Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Seoulio]

[Senior]

[Seoulio]

[Senior]

[Senior]

[Senior]

[Seoulio]

oh my god, okay back to the original agreement, stop responding to my posts,

If you were even slightly educated on this You'd know that from the manufacturers standpoint theres no real benefit, it costs the same to make as a regular car, and it requires virtually no maintenance. MY argument is that the car companies would lose money in the long run, hmmmmm wonder why they killed it eh?

As for government forcing, it IS, and SHOULD be done all the time. OR are you suggesting that most companies voluntarilly pay lots of money to make sure their businesses are cleaner and better for the environment without such restrictions.

Saying "hey you MUST make some cars that don't pollute, or you are free NOT To sell in California" is awesome.

As for the battery being owned by Texaco, again, please try watching the film, it interviews the blooody inventor of the thing.

Ironically we only have hybrid cars now because of American car makers stupidity. In response to the people who were saying we want the electric car, they came up with the idea of a hybrid, and then KILLED that program too. The Japanese not wanting to fall behind in the hybrid market ( not realizing the american program was effectively dead, or didn't believe it) sent out the Prius and other hybrid cars.

Anyway, that's my response, I shouldnt have made one to you at all

I do not want to be called a liar ( making stuff up) when I am not.

I have asked politely, I don't want this to turn into another pointless rah rah capitalism and government is unfair to business rant from you while I pointlessly argue against you.

[sheriffadam]

[Seoulio]

[atomicdeathmonkey]

The environmental cost of manufacturing a car like the toyota prius exceeds that of a Hummer over it's lifetime, have a read of this - it's all true btw !

http://www.impactlab.com/2007/03/14/prius-outdoes-hummer-in-environmental-damage/

The petrol engine in the prius too needs as much maintenance as that of a normal car and it is notably less efficient than that in other basis models, add to this that any electric car will have tyres, uj's, lights, electrical systems, oil based plastics, metal and safety systems and the only environmental gain is based on the manufacture of the engine and tranny. These two incidentally are less costly in environmental terms than mining and processing/transport for nickel/lithium based cells and less costly on average to maintain unless you suffer terminal engine damage every 30k miles.

Expect consumables like tyres and brakes to increase in use and complexity too because unlike a normal car you'll have no engine/driveline braking with an electric either.

The Prius is a marketing ploy to sell Environmentalism to those with too much money and not enough brainpower to work out their own impact on the environment.

Incidentally the cost saving in fuel when taken with the extra cost over the nearest non-hybrid rival means it actually costs you more over 60 months than a normal car to own/run. 5 years for it to benefit you economically !

The absolute best thing you can do for the environment is to drive your old car into the ground, the environmental cost of building new car exceeds whatever benefits in emissions it offered over your existing one.

As for car companies not making their cars more efficient that's bull too - check out this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Volkswagen_Group_petrol_engines

and specifically the 1.4 R4 16v TSI/TFSI 90-133kW model. It is basically the smart use of turbo and superchargers for economy and power together in a small litre engine - fascinating technology and a move in the right direction. On cars being sold since 2008 methinks !

Electric cars are not viable as full on transportation for that job i.e. a serious alternative to petrol/diesel we have hydrogen. Let alone in europe where distances travelled would be less than that of bigger countries like America. It's not a viable replacement - never was.

The big thing with electric cars is that the electricity is only as friendly as how it's generated i.e. unless it's tidal, solar or wind driven it's not particularly friendly.

Maybe the electric car was killed off - and probably at the time for bad reason - hydrogen is truly the way forward !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_FCX_Clarity

it still costs more than a normal car to build, and more than that of the other hybrid electrics but the technology will eventually be commercially scalable and with 5 min refueling and more realistic mileage ability it will pee all over electric cars for people who actually need a car vs those who could make do with public transport.

edit: before anyone decides to question my learning on the subject I studied 4 years of Environmental management and a lot of what's in this thread sensationalized Hollywood crap to sell a movie and isn't cognizant of the bigger picture in energy source development

[Captain Corea]

[atomicdeathmonkey]

sorry not merican - tires

if it's a question as to why it uses more - it's the instant torque an electric turbine gives - leaves more rubber down

[Underwaterbob]

In a perhaps not so objective study I heard about a while back it was said that had cars progressed as quickly as computers and electronics in general, we'd all be driving Rolls Royce quality vehicles that cost about $2000 a pop.

How much better is a modern Hummer than say a 1950s landrover? Now how about a modern computer compared to a 1950s "computer"?

Obviously the two industries aren't entirely comparable, but shouldn't there have been at least a little more progress than mildly better gas mileage, power windows and obnoxious 700Watt stereos in the last 60 years?

[Seoulio]

[Senior]

Did you notice the part where he mentioned that he actually has some credentials in this area? What are your credentials? You watched a movie?