"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Roger" wrote in message
k...
The message
from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:

But what?


Electric cars from non fossil generated electricity will cut both
carbon
and other emissions?

Yes but switching to diesel saves precious little.

It probably saves about 30%.

It won't save more than about 25% at best.

That depends on what you are comparing..

I get almost double what the wife gets out of her smaller petrol engined
car.

Is it the way she drives?

Mary

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
. net...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...

...

Actually, PV cells can be the whole roof of the car in any climes. But
they don't help very much with heating on a dark winter day in the UK.

They don't help much on an even colder night either.

Nothing to do with temperature ...


No just another barmy idea from someone that "thinks" green.

???

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Rod wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html

But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally
unheated behicle in the winter. Even keeping the screens clear becomes a
bit of a problem.


Electric heaters, plus recirculating the odd few hundred watts that does
come off the battery pack. And maybe the motors. You don't need much more
than a couple of hundred watts to heat a decently insulated car.


Lets think this through..

electric cars are at their best for shortish trips in heavy traffic..

under these conditions they don't generate much heat..

Electric cars don't generate enough heat if they are used in heavy traffic
AFICS.

But you can't see everything, can you?

Q.E.D.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 May 2008 17:54:21 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"T i m" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 27 May 2008 16:37:52 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


Hint: kerbside emissions.

For 2 miles in the city traffic .. LOL!

Get to know how they work. You clearly do not.

Oh look, someone is selling a perpetual motion machine on eBay ..
quick ...

Wonder why they're selling it - guarantee run out or does it go round in
circles ... ?

I think they built several Mary .. ;-)

I see Dribble is selling his Primus on eBay ..

http://tinyurl.com/3tvg54

Seriously though, anything that reduces emissions [1], especially in
built up areas [2] AND does many more mpg than alternatives should be
considered.

Agreed.

However, hybrids are no more than a stop-gap to better technologies,
aren't significantly better mpg than many std vehicles and ONLY offer
their reduced kerbside emissions in stop-start traffic areas (where we
shouldn't be driving in the first place).

Agreed. About our not driving in such conditions.

A decent trip on decent roads (where you can maintain a constant speed
and brake rarely) and it's just an ordinary IC car.

So?

The big problem these days is the volatility of everything. It seems
as soon as you change to a cheaper fuel source or vehicle then someone
moves the goalposts (didn't that happen to LPG recently?).

Oh yes, and there are VERY many very clever people who know everything.
Especially on uk.d-i-y.

And who can afford to keep changing their vehicles every few months
(and what of the environmental cost of all these out_of_fashion
vehicles)?

I'm all for recycling, now where did I put that old chip oil? ;-)

A friend of mine pours (new) vegetable oil which he buys at his supermarket
into his fuel pipe. He says that at 78p (or whatever) per litre it's cheaper
than fuel at the pump and that it works perfectly.

I can't see that because I know how cooking oil oxidises and becomes gummy
when used for cooking. I haven't argued with him.

Mary

Adrian wrote:
The Natural Philosopher gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

about 40kg for enough steel to take the torque and vibration of a big
IC engine, and connect the stresses to the suspension pickup points.

How, exactly, were you planning to have this electric car deal with
suspension loadings and collision impacts?

with a minimal torsion box, of which te major part would probably be
integrated with the battery carrier cell.

Thats for the suspension anyway. you only neeed connect the cell to the
whhels..thats the only bit with any mass apart from the passengers.

As far as the passenger cell goes, I'd probbly take a leaf out of racing
practice, and make a roll /side impact cage and some crumple zones, and
encase that with foam plastic and moulded ppalstic panels, for
lightness.

Fine. So why isn't that being done with a _lighter_ internal combustion
drivetrain?

historical inertia.

Plus the fact that with such an expensive thing as a motor, given that
the cost is pretty much the same for a llttle un as a big un, its easier
to shove a big un in and throw some bent tinplate around it and still
have performance.

below a certain level. weight reduction isn't that mileage saving
anyway..its all aero/size on the motorway.

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:13:07 on Tue,
27 May 2008, The Natural Philosopher remarked:
200 miles is a very large threshold. I'd use 50 miles as where "long
distance" starts.

Well I used 200miles because that is what is currently achievable at
decent performance with LI-Ion batteries.

