Toyota Debuts Plug-In Prius Hybrid
Toyota has long been in talks regarding debuting a plug-in version for the Prius that would allow the driver to plug the car in
at home and charge the batteries allowing the car to drive for at least a short distance on battery power alone. And now all that talk is a reality, as Toyota has now officially announced the plug-in Prius and hopes to sell 50,000 of the fuel-efficient vehicles globally once it hits the market.
There are several hybrids to choose from. That being said, the Toyota Prius hybrid has been the most popular hybrid model on the market for quite some time now. The main reasons it is the most popular hybrid are simple; it was one of the first available, and the price is not to out of reach for individuals who really want to save on gas.
There are a couple of differences with the new Toyota Prius hybrids that make it much better than the older hybrid models. Of these differences, the most useful one is the difference in batteries. The Prius hybrids that are on the market today have used NiMh battery packs. Compared to the newer battery technology the NiMH battery doesn’t have the range lithium-ion batteries offer. The new Prius will now use NiMH batteries. The new cells will give the plug-in Prius a driving range on the battery only of 14.3 miles at 53 mph.
Once those batteries run out of power the traditional hybrid system kicks in to propel the vehicle. The best thing about the battery pack in the Prius plug-in is that Toyota claims the packs can be charged fully in only an hour on a standard AC outlet.
That means no expensive charger or associated costs. The car is far from performance oriented with a 0-60 mph time said to be 10.7-seconds and a top speed of 112 mph. The new plug-in tech and battery packs add 110 pounds to the old vehicle weight. Sales of the plug-in Prius will start early in 2012. There is no pricing information offered at this time.
Some information gathered via Daily Tech.
For more information regarding the new Prius hybrid please visit the Toyota Prius Hybrid Website.
Water As Fuel for My Car?
For more than a century, we have relied on oil to fuel our cars. But did you know that the world’s oil is close to drying up because it is a nonrenewable resource? While that may not happen tomorrow or next year, we are getting closer because of the sheer demand for oil in the world market. Why wait for that day when we can rely on a green energy source like water to power our cars.
Water can power a car? If you think that’s impossible think again. The technology actually already exists but it is not being made on a commercial scale.
The German automobile maker BMW has produced the world’s first ever hydrogen powered car. While only 100 of these units were produced, you can already imagine if more of these vehicles are on the road.
The initial model – which was named the BMW Hydrogen 7, uses the body of the 760i model. Once you pop the hood, you will notice that the engine is different since it uses gas and hydrogen. What does this mean? This just means we have not yet totally abandoned are dependence on gas. Given more time and money, the current 4.7 miles per gallon it can travel using water alone could hit double digits in the future.
The biggest challenge to using water as a green energy source as opposed to oil in vehicles is the vehicle engine. While there are cars around like the Prius – which runs on electricity and gas thanks to fuel cell technology, the hydrogen combustion is less than 10 years old, so you could say we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg.
To prevent the water from evaporating, it has to be stored in a large, 30-gallon, bi-layered and highly insulated tank so the water does not evaporate into compressed gas. Another built in safety mechanism is the valves, which are designed to open should the pressure within the tank exceed 5 bars.
With the success of the BMW H7, the company came out with a new car that is also partly powered by water known as the H2R. While we cannot yet put our garden hose into the fuselage to fill it up, this vehicle does use liquid nitrogen as a fuel.
Tests on this vehicle have shown it can achieve 285hp and reach a top cruising speed of 185.5 miles per hour. It can also accelerate from 0 to 60 miles per hour under 6 seconds. These are phenomenal numbers for a car that is partially running on water.
So why should we use water as a fuel for our automobiles? Because hydrogen combustion is clean and does not emit harmful gases into the atmosphere, which is unlike cars that run on petrol or diesel that emit carbon monoxide. Studies have shown that it also weighs less than hydrocarbon-based fuels and burns faster than conventional gasoline.
