A saloon (sedan) car or even an 4x4 that is fully occupied may be responsible for less greenhouse gas per kilometer travelled per person than a suburban train that is a quarter full, the researchers calculate.
Airfoilsguy wrote:Agree, the more times the end product is separated from work being done to provide the power, the less efficient.
For example efficiency and power are lost at each step of the below
Normal car
Gas >> combustion >> pistons moved >> transmissions spins >> wheels rotate = car moves
Electric car
Natural gas >> Combustion >> turbine spins >> generator spins >> Electricity transformed to power lines >> electricity transformed to sub station >> Electricity to transformer outside house >> Electricity to car batteries >> Electricity from car batteries to electric car motor >> wheels rotate >> car moves
Now which do you think is more efficient??
AndesSMF wrote:This is not a thread about whether GW is real or not, but the fact that many other factors about being 'green' are usually not taken into account.
From the story:A saloon (sedan) car or even an 4x4 that is fully occupied may be responsible for less greenhouse gas per kilometer travelled per person than a suburban train that is a quarter full, the researchers calculate.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090608/sc ... nlifestyle
I have stated it before and will say it again.
To me, anything that has a battery in it, is simply NOT GREEN.
Discuss.
LOT 737-300 wrote:What about compressed air powered cars?
LOT 737-300 wrote:Though they are working on hydrogen cells, which are supposed to be much more cleaner than the tradition battery.
LOT 737-300 wrote:Though they are working on hydrogen cells, which are supposed to be much more cleaner than the tradition battery.