Which car is that, then?
--
Roland Perry

Try this "home made" car built in 2004..

http://www.speedace.info/lithium_ion_electric_car.htm

http://greenerenergy.eu/cms/index.ph...tpage&Itemid=1

"official testing carried out by AEA Technology" ...

Extra urban cycle: 255 km/156 miles
**Urban cycle: 326 km/ 204 miles**
Urban cycle power consumption: 0.121 kWh/km
Extra urban cycle power consumption: 0.155 kwh/km
Maximum speed measured during tests: 114 kmh/71 mph
Useable energy stored in batteries: 39.6 kWh
Motor: Advanced DC with Regenerative Braking

Roberts wrote:
Electric cars will not cut emissions. When batteries are being charged they
give off an explosive vapour.

LIPOs do not. They are sealed.

This also contains particles of the battery
which is very harmful.

no emmissions from Li-Ion Or nickel cells either.

The green people should look at the complete scene
not just a little part which seems to suit them. Try visiting a place where
they have a fleet of electric vehicles and visit the battery charging shop.

No one has a fleet of LI-ion batteries. Well I do, but they are somewhat
smaller.


If we do go over to electric vehicles a lot of people will get killed or
injured because people don't hear them coming. I know that from working at
Gatwick where they had a large fleet although that was years ago. Do not
forget all the factories that will be needed to make these motive power
batteries and then all the extra power stations and how will they be
powered?

dozens of fork lift trucks are battery powred and dont normally kill
people. Ditto electric trains.

Anyway more peple will be saved because wth less noise around, they will
be able to heare the diesel busses coming ;-)


Also people pushing for hydrogen power should be made to watch the film of
the Hindenburg disaster.

Ohmigawd, a weirdo.

No one is pushing hydrogen power here. Complete dead end.

Mary Fisher wrote:
"dennis@home" wrote in message
...

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Rod wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html
But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally
unheated behicle in the winter. Even keeping the screens clear becomes a
bit of a problem.

Electric heaters, plus recirculating the odd few hundred watts that does
come off the battery pack. And maybe the motors. You don't need much more
than a couple of hundred watts to heat a decently insulated car.

Lets think this through..

electric cars are at their best for shortish trips in heavy traffic..

under these conditions they don't generate much heat..

Electric cars don't generate enough heat if they are used in heavy traffic
AFICS.

But you can't see everything, can you?

Q.E.D.

so, use the heater then.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Domestically its a twelve hour charge overnight on cheap rate. Easy
enough for those with garages and well within domestic supply limits.

That it might be, but I wonder if the local distribution grid could cope if
lots of us pushed up our consumption. It's one thing for the supply to
houses to be rated at 100A but quite another if we all draw 50A. That's
apart from the generation issue.

In article , dennis@home
scribeth thus


"Roberts" wrote in message
...


Also people pushing for hydrogen power should be made to watch the film of
the Hindenburg disaster.

They should explain where the hydrogen is coming from.


Yes not quite the Hydrogen which cased all of that, apparently the
envelope fabric was almost explosive!...
--
Tony Sayer

The Natural Philosopher gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

How, exactly, were you planning to have this electric car deal with
suspension loadings and collision impacts?

with a minimal torsion box, of which te major part would probably be
integrated with the battery carrier cell.

Thats for the suspension anyway. you only neeed connect the cell to
the whhels..thats the only bit with any mass apart from the
passengers.

As far as the passenger cell goes, I'd probbly take a leaf out of
racing practice, and make a roll /side impact cage and some crumple
zones, and encase that with foam plastic and moulded ppalstic panels,
for lightness.

Fine. So why isn't that being done with a _lighter_ internal combustion
drivetrain?

historical inertia.

Plus the fact that with such an expensive thing as a motor, given that
the cost is pretty much the same for a llttle un as a big un, its easier
to shove a big un in and throw some bent tinplate around it and still
have performance.

....is the right answer...

So why is it suddenly going to get 30% market penetration based solely on
a powertrain technology that also requires massive infrastructure
investment?

below a certain level. weight reduction isn't that mileage saving
anyway..its all aero/size on the motorway.

Yes and no.

Many families have two cars these days so if we assume that one of them is a
500 mile range gas guzzler....is there any reason why most of the "second"
cars need have more than 100 mile range? If reliable 100 mile range,
acceptable acceleration and 70mph could be achieved I'd buy one.

