VW on the ropes again

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
What do you actually imagine batteries are "magically transformed" into being? They also are mined, transported, extracted and all the other bits you mention above. If you want to try to say something, compare apples with apples.

Battery production is very environmentally damaging. .
Did I suggest otherwise? I just pointed out they're not worse than oil production, and the impact is mitigated in the long term by being recyclable.

The very vast bulk of the energy consumed by a vehicle in its use - the production component is relativly minor. A one off battery hit vs a lifetime of oil consumption is a clear improvement.
 

scblack

Leucocholic
Citing a combined cycle hides the advantage in stop start traffic, and the disadvantage in sustained highway use.

I'd interested in comparing particulates, NOx and CO emissions though. In city and highway cycles.
The combined cycle more closely reflects "real world" usage. People in the real world drive both in the city and on rural roads. You can't just poke your hand up for one cycle and pretend you have a better result.

Not around those of us who live in the real world. You know, who drive to places and stuff.

If you were truly concerned about the environmental impact in city environments, you should be riding a bus, or on the train. Not polluting our air, with another car.
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
No. It is rare that a consumers driving patterns will reflect the test cycle for combined. If your own milage is predominantly urban use or highway use, then the combined cycle will be meaningless. It is only there as a very simplified point of comparison for consumers.

As I've said, hybrids do best in stop start conditions and diesels in sustained long distance (economy iwse at least - the whole issue of this thread is health damaging air quality emissions, where a diesel will ALWAYS perform much worse than a hybrid and is not reflected in your figures) - so if you live in a city and rarely go to the country you will have an economy advanatgae in a hybrid.
 
Last edited:

scblack

Leucocholic
The very vast bulk of the energy consumed by a vehicle in its use - the production component is relativly minor.
So, seeing you know this, how about you give us some numbers.

How much energy is consumed in the production of a hybrid vehicle? Including:
  • exploration
  • mining
  • vehicle testing
  • raw materials transport
  • energy
  • battery production
  • tyre production
  • aluminium smelting and subsequent production.

You are telling us its minor - what are the numbers?

A one off battery hit vs a lifetime of oil consumption is a clear improvement.
I just showed you that a hybrid SUV has WORSE fuel consumption than my diesel SUV. Then you add the battery production on top of that. Making it much worse again.

How do you possibly come out thinking that is a good thing? Or is it head in sand again?
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
So, seeing you know this, how about you give us some numbers.

How much energy is consumed in the production of a hybrid vehicle? Including:
  • exploration
  • mining
  • vehicle testing
  • raw materials transport
  • energy
  • battery production
  • tyre production
  • aluminium smelting and subsequent production.

You are telling us its minor - what are the numbers?

I just showed you that a hybrid SUV has WORSE fuel consumption than my diesel SUV. Then you add the battery production on top of that. Making it much worse again.

How do you possibly come out thinking that is a good thing? Or is it head in sand again?
No, just that its not significantly worse that an ICE car, which also has all of those things attributed to its manufactuer.

The risk of a major pollution event like the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico is considerably less when drilling for battery packs and wind farms...

And no, as I tried to explain you did not show your diesel has better fuel consumption.
 
Last edited:

scblack

Leucocholic
And no, as I tried to explain you did not show your diesel has better fuel consumption.
Head in sand again.

IF you choose to pretend you only ever drive in stop start traffic then "maybe" fuel economy is better for a hybrid. Due to the fact it uses solely battery power for some slow driving - not as you seem to believe the regenerative braking factor.

I live in Sydney - the most densely populated city in Australia. In my "real world" driving to work etc a very large percentage of that is on motorways. So for my real world driving the economy of a diesel far outstrips a hybrid in a very large percentage of my driving. So - YES - for people like me in Sydney a diesel will have better fuel consumption. Thus I have shown diesel fuel consumption is often and for many people much better.
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
I'm starting to think you're not being ironic with the andrew bolt reference in your signature...
 

scblack

Leucocholic
Has the diesel vs. hybrid argument exhausted you? If you can come up with more facts I'm happy to listen. I am quite comfortable with my facts. Statements like "A one off battery hit vs a lifetime of oil consumption is a clear improvement" are just hollow platitudes unless you can give us quantifiable numbers. And those facts are sadly lacking from your end.

I'm starting to think you're not being ironic with the andrew bolt reference in your signature...
Its good bait to the lefties....
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
You ignored the facts I did provide, or failed to grasp their meaning. No point progressing the argument if it falls at the first hurdle...

Plus you like "baiting lefties" - I have been down this road before with trolls of your ilk, and have found it to be dull and predictable.
 

scblack

Leucocholic
Plus you like "baiting lefties" - I have been down this road before with trolls of your ilk, and have found it to be dull and predictable.
Yep, when we expect facts to back up the hollow platitudes, it does get hard for you to continue.
 

MARKL

Eats Squid
Transmission is the biggest difference, CVT or manual? The DS vs DL is insignificant - 0.1 from memory but the DS is a closer match to the Lexus, though still not as luxurious.
 

scblack

Leucocholic
Transmission is the biggest difference, CVT or manual? The DS vs DL is insignificant - 0.1 from memory but the DS is a closer match to the Lexus, though still not as luxurious.
CVT, the numbers I had come from Lexus website.

Here's a review of the Lexus, in real world driving they only achieved 8.1l/100km:

http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews/lexus-rx-450h-review-10781

It always depends on location and driving style but I have had mine down to using 4.7l/100km in a decent drive. Lifetime average of mine so far is 6.9 but that includes towing a 1,700kg Jayco Swan Outback camper trailer for several thousand kilometres.
 

MARKL

Eats Squid
CVT, the numbers I had come from Lexus website.

Here's a review of the Lexus, in real world driving they only achieved 8.1l/100km:

http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews/lexus-rx-450h-review-10781

It always depends on location and driving style but I have had mine down to using 4.7l/100km in a decent drive. Lifetime average of mine so far is 6.9 but that includes towing a 1,700kg Jayco Swan Outback camper trailer for several thousand kilometres.
Agreed, driving style and conditions make a bigger difference. This really isn't my argument, I have a V8 in the shed that won't get near either of those numbers, it's just that you were asking Haakon to come up with 'facts' when your own (or Lexus's) were not perfect either.
 

Ivan

Eats Squid
scBlack,

The Lexus has double the power of the forester, and weighs >35% more. Even just the electric motor in the Lexus has more power than the forester Diesel engine. Of course fuel consumption is going to be higher.
 
Last edited:
Top