So when can you expect to buy a car that uses water as a green energy source? Hopefully in the next 10 to 20 years. It is really up to the automakers. All we can do is wait until a better and clear car hits the dealership.
Right now, the best option we have available are electric cars. Since its introduction in 1999, more and more people are using electric cars because they don’t want to spend anymore for gasoline. With gas prices continuing to fluctuate wildly, consumers are beginning to look more and more at alternatives.
If water as a green energy source can be used to power a car, why won’t the government and auto makers start to make this function more readily available? Only time will tell.
The Main Benefits of Green Energy Sources
For a very long time, we have relied on fossil fuels. It provides heat to our homes, gas for our cars and electricity. Since we are now using it more than ever, there is a consequence. We are depleting our resources and slowly killing our planet. Fortunately, we can change our ways and then shift our attention to green energy sources.
But why green energy sources? There are a number of advantages to using green energy sources, which we will never be able to get if we don’t change our ways. Some will argue that the problem with green energy is that it is sometimes difficult to generate the power we need. While that may be true, that is why there are other green energy sources available and we just need to know which ones are viable given the geographic location.
Various green energy sources such as solar, wind, wave, hydropower and geothermal do not produce anything harmful, and in turn do not have a negative effect on the environment. This is exactly the type of energy we need because we can’t continue to operate solely on coal and nuclear power plants.
Coal releases carbon dioxide into the air. On its own, it may not cause that much damage, but there are currently 50,000 coal plants around the world and that number is expected to grow in the next few years.
Nuclear plants may not release anything harmful into the air. The main issue here is how to dispose of the spend rods. What if another nuclear accident should occur? We remember Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. We have probably learned better ways to prevent another incident like those from happening. Through the years, a few minor accidents have occurred and although the leak was contained, just imagine if it wasn’t?
Green energy sources may not be maintenance free, but at least it does not require that much to maintain them compared to conventional means. In the end, we save money because such facilities don’t cost that much to operate.
Another advantage of using green energy sources is that we will never run out of them. For centuries, we have tried to come up with techniques to harnessing the suns rays and harnessing the power of the wind. Why? Because we want to turn this into renewable energy that will always be there. This will help decrease our dependence on oil, which is a nonrenewable resource.
If you think about it, many of us have taken these green energy sources for granted. If we do the right thing now, future generations will not have to face the mess that we could have handled on our own years before.
In short, the power is in our hands. We have the technology and we know what to do with it. The only thing we need to do is to put our money where our mouth is. This may be easier said than done however, because despite the number of conferences on global warming and climate change, little has happened.
It is easy to talk about how concerned we are about the environment, but you have to ask yourself; when will more solar panels or wind turbines will be erected? When will the number of coal or nuclear power plants be reduced?
Green energy sources are the solution to the environmental, political and social problems of this lifetime. By spending more on these technologies, no country will have to depend on another for their power needs because they are self dependent and free.
The Science of Climate Change
For detailed disscussion on the science of climate change, check out the science blog Atoms to Zebras
Not only will you learn a lot about the science of climate change, you can read about present-day Stone Age tribes untouched by modern civilization, why drinking moderate amounts of wine may be good for your health, and other wonders of the pale blue dot called Earth.
——
Posted by Tim Roth, author of the political blog Think Anew and Act Anew
Green Economic Stimulus
In most of my articles for this blog, I’ve focused on the environmental and geopolitical reasons why we need a green revolution. One aspect that I have yet to mention is the enormous economic benefit that a green revolution will fuel. Ironically, many critics of green policy proposals claim these policies will stifle the economy when actually such measures will provide much needed economic stimulus.
The Apollo Alliance (named in the spirit of President John F. Kennedy’s ambitious goal of the Apollo manned missions to the moon) is a group that put together a $300 billion policy proposal for another moon-shot: a green America.