"CWatters" wrote in message
et...
Many families have two cars these days so if we assume that one of them is
a 500 mile range gas guzzler....is there any reason why most of the
"second" cars need have more than 100 mile range? If reliable 100 mile
range, acceptable acceleration and 70mph could be achieved I'd buy one.

We got rid of our second car some yers ago, replacing it with a 125cc
scooter. It's fine for local journeys and has at least a 100 mile range. We
don't need 70mph because we don't use it for that sort of journey - why
should we want to?

A high potential speed doesn't necessarily mean a faster journey. A scooter
travelling well within any speed limit will arrive at a destination sooner
than legally driven cars most of the time.

Mary

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

A scooter travelling well within any speed limit will arrive at a
destination sooner than legally driven cars most of the time.

If you live that long. I gave up driving a bike years ago, when just too
many people in cars had tried to kill me.

(And as to speed, my C90 just about managed 60mph when slipstreaming
downhill at exactly the optimum distance behind a juggernaut. It was only
faster than a car when driving around town.)

--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Limited - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor

On Tue, 27 May 2008 14:29:15 +0100, Richard Torrens wrote:

Properly designed, an electric car will have regen braking. This will
recover a significant amount of the potential energy when you go down
hill.

Fine but you need roughly 4MJ of energy to lift a 1 tonne car through 400m
(1300'). Currently this 4 mile/400m section takes about 10mins so you are
looking at 24kWh of motor just to do the vertical lift of the car let
alone deal with the accelaration after sharp 2nd gear bends... And of
course that capacity and more in the battery at the bottom to get you to
the top.

Provided, of course, you don't use the brake pedal!

Having had the brakes fade to more or less nothing going down this hill in
my previous car I don't use the brakes much at all now... They took quite
a while to come back, a good 3 miles and they where ventilated discs at
the front as well.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:41:35 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Fine for your 10 mile each way commute but that would be better served
with decent public transport rather than thousands of single occupancy
cars.

Public transport can not do what a private car can: we may have to go
back to it, but not without a struggle.

It can do the 10 mile each way commute fairly well though and while
people/companies still insist of people doing that to sit in front of
computer screen and occasionaly shuffle a bit of paper it ought to be
done.

And not a cure all for all trips by any stretch of the imagination.

I never said it was. But an awful lot of trips could be "saved" with
decent properly thought out and joined up PT system.

The extra time it takes might be the death of you when you need to get
to A & E.

Nearest proper A&E is the far side of Carlisle, I think Hexham also has an
A&E but not sure of it's hours but both are best part of an hour away by
Ambulance, which one would be travelling in if the injury/illness was that
bad. Mind you the wait for the ambulance as it takes an hour to drive in
to get you doesn't help. Having said that serious cases are shipped out
via Air Ambulance. At least there is a 24/7 Minor Injuries unit at the
cottage hospital that's only 3 miles away and has enough kit to at least
stabilise and keep you alive, though there is no paramedic just the local
GPs and trained nursing staff.

--
Cheers
Dave.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 May 2008 15:56:08 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"T i m" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 May 2008 13:54:34 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


p.s. And Hybrids really aren't in the equation .. 2 mile electric
range and IC powered after that shrug.

Only if you go on long runs. The average town journey has the motor
assisting a lot of the time.

sigh

And the electric motor gets it's
power from (and if you say the
batteries what happens after the two miles)?

You need to understand how they work properly.

Please explain how my statement is incorrect?

No, the ONLY advantage of a Hybrid (over a straight IC car) is that
it can make use of regenerative breaking and only then presumably when
the batteries aren't already fully charged?

Kerbside emissions are virtually eliminated with a Prius.

For two miles, great, after that it's a plain old [1] IC car. What if
you live a few miles out of town (as most people do) drive hard into
town (so drawing on the battery) and were to switch it into electric
only mode when you saw some kerbs (otherwise the IC engine would be
frantically trying to get the battery charged while you were sat in
the traffic and doing zero mpg) it would take you what .. another
500 yards? So by 'virtually' you meant 'in your imagination'?

Again.."Kerbside emissions are virtually eliminated with a Prius." Stop
guessing.

I really have an EV, not just a catalogue. ;-)

I would rather a catalogue than the one you have got.

p.s. I've just had an idea. I could couple my Rover behind the
Electric car, with the Rovers engine stuck on 2000 rpm and with the
alternator hooked up to the Electric cars batteries .. presto .. A
Hybrid!

