| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Nerf Smurf
Mad Scientist
USA
390 Posts |
 Posted - Sep 20 2004 : 5:25:58 PM
|
Anyone know a project that i can do research on that could help the world out?
|
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6718 Posts |
Posted - Sep 21 2004 : 09:11:43 AM
|
Electric vehicles.
|
 |
|
|
n/a
DELETED (Inactive)
5 Posts |
Posted - Sep 22 2004 : 12:00:25 PM
|
I've never really understood the great benefit of electric vehicles - you've still got to generate the power somewhere. If everyone switched to an EV the load on fossil plants would increase and we would have the very same pollution problem.
Of course there is the argument that EVs are more efficient, but that doesn't take into account a number of added costs such as the production and disposal of batteries.
Anyway, just my two cents.
By the way, I'm new on the forum and this seemed like as good a topic as any to introduce myself on :)
|
|
|
|
cirvin
Nobel Prize Winner
USA
1542 Posts |
Posted - Sep 22 2004 : 6:34:08 PM
|
Consider this: every year the government increases standards for emissions. These standards apply to new cars, but not to ones already on the road. Theese higher standards do apply to the power stations.
In other works, cars on the road today put out much more more pollution than the power stations.
http://daxter12.topcities.com <Its updated now! |
|
|
|
n/a
DELETED (Inactive)
5 Posts |
Posted - Sep 22 2004 : 9:49:49 PM
|
quote:
In other works, cars on the road today put out much more more pollution than the power stations.
Hmm... good point. Do you have any data on how much pollution a typical fossil plant spits out per killowatt hour, versus a typical car?
I Googled it but didn't turn up anything useful, so I was wondering if you knew any numbers off hand.
However, remember, these new EVs will have to be manufactured. For every car that is replaced that's a car that's in the dump and another set of highly acidic batteries that need to be maintained.
|
|
|
|
Brian
Apprentice
USA
106 Posts |
Posted - Sep 22 2004 : 11:06:08 PM
|
quote:
Hmm... good point. Do you have any data on how much pollution a typical fossil plant spits out per killowatt hour, versus a typical car?
I don't remember any specific numbers, but a dedicated power plant is much, much more efficient than a car engine. They don't have to be designed to start quickly, handle huge power fluctuations, or fit under the hood of a car. I believe that car enginers only get about 20% efficiency, and put out quite a bit more harmful emissions.
Most of the power here comes from hydro and one gas powerplant that was designed for maximum efficiency - a turbojet system that even uses heat from the exaust to boil water to generate more electricity if I recall correctly.
So yes, generating power at a central location is more efficient than in seperate car engines.
|
|
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6718 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2004 : 09:42:42 AM
|
I've coverd this a bunch of times, but there are the main points.
1. Electricity can be as clean or as dirty as you want. You can burn crude oil to generate steam, to run a pinwheel that is attached to a generator with a rubber band. Or you can use clean solar/wind power. It's up to you.
2. Even the the dirtiest oil fired plant is cleaner then the cleanest gas car.
3. There would be very little changes needed in the electrical grid since most EV charging is done at night, when power plants are desperately looking for something to do with their extra capacity.
4. Batteries are no big deal. Lead acid batteries are 99% recyclable, and perhaps the most successful recycling program ever. "Highly" acidic is a myth. Battery acid is very weak. At most it will make skin slightly pink until it is rinsed off.
5. MANY areas of the world get most of their power from "green" sources. Around here, large amounts of it come from nuclear and the Niagra hydroelectric set up.
Check this out for ending "EVs move the pollution" arguments: http://www.evadc.org/pwrplnt.pdf
|
|
|
|
Chamkeeper
Mad Scientist
278 Posts |
Posted - Sep 26 2004 : 11:56:02 PM
|
Maybe you could consider other alterante fuel sources (non-fossil) if you want a third element to compare. Fuel-Cells are going to change things in our lives in the not too distant future, Also, other fuels can be burned in existing vehicles with only minor changes. These things would make for an interesting project.
|
|
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6718 Posts |
Posted - Sep 27 2004 : 4:18:32 PM
|
If you're going to do a project on fool-cells, then do one that is based in "reality". If you need info, I can give you links to a recent study that proves that fool-celled vehicles are about half as efficient as pure battery EVs...
|
|
|
|
binaryblade
Apprentice
Canada
136 Posts |
Posted - Oct 24 2004 : 3:36:15 PM
|
you could always look into the world energy distribution. electricity, fossil fuels, nuclear, hydrogen are just energy currencys some are cleaner then others any conversion you do between them develops some sort of waste it's just a matter of minimizing it no energy is perfectly clean including hydroelectric they produce heat which is a form of pollution however compared to fossil fuels its much less excetera the only reason fuel cells are being looked at compared to electric(battery) vehicles is that electricity is a difficult energy to store if it was power plants could store the excess energy they produced at night and feed it into the grid during the day allowing fewer plants. batteries are one way they are just large heavy and expensive (relatively). so really it comes down to minimizing pollution yes but inversly maximizing convienence.
Suddenly I realize that I, like most of humanity, only know enough to be dangerous. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Arg Science Project
