View Single Post
Old Sep 12th, 2007, 20:41   #7
RoyMacDonald
VOC Member
 
RoyMacDonald's Avatar
 

Last Online: Feb 1st, 2023 11:27
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rye, East Sussex
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viper_7 View Post
167g CO/KM ?! not exactly very clean!

Zero emissions when using the batteries - ermmm exactly how did the power get in the batteries and where did said power come from, and in the conversion from electrical to chemical energy you've lost about 40% of the power. Yes very efficient indeed - not!

The best systems are those than charge the batteries when braking, this should be the only method of charging them and only that way do you save energy and reduce emissions.

sorry, but not falling for these zero emission vehicles - at the exhaust pipe yes, but your just moving the emissions else where. Yes there's wind farms, but to create these uses more energy then they can actually produce in their lifetime.
Welcome to the Nuclear age - the only way to produce the power "cleanly"
until something goes wrong and we all die!

think it's time to walk....!


Vipes
I think the repayment time on a wind generator is a about 3 years for one for my house, why are the farms so different? There's solar and wave as well.

I'm puzzled by the quoted emissions as well. 124mpg doesn't equate to those emissions. I was wondering if it was a missprint and should be 67g CO/KM, which would be more in line with the mpg figure.
__________________
1984 245 SE 1986 345 SE Auto
1991 940 TD Auto 2003 XC90 D5 SE AWD Geartronic2002 V70 D5 SE Auto 2014 V40 D2 SE Tiptronic Cross Country 2017 V40 D2 Cross Country Geartronic Pro 2015 XC60 D5 Polestar SE Lux Nav AWD Geartronic
RoyMacDonald is offline   Reply With Quote