I do like lateral thinking.

"T i m" wrote in message
...

However, hybrids are no more than
a stop-gap to better technologies,

You got that right. But here fior another 10 years or so, and getting
better.

aren't significantly better mpg
than many std vehicles

They are.

and ONLY offer
their reduced kerbside emissions in
stop-start traffic areas

Where they are designed to excel.

snip drivel

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
. net...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Toby Douglass" wrote
in message om...
wrote:
What they probably mean is that by introducing cleaner diesels (in
the
particulate/smog sense) they have persuaded new buyers to pick a
diesel
50% of the time, but that market is now saturated and if they want to
further reduce their *carbon* emissions they must look elsewhere than
sell people the better-mpg diesels which have been achieving that
goal
so far.

Hasn't diesel caused a huge soot problem? they emit a lot more
particulate matter?


Only the older engines on public transport and lorries.
New cars emit virtually nothing.


But they don't stay new.

But they have to pass the emissions tests or no MOT.
You can't have any smoke on a modern diesel and pass.
I bet your old banger produces more.

Our 'old banger' is serviced and tested. It's the newest car we've ever
had.

How old?
Older cars have to pass less stringent tests.


So saying, I have little faith in the efficiency of emission tests on any
vehicle :-(

We were once stopped by a police spot check. Spouse was worried (he's
terrified of 'authority') and I had to tell him to be quiet or he'd have
been defensive. I smiled nicely and was treated courteously and our
emissions were tested and we were waved on.

Spouse was testy for the rest of the journey.

My attitude was that if there were a problem we should - SHOULD - have it
seen to.

That is my view, if a car will fail an MOT I want to know so it can be fixed
not hidden like some of idiots here would want.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html


hybrid cars are *not* green.. they are an excuse for people to claim
they are green while still burning more fuel than a smaller car does.

That is nonsense. Hint: kerbside emissions.

Hint, they use more fuel per mile, they emit more kerbside emissions.

You are a total idiot.

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Roger" wrote in message
k...
The message
from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:

But what?


Electric cars from non fossil generated electricity will cut both
carbon
and other emissions?

Yes but switching to diesel saves precious little.

It probably saves about 30%.

It won't save more than about 25% at best.

That depends on what you are comparing..

I get almost double what the wife gets out of her smaller petrol engined
car.

Is it the way she drives?

Its easier to drive economically in a diesel.

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
. net...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
. net...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...

...

Actually, PV cells can be the whole roof of the car in any climes. But
they don't help very much with heating on a dark winter day in the UK.

They don't help much on an even colder night either.

Nothing to do with temperature ...


No just another barmy idea from someone that "thinks" green.

???

Mary, just another idiot. They want to bring back 1950s cars.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Roger" wrote in message
k...
The message
from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:

But what?


Electric cars from non fossil generated electricity will cut both
carbon
and other emissions?

Yes but switching to diesel saves precious little.

It probably saves about 30%.

It won't save more than about 25% at best.

That depends on what you are comparing..

I get almost double what the wife gets out of her smaller petrol engined
car.

You made that up.

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"CWatters" wrote in message
et...
Many families have two cars these days so if we assume that one of them
is a 500 mile range gas guzzler....is there any reason why most of the
"second" cars need have more than 100 mile range? If reliable 100 mile
range, acceptable acceleration and 70mph could be achieved I'd buy one.

We got rid of our second car some yers ago, replacing it with a 125cc
scooter. It's fine for local journeys and has at least a 100 mile range.
We don't need 70mph because we don't use it for that sort of journey -
why should we want to?

It probably chucks out so much muck that it makes a diesel bus look clean.
Especially if its a two stroke.
Nobody that uses a scooter or motor bike can claim to be clean.
No cats and burn oil.


A high potential speed doesn't necessarily mean a faster journey. A
scooter travelling well within any speed limit will arrive at a
destination sooner than legally driven cars most of the time.

Not if they obey the rules of the road it won't.


Mary

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html


hybrid cars are *not* green.. they are an excuse for people to claim
they are green while still burning more fuel than a smaller car does.

That is nonsense. Hint: kerbside emissions.

Hint, they use more fuel per mile, they emit more kerbside emissions.

You are a total idiot.

