Prius worse than Hummer for the environment?

http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_of_science/case_studies/hummer_vs_prius.pdf

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The Audi A8 is better for the environment than the prius, it does 45mpg and has a W12 engine... and even though that says nothing, its still an Audi, I like Audis...hence Audis are great, if you don't agree go fuck yourself, because I know god drives an Audi, he told me so himself, just after he was through with telling bush to attack the evil-doing muslims.

But yeh... Audi....

There is also a project elf car by renault that does 150mpg and has a top speed of 145mph. It's not for sale as you can imagine...but... sometime sooon......


Hummer....

the H1 is actually more efficient than the new H2 which has an engine from a ford pickup, and has an average efficiency of 1mpg according to it's onboard meter; when you accelerate, decelerate, turn, park, travel at constant speed. It does 2mpg when you reverse....who thought of putting a meter in it to tell you that, I don't know.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This whole idea of cars that get better milage because of the motors or engines they use is a mute point to me. We should be changing the infrastructure over to hydrogen. Instead we keep batteling ourselves with crap like this, fuel milage and costs. By converting to hydrogen we won't worry about pollution at all therefore the entire planet wil be better off. True the costs may be a little high at first but they should come down. Hydrogen can be made using nuclear reactors. Water is the element that is used to attaing hydrogen. We won't run out of water because once you burn hydrogen you get water! A very recycleable fuel to use.

Now everyone stop bickering and letting the oil companies ruin your lives, get out there and promote hydrogen.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hydrogen is an energy carrier not an energy source. It takes energy to make hydrogen, just as it takes energy to charge batteries. Something has to provide that energy. Coal power plants for instance. And transferring energy from one state to another costs efficiency losses. The longer the chain, the worse. Nice if fuel cell technology has efficiency rates of what? 80-90% dunno. But that doesn't help if the production of hydrogen has efficiency rates of a few percent.

 

lol

 

Then there's no need for the intermediate step of making hydrogen, we already have a distribution system for electricity.

 

We need hydrogen to fuel cars, use to fuel tractors, tanks, lawnmowers and on and on. They don't use electricity.

 

Because you can't put nuclear energy into a cars gas tank now can you?

 

never mind hydrogen ,just build these
www.theaircar.com

 

The report is incorrect. The unit of energy is "Joules", not "Dollars".

 

Hydrogen is the best alternative, recycleable , pollution free fuel that humanity can make at this time.

 

You can power a car with it. Like hydrogen powered cars there aren't very many, though.

There are a lot of ideas for making nuclear energy portable.

Converting to hydrogen would make you lose about 40% of the energy (number off the top of my head from a hydrogen battery).

Hydrogen would be nice but we don't have a supply of h2 around and to make it costs more energy than it gives out.