IRS should cancel tax credits on gas guzzler "hybrids"

Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed to increase
fuel economy more than a few MPG but rather to reduce emissions. Since the
most emissions are generated in slow speed stop-and-go driving, the use of
an electric motor for that type of movement reduces emissions on these
vehicles to somewhere between 1/2 and 1/3 of the amount a non-hybrid
version of the same vehicle produces.

Cheers - Jonathan

"Nomen Nescio" > wrote in message
...
> What a ripoff to we taxpayers who pay extra taxes so tax giveaways are
> given to rich people who buy expensive hybrids that actually guzzle more
> gasoline than regular cars you and I are destined to purchase! Write your
> Congressperson today and tell her/him just how you feel about getting the
> shaft without the benefit of K-Y Jelly. If a hybrid doesn't get at least
> 15% better gas economy, than it does with its battery removed, tax it
> double for extra damage it does to the economy and Nation by using a lot
> of
> contaminating elements in it's battery pak.

Jonathan Race wrote:
> Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed to
> increase fuel economy more than a few MPG but rather to reduce
> emissions. Since the most emissions are generated in slow speed
> stop-and-go driving, the use of an electric motor for that type of
> movement reduces emissions on these vehicles to somewhere between
> 1/2 and 1/3 of the amount a non-hybrid version of the same vehicle
> produces.
> Cheers - Jonathan
>
> "Nomen Nescio" > wrote in message
> ...
>> What a ripoff to we taxpayers who pay extra taxes so tax giveaways
>> are given to rich people who buy expensive hybrids that actually
>> guzzle more gasoline than regular cars you and I are destined to
>> purchase! Write your Congressperson today and tell her/him just how
>> you feel about getting the shaft without the benefit of K-Y Jelly. If a
>> hybrid doesn't get at least 15% better gas economy, than it
>> does with its battery removed, tax it double for extra damage it
>> does to the economy and Nation by using a lot of
>> contaminating elements in it's battery pak.

Lemee see, there's only *one* source of energy for these vehicles. Anyone
surprised at the real outcome? BTW, one doesn't run around town on electric
power for long before the gasoline engine is needed to charge the batteries
that are powering the electric motor. There ain't no free lunch.

FanJet wrote:
> Jonathan Race wrote:
> > Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed to
> > increase fuel economy more than a few MPG but rather to reduce
> > emissions. Since the most emissions are generated in slow speed
> > stop-and-go driving, the use of an electric motor for that type of
> > movement reduces emissions on these vehicles to somewhere between
> > 1/2 and 1/3 of the amount a non-hybrid version of the same vehicle
> > produces.
> > Cheers - Jonathan
> >
> > "Nomen Nescio" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> What a ripoff to we taxpayers who pay extra taxes so tax giveaways
> >> are given to rich people who buy expensive hybrids that actually
> >> guzzle more gasoline than regular cars you and I are destined to
> >> purchase! Write your Congressperson today and tell her/him just how
> >> you feel about getting the shaft without the benefit of K-Y Jelly. If a
> >> hybrid doesn't get at least 15% better gas economy, than it
> >> does with its battery removed, tax it double for extra damage it
> >> does to the economy and Nation by using a lot of
> >> contaminating elements in it's battery pak.
>
> Lemee see, there's only *one* source of energy for these vehicles. Anyone
> surprised at the real outcome? BTW, one doesn't run around town on electric
> power for long before the gasoline engine is needed to charge the batteries
> that are powering the electric motor. There ain't no free lunch.

Well, if the hybrid uses regenerative braking, it's entirely possible
that it will get better economy in stop and go driving.

nate

N8N wrote:
> FanJet wrote:
>> Jonathan Race wrote:
>>> Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed to
>>> increase fuel economy more than a few MPG but rather to reduce
>>> emissions. Since the most emissions are generated in slow speed
>>> stop-and-go driving, the use of an electric motor for that type of
>>> movement reduces emissions on these vehicles to somewhere between
>>> 1/2 and 1/3 of the amount a non-hybrid version of the same vehicle
>>> produces.
>>> Cheers - Jonathan
>>>
>>> "Nomen Nescio" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> What a ripoff to we taxpayers who pay extra taxes so tax giveaways
>>>> are given to rich people who buy expensive hybrids that actually
>>>> guzzle more gasoline than regular cars you and I are destined to
>>>> purchase! Write your Congressperson today and tell her/him just
>>>> how you feel about getting the shaft without the benefit of K-Y
>>>> Jelly. If a hybrid doesn't get at least 15% better gas economy,
>>>> than it
>>>> does with its battery removed, tax it double for extra damage it
>>>> does to the economy and Nation by using a lot of
>>>> contaminating elements in it's battery pak.
>>
>> Lemee see, there's only *one* source of energy for these vehicles.
>> Anyone surprised at the real outcome? BTW, one doesn't run around
>> town on electric power for long before the gasoline engine is needed
>> to charge the batteries that are powering the electric motor. There
>> ain't no free lunch.
>
> Well, if the hybrid uses regenerative braking, it's entirely possible
> that it will get better economy in stop and go driving.
>
> nate

How's that? To use regenerative braking, the car needs to be moving.
Gasoline is required to get the car moving either from a gasoline charged
battery or directly from the gasoline powered engine. There are considerable
losses involved in converting gasoline to electricity and the reverse. If
the manufacturers really are saving energy with Hybrids, they could do
exactly the same thing with gasoline only powered vehicles. In fact, they
should be able to do better since these vehicles wouldn't be carting extra
batteries, a heavy electric motor and assorted control doodads around. I
think Hybrids buyers are being had. On the other hand, they are probably
funding some research that may prove useful in the future so it might not be
all bad.

In alt.autos.ford FanJet > wrote:

> How's that? To use regenerative braking, the car needs to be moving.

Brakes produce heat. That's wasted energy.
During normal braking, a Ford Escape Hybrid doesn't use the brakes at all
for the majority of the braking. What would be wasted as heat is captured
to the batteries.
Cars.com: "To test this claim, I poked my finger through the spokes and
touched the discs after 30 minutes of stop-and-go driving. The front ones
were cold to slightly warm. The rear discs were searing hot, though, which
makes sense because the rear wheels don't perform regenerative braking."

When the dam was built at Lake Shasta in the late 40's, the downhill
conveyor belts used to haul excavated rock from the dam site down to the
onsite concrete plant were slowed by conventional brakes which burned out
frequently. These were replaced with motor generators that in turn power
most of the construction project.

The school bus in Point Arena, CA, had a bank of resistors at the front of
the bus, tied to generators on a PTO. Going downhill, the PTO generated
heat, wasted out those resistors, and didn't use the brakes at all.

FanJet wrote:
> N8N wrote:
> > FanJet wrote:
> >> Jonathan Race wrote:
> >>> Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed to
> >>> increase fuel economy more than a few MPG but rather to reduce
> >>> emissions. Since the most emissions are generated in slow speed
> >>> stop-and-go driving, the use of an electric motor for that type of
> >>> movement reduces emissions on these vehicles to somewhere between
> >>> 1/2 and 1/3 of the amount a non-hybrid version of the same vehicle
> >>> produces.
> >>> Cheers - Jonathan
> >>>
> >>> "Nomen