I must be for thinking you might understand something simple. 8-(

dennis@home wrote:


"magwitch" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:



Diesels don't have catalytic converters... petrol engines do and
therefore emit more C02

Mine does.

Mine doesn't.

So buy a new one that doesn't smoke.

But my diesel doesn't 'smoke' and never has.

On 2008-05-28 00:54:42 +0100, said:

On 27 May,
Andy Hall wrote:


I'm pretty happy using my Land Rover..

The only issue is finding garages with high fill rate commercial pumps
so that I can fill it quickly. With 90 litres plus at a time, it
takes a while with ordinary mimsy pumps.

Try filling a petrol one up in winter, 10mpg results in frozen brass monkey's
assets.

This is another reason for the diesel and for using commecial pumps.
Apart from faster delivery, they have the little wire insert on the
pump handle which means that it's not necessary to hold the trigger.

Adrian wrote:
The Natural Philosopher gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

How, exactly, were you planning to have this electric car deal with
suspension loadings and collision impacts?

with a minimal torsion box, of which te major part would probably be
integrated with the battery carrier cell.

Thats for the suspension anyway. you only neeed connect the cell to
the whhels..thats the only bit with any mass apart from the
passengers.

As far as the passenger cell goes, I'd probbly take a leaf out of
racing practice, and make a roll /side impact cage and some crumple
zones, and encase that with foam plastic and moulded ppalstic panels,
for lightness.

Fine. So why isn't that being done with a _lighter_ internal combustion
drivetrain?

historical inertia.

Plus the fact that with such an expensive thing as a motor, given that
the cost is pretty much the same for a llttle un as a big un, its easier
to shove a big un in and throw some bent tinplate around it and still
have performance.

...is the right answer...

So why is it suddenly going to get 30% market penetration based solely on
a powertrain technology that also requires massive infrastructure
investment?

It wont be sudden. Fortunately. Cos the infrastructure isn't all there.

However the demand is almost certainly there. I'd say that 5 years on it
will be around 20-30%, depending on what oil prices do.

ramping up to around 70% plus in ten years.


below a certain level. weight reduction isn't that mileage saving
anyway..its all aero/size on the motorway.

Yes and no.

CWatters wrote:
Many families have two cars these days so if we assume that one of them is a
500 mile range gas guzzler....is there any reason why most of the "second"
cars need have more than 100 mile range? If reliable 100 mile range,
acceptable acceleration and 70mph could be achieved I'd buy one.


Exactly.

Andy Hall wrote:
This is another reason for the diesel and for using commecial pumps.
Apart from faster delivery, they have the little wire insert on the
pump handle which means that it's not necessary to hold the trigger.

I've often thought about putting a little (but sturdy) metal eye-pin on
my keyring, to replace the missing pin during fuelling. Never got a
round tuit, though. American pumps have them, so I don't really
understand why UK ones don't.

Jon
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! To reply in email, replace 'deadspam'
with 'green-lines'.

Adrian wrote:
Toby Douglass gurgled
happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Hasn't diesel caused a huge soot problem? they emit a lot more
particulate matter?

Not these days. Perticulate emissions have been VERY tightly controlled
in the last couple of rounds of Euro emission standards.

Are buses still exempt? I never did understand why public transport
seemed to have the weakest emissions control of all.

Jon
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! To reply in email, replace 'deadspam'
with 'green-lines'.

Roberts wrote:
Also people pushing for hydrogen power should be made to watch the film of
the Hindenburg disaster.

And to understand that the doping on the envelope was the worst culprit,
with the hydrogen providing only a second-stage ignition.

Jon
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! To reply in email, replace 'deadspam'
with 'green-lines'.

tony sayer wrote:
Yes not quite the Hydrogen which cased all of that, apparently the
envelope fabric was almost explosive!...

Well, given that they'd essentially doped it with thermite, and set up
ideal conditions for a static spark to kick it off...seems to me that
they were lucky that lightning didn't do the job for them mid-Atlantic.
As it was, because it ignited near its mooring mast, most of those
on-board did survive, something that's often forgotten.

Jon
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! To reply in email, replace 'deadspam'
with 'green-lines'.

On Wed, 28 May 2008 00:50:32 +0100, wrote:

Having had the brakes fade to more or less nothing going down this hill
in my previous car

Hartside?

