ... that 20 or 30 year old vehicle puts out in the exhaust ... then you can run the numbers to get a more precise point where it breaks even , or is better ... but it is more toxic and dirtier per mile to operate ... no escaping that.

[H-Man]

I... don't... like... ellipsis...
With that out of the way, I can know what comes out of Ecomodded Prizm's tailpipe from last year's smog test paperwork: 14.8% CO2, 143 ppm NOx, .23% CO, and 22 ppm HC with a missing thermostat, the oxygen sensor, cap, rotor, and spark plug wires worn out, and the car sitting for a year.
I've replaced the cap, rotor, thermostat, spark plugs and wires. The car was cleaner than what it replaced by a long shot (7.4 L engine with 3 speed automatic in a chevy suburban.) Oil change is 7500 miles according to the GM manual, 9000 miles according to the Toyota big yellow book (the geo prizm is a toyota built car.) The 19 year old car isn't going anywhere any time soon seeing how I can't afford a new car (I have better things to spend money on, namely textbooks, gas, tuition, and food,) and it is the newest car my family owns.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by IamIan

And every 1 pound of the steel and other things cost more pollution than the same 1 pound did today with modern industry ... even if was the same amount of steel ... it polluted more to produce it.

Producing steel under current environmental standards won't neutralize the pollution from the older steel manufacturing process.

If you want to admit the inferiority of the maintenance of the older vehicle ... than fine invest the additional costs of both money and pollution in order to try and improve it , by making those upgrades to the beater ... but don't forget to include their environmental costs of doing those upgrades ... to the whole life time pile the vehicle is producing.

Some improvements in an old beater can be applied with a smaller energy expense than it would be required in a newer car with an increased electronic complexity.

And if you already opened up the can to allow overhauls and modifications ... the Prius can be modified to run on alternative fuels as well... and it would still produce less toxic emissions per gallon ... and use less gallons per mile.

An old-school engine, either a Diesel or a spark-ignited one, is still usually easier (then cheaper and less energy-expensive) to convert to alternative fuels than a Prius engine. I can set a carburettor-fed engine to run on both gasoline and ethanol without having to hook it up to a computer since there is no ECM to require a reflashing.

So you think a 79hp engine is a good comparison to a 134hp current Prius?

Considering what it does in such a low-geared brick, yes, I do. If I would ever buy a Prius bodyshell, I could eventually consider to put an old Diesel into...

Why stack the deck so much ... compare apples to apples ... where's the nearly ~134 HP diesel to compare vs the ~134HP HEV?

They're not so usual in America, but in the European market there are many examples. But let's consider the power output of the gasser, 99hp, so a Diesel with a lower power wouldn't fare so badly, also considering the torque output.

Toyota started selling a Bio-Fuel running Prius in Brazil in 2012

I don't consider E20/E25 as bio-fuel, since I can have E96h here in Brazil. And no, the Prius doesn't run on E96h back here.

Re-using waste is a good thing ... but is not limited to only be converted to bio-diesel ... nor is waste restaurant oil the only waste that can be converted to fuel.

Any source of organic matter can be turned into bio-fuel, including some sort of synthetic gasoline like the one that was made out of wood chips in Poland during WWII.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Producing steel under current environmental standards won't neutralize the pollution from the older steel manufacturing process.

Exactly ... That is a pollution penalty for the older vehicle's operating life time ... that the older vehicle will never escape.

= Con for Old.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Some improvements in an old beater can be applied with a smaller energy expense than it would be required in a newer car with an increased electronic complexity.

Some yes ... it could be less ... and others ... it would be more.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

An old-school engine, either a Diesel or a spark-ignited one, is still usually easier (then cheaper and less energy-expensive) to convert to alternative fuels than a Prius engine. I can set a carburettor-fed engine to run on both gasoline and ethanol without having to hook it up to a computer since there is no ECM to require a reflashing.

And after you spend the pollution cost to do that... that old vehicle ... is still polluting more per gallon and using more gallons per mile.

= Con for Old.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Considering what it does in such a low-geared brick, yes, I do. If I would ever buy a Prius bodyshell, I could eventually consider to put an old Diesel into...

By all means ... and it would still be producing more pollution per gallon or per mile.

= Con for Old

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

I don't consider E20/E25 as bio-fuel, since I can have E96h here in Brazil. And no, the Prius doesn't run on E96h back here.

But sense you plan on including overhauls and modifications anyway ... then E85 Prius is available ... link ... and would produce less tail pipe pollution than that 7,700 lbs van on E96... for every mile you drive.

The Prius may not even have to go to E85 to produce less tail pipe pollution for every mile ... but the point remains , the Bio-Fuel Option is not exclusive to the old 7,700 lbs van.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Any source of organic matter can be turned into bio-fuel, including some sort of synthetic gasoline like the one that was made out of wood chips in Poland during WWII.

Exactly.

= No exclusive benefit for the Bio-Fuel for the Old ... they both can do it ... but the Prius will do it with less tail pipe pollution per mile.

= Con for Old

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by IamIan

But sense you plan on including overhauls and modifications anyway ... then E85 Prius is available ... link ... and would produce less tail pipe pollution than that 7,700 lbs van on E96... for every mile you drive.

E96h (96% ethanol with 4% water) is 100% renewable, while E85 still uses some gasoline.

[IamIan]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

E96h (96% ethanol with 4% water) is 100% renewable, while E85 still uses some gasoline.

Agreed ... but ... Makes no difference to the point that was being made.

The ability for a vehicle to run on a Bio-Fuel as an option is not exclusive to the old 7,700 lbs vehicle ... the newer vehicle can also be made or modified to run on a 100% renewable bio-fuel ... but the newer Prius like vehicle will produce less tail pipe pollution per gallon and use less gallons per mile while doing so.

So from a pollution stand point ... it still is = Con for old.

- - - - - -
And , as you pointed out yourself , the 'gasoline' be it 100% or even the % in E85 can itself still be a 100% renewable Bio-Fuel.

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Any source of organic matter can be turned into bio-fuel, including some sort of synthetic gasoline like the one that was made out of wood chips in Poland during WWII.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

We'll be walking in circles forever with all that hybrid vs. old beater, and it all started with batteries and their environmental impact...

Considering the energy spent in mining for rare earths used in electric motors, and either Nickel or Lithium to the batteries, then the logistics, both the energy balance and the pollution footprint from a battery pack is often pointed out to be even higher than the footprint of a Hummer H2 in a 20-year life cycle, even after the energy required to refine petroleum and to transport the gasoline is taken into account. Sure it sounds weird and over-exagerated, but if we could consider something with an engine smaller and lighter (thus requiring less raw materials) than the Hummer's V8 I'd still rather get an old Mercedes-Benz MB 180 D with the die-hard OM616 engine rated at 79hp instead of a brand-new Prius.

And while you would need a computer to be hooked up to the Prius, I could fix anything in the old Mercedes just with manual tools.

Sure there are other old beaters that could be compared to the Prius more closely than the MB 180 D, either gassers like the Metro or small Diesels like an early Rabbit. Even a current Golf TDI could be compared to the Prius if you would rather want to compare brand-new rides, and we might not forget that it still has engine options more efficient than the U.S.-spec 2.0L in overseas markets.