According to studies by the non-partisan Perryman Group, the Apollo Alliance’s ambitious and very achievable plan would have the following benefits:
1. Add more than 3.3 million jobs to the economy
——
Posted by Tim Roth, author of the political blog Think Anew and Act Anew
Humans are “very likely” causing global warming
“Friday, 2 February 2007 may go down in history as the day when the question mark was removed from the question of whether climate change has anything to do with human activities” — Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) [1]
In an important report published yesterday in Paris, France the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) declared that human are “very likely” a cause of global warming. While this isn’t exactly breaking news, what is significant is that in a 2001 report the IPCC said humans are “likely” a cause of global warming. In more concsete terms, the IPCC definition for likely is a 66-90% probability. This means the probabilty of a human effect is now greater than 90%. [2]
Another interesting paragraph of the IPCC Executive Summary read the following:
“The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past fifty years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that it is not due to known natural causes alone.” [3]
Other highlights from the IPCC report:
1. By the end of the century, temperatures will probably rise 1.8-4C (3.2-7.2F) and could possible rise between 1.1-6.4C (2-11.5F)
2. Sea level likely to go up by 28-43 cm (11-16 inches)
3. By the second half of the century, Arctic sea ice will disappear entirely during the summer months.
4. Eleven of the last 12 years are some of the warmest on record
5. Changes in weather patterns will lead to longer and more intense droughts, heatwaves, and tropical storms.
The IPCC will release a full report later this year and will release reports on how to adapt to climate change and suggestions towards reducing greenhouse gases. Stay tuned for more updates.
——
Posted by Tim Roth, author of the political blog Think Anew and Act Anew
Sources:
1. “Analysis: Through the climate window” by Richard Black, BBC News
2. “Humans blamed for climate change” by Richard Black, BBC News
3. IPCC report (PDF), released on February 2, 2007
The first 100 hours
As Speaker of House Nancy Pelosi promised, the new Democratic House voted Thursday to reverse billions of dollars in subsidies to oil companies. This move was part of the “first 100 hours” agenda to kick off the 110th Congress in the House of Representatives. While the bill passed by a vote of 264-163, the bill has two major hurdles: a narrow Democratic majority in the Senate and possibly the veto pen of President Bush.
Obviously this kind of legislation has a huge impact for the alternative energy sector, so stay tuned for further legislative updates.
——
Posted by Tim Roth, author of the political blog Think Anew and Act Anew
Source:
Source
Rhetoric up, action down
“The gap between what the science tells us is necessary and what the politics is delivering is still significant” – David Milibrand, Environment Secretary of Britain
Check out this summary of the climate and alternative fuel debate in 2006 in a BBC article by Richard Black called “Climate 2006: Rhetoric up, action down”
——
Posted by Tim Roth, author of the political blog Think Anew and Act Anew
Drilling for natural talent and energy
As discussed before in this blog, alternative energy is not only an economic and environmental issue. Ending our dependence on foreign oil is the best thing we can do for the citizens of oil-rich countries who are ruled by dictators. Thomas Friedman couldn’t said any better than this:
“As long as the monarchs and dictators who run these oil states can get rich by drilling their natural resources – as opposed to drilling the natural talents and energy of their people – they can stay in office forever. They can use oil money to monopolize all the instruments of power – army, police, and intelligence – and never have to introduce real transparency or power sharing. All they have to do is capture and hold the oil tap. They never have to tax their people, so the relationship between ruler and ruled is highly distorted. Without taxation, there is no representation.” – Thomas Friedman from The World is Flat
——
Posted by Tim Roth, author of the political blog Think Anew and Act Anew
Great Offshore Wind Farm Images
I recently found some great images of offshore wind farms. Although when I look out at the ocean around me here on the island of Oahu I enjoy seeing nothing. Just endless water (except for the occasional island depending on where you are and what direction you’re looking.)
But the idea of utilizing the vast openness of the large bodies of water just makes great sense! We as a world need to start looking into alternative energy options and having offshore wind farms is a giant step in the right direction.
You can see tons more of these pictures at Thrilling Wonder’s Picture Post. There’s lots of them there so be sure to check it out.