Yes.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Wed, 28 May 2008 08:57:01 +0100, Jon Green wrote:

Are buses still exempt? I never did understand why public transport
seemed to have the weakest emissions control of all.

Presumably beacuse the operators boards have friends and/or shareholders
in high places?

I find the hauliers demands yesterday of an "essential user" rebate rather
strange. To me an "essential user" would be the fire, ambulance and police
services and only those hauliers involved in the food and/or fuel supply
chain. Sorry but F.Bloggs Hauliers Ltd taking a pallet of widgets from A
to B is not an "essential user".

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Wed, 28 May 2008 08:55:39 +0100, Jon Green wrote:

I've often thought about putting a little (but sturdy) metal eye-pin on
my keyring, to replace the missing pin during fuelling. Never got a
round tuit, though.

Those particular round tuits are very rare, I've never got one either.

--
Cheers
Dave.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


But they have to pass the emissions tests or no MOT.
You can't have any smoke on a modern diesel and pass.
I bet your old banger produces more.

Our 'old banger' is serviced and tested. It's the newest car we've ever
had.

How old?

No idea. 2001 I think. Age isn't important.

Older cars have to pass less stringent tests.

Oh - so old diesel engines have to pass less stringent tests :-) I rest my
case.


So saying, I have little faith in the efficiency of emission tests on any
vehicle :-(

We were once stopped by a police spot check. Spouse was worried (he's
terrified of 'authority') and I had to tell him to be quiet or he'd have
been defensive. I smiled nicely and was treated courteously and our
emissions were tested and we were waved on.

Spouse was testy for the rest of the journey.

My attitude was that if there were a problem we should - SHOULD - have it
seen to.

That is my view, if a car will fail an MOT I want to know so it can be
fixed not hidden like some of idiots here would want.

Quite.

Mary

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"Roger" wrote in message
k...
The message
from The Natural Philosopher contains these words:

But what?


Electric cars from non fossil generated electricity will cut both
carbon
and other emissions?

Yes but switching to diesel saves precious little.

It probably saves about 30%.

It won't save more than about 25% at best.

That depends on what you are comparing..

I get almost double what the wife gets out of her smaller petrol engined
car.

Is it the way she drives?

Its easier to drive economically in a diesel.

Ours is petrol fuelled, we only have one car now. I get a better mpg under
any conditions than Spouse, I drive as i was taught for maximum economy.

He taught me :-)

Mary

"Jon Green" wrote in message
news
tony sayer wrote:
Yes not quite the Hydrogen which cased all of that, apparently the
envelope fabric was almost explosive!...

Well, given that they'd essentially doped it with thermite, and set up
ideal conditions for a static spark to kick it off...seems to me that they
were lucky that lightning didn't do the job for them mid-Atlantic. As it
was, because it ignited near its mooring mast, most of those on-board did
survive, something that's often forgotten.

Flames go upwards ...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 May 2008 15:56:08 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"T i m" wrote in message
news On Tue, 27 May 2008 13:54:34 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


p.s. And Hybrids really aren't in the equation .. 2 mile electric
range and IC powered after that shrug.

Only if you go on long runs. The average town journey has the motor
assisting a lot of the time.

sigh

And the electric motor gets it's
power from (and if you say the
batteries what happens after the two miles)?

You need to understand how they work properly.

Please explain how my statement is incorrect?

No, the ONLY advantage of a Hybrid (over a straight IC car) is that
it can make use of regenerative breaking and only then presumably when
the batteries aren't already fully charged?

Kerbside emissions are virtually eliminated with a Prius.

For two miles, great, after that it's a plain old [1] IC car. What if
you live a few miles out of town (as most people do) drive hard into
town (so drawing on the battery) and were to switch it into electric
only mode when you saw some kerbs (otherwise the IC engine would be
frantically trying to get the battery charged while you were sat in
the traffic and doing zero mpg) it would take you what .. another
500 yards? So by 'virtually' you meant 'in your imagination'?

Again.."Kerbside emissions are virtually eliminated with a Prius." Stop
guessing.

I really have an EV, not just a catalogue. ;-)

I would rather a catalogue than the one you have got.

p.s. I've just had an idea. I could couple my Rover behind the
Electric car, with the Rovers engine stuck on 2000 rpm and with the
alternator hooked up to the Electric cars batteries .. presto .. A
Hybrid!

I do like lateral thinking.

He said he could couple in-line, not laterally!