

Prius v

Prius Plug-in Hybrid
Toyota's newest hybrids get priced






Comments     Threshold


By EricMartello on 9/20/2011 12:28:28 AM , Rating: 2
Not really but there are other ways to produce energy and coal can be made cleaner. If you don't mind the additional costs.

If the majority of the world's electric power was coming from modern nuclear power plants, EVs and plug-in hybrids would actually be worth considering if the goal is to reduce fossil fuel dependence...but due to the general "fear" of nuclear power, most electricity comes from coal-fired plants. Yes, there are ways to burn coal more cleanly than the old days, but retrofitting old, dirty plants isn't high on the priority list.

You realize even with all the emission control devices and restrictions on sulfur in the base fuel for our cars now there is still a smog problem. In general it is easier to contol the polution of a few highly efficient generators than it is to control the output of millions of vehicles which may get little or no maintence.

Smog as a result of vehicle emissions has largely been eliminated due to the catalytic converter...and industrial emissions are already 'regulated', yet they still contribute to the majority of the pollutants in the air today. Did you stop to think about the costs involved with scrubbing the emissions of a power plant that runs 24/7/365 vs a car that drives 12K-15K miles per year?

While I prefer bio-diesel over dino-diesel for emissions reasons I still lump it in the same category as corn-ethanol. (Sounds good when you are using a waste stream for you stock but far from a solution for the whole fleet.)

The alternative "bio" fuels did not improve on emissions; they were primarily concocted as an alternate source. Bio-diesel is not in the same category as corn-ethanol because bio-diesel can be produced from bio-WASTE material whereas corn-ethanol takes away from a resource we already depend on - corn and corn-based products.

