this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
123 points (96.2% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

7096 readers
452 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] magiccupcake@lemmy.world 27 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Honestly plug in hybrids are the worst of both worlds.

There was a study recently from Europe that found the vast majority of people with plug in hybrids hardly every plugged them in, and drove them like normal cars. That defeats the entire point of a plug in hybrid, and now you are carrying a heavy battery everywhere that you are not fully using. Which makes the car less efficient than a normal hybrid!

[–] Delta_V@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, it depends on the user.

I had an alcoholic neighbor with learning disabilities who had a PHEV minivan purchased for them, and they only kept the battery charged for the first few months of ownership. After that, they seemed to lose interest in plugging it in when they got home.

On the other hand, a friend of the family owns a PHEV sedan they keep charged religiously, and they need to buy fuel stabilizer because they almost never use any gas.

[–] Swarfega@lemm.ee 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

An alcoholic neighbour and someone purchased a car for them?

[–] Delta_V@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

don't get me started

[–] tankplanker@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

The second one sounds an awful lot like they would be better off with a pure ev rather than carrying around a complete ice setip plus tank of fuel.

It's why plug ins rarely work for normal use, you're either carrying around a heavy battery pack and motor you aren't using or the ice and fuel you aren't using.

Harry Medcalf loved his Range Rover PHEV because they only ever used it for short journeys, almost of all of which were on electric. It's such a face palm moment making an already massively heavy car even heavier when a small EV with a small battery like a Leaf or even a small ICE would be far cheaper to buy and run, while fitting all of their actual requirements.

I get why people like them, as they let you dip your toe into evs but they just don't offer the benefits that a straight ice or straight ev would.

I imagine that when the concept was first dreamt up they were thinking that cities would charge you if you entered using ICE, so the battery is for then and you get to the city using ICE savingyour battery. But that's not happened.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Mass is mass. It has momentum. So a large battery can help you store energy as momentum just by it being heavy.

[–] tankplanker@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, hmm, at some point you have to stop, thats where the momentum or at least some of it is returned to the battety. The return from regen is less than the energy spent to accelerate and overcome friction, in the first place, so you get significant losses of around 20% or more, so not really...

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Believe me when I say that there are smart people working out the details to minimize losses. Like. Arguing here doesn't make the cars more or less efficient. It's a thing you can buy already and it's appeal is that it saves fuel. So like unless it were to not actually save fuel, I would say that someone actually did their homework and figured out how to deal with any of theoretical problems such as this one.

[–] tankplanker@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

What you are describing, for it to be of actual benefit, is at its minimum a perpetual motion device, as that's what a zero loss system would be. Only people working on that also sell snake oil.

Anything less than 100% is a loss, which is going to be larger the heavier the car is due to friction (aero, drive train, and rolling) and extra energy to accelerate, that's basic physics.

Very large batteries, 100kwh or over, solve what should be a medium term problem, they are an expensive dead end as they are often around half the cost of the car's production cost and add . What I really don't like is stupidly large bricks of cars that struggle to even do 3 miles per kwh and then use a massive battery to get around their comically small range, which further lowers their efficency.

[–] fuzzzerd@programming.dev 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You can't fix stupid. You can argue plugin hybrids are bad on the pragmatic argument that people don't charge them and that's fair, but to say they are the worst is just wrong. The have the potential to be the best.

[–] magiccupcake@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Well let me clarify a bit why I think they are the worst.

They have the full complexity an an ICE car, with the added difficulties that arise in a full EV

You need to build and design a car that has all of the downsides of ICE cars. Complicated engine, emissions management, fuel, air intakes.

With a lot of the downsides of an ev. Large heavy, expensive batteries.

Meanwhile you get limited upsides. Evs get lower maintenance and transport costs and ICE cars get range.

Plug in hybrids will have harder maintenance than either, while not getting the fully reduced transport costs as it's not as efficient as a full ev.

Here's where traditional hybrids win out, their battery can be really small, correspondingly cheap and more efficient.

Lugging all that extra weight around decreases the efficiency of the vehicle, where for full ev that matters a lot.

When running in full gas mode your lugging around a heavy battery for nothing, and in a full ev mode your lugging around a heavy engine for nothing.

The High-medium range of full gas would be better served by a traditional hybrid, and the low-medium range would be better served for full evs.

I'm sure there is a narrow window for plug in hybrids, but again that is going to be rare and shrinking as evs get better.

While you can't fix stupid, we do have to think about how a product actually gets used vs it's design.

If nobody is plugging their plug in hybrid, then maybe the manufacturer should remind them, even if its only outlet level power.

To me it is also a symbol of overconsumption. Buying a vehicle that will cover 100% of your use cases vs buying for 99% and renting a more suitable option for that 1%.

I do think this argument for me would change if manufacturers took a different approach. If they took something like a traditional hybrid, like a Ford fusion, and stuck a modern battery in and added a simple plug would be great. Then increase the efficiency a bit and maybe someone could get 10 miles of battery from a regular outlet.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I get a lot of engineers at my job who don't understand the concept but they react to it in extreme ways. Like when we talk about plasma, there would always be someone bringing up how you can't use certain materials near plasma or near heat or in vacuum. Yet some how the machines we make work and you even have on your hands a little TV screen powered by all sort of circuitry that shouldn't exist because x or y factor that some guy always thought wouldn't work because they were not in the team that actually made the thing work. But do keep telling us how plug-in hybrids don't work. I only spent a decade in that industry actually developing motors, gear drives battery packs etc, and just so that some guy over here who maybe had one or drove one last week and has some options now controls the conversation. To me. Seeing is believing. I drive a little hybrid, I watch the gauge and it tells me, hey you got 57 mpg! Yey! But what I believe is that I do maybe 14 trips a year to go get gas and it's way cheaper than when we fill up the van. As a user of my Toyota hybrid, that's the bottom line regardless of my engineering degree and years of experience in the matter.

[–] jumjummy@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Not necessarily. In our case, we have a hybrid SUV that we’ve used on several road trips, however most of the driving is within the 40 mile range. At the time, there was no plug in hybrid option, but if there was, it would have been perfect. Battery for most daily driving, but no range anxiety for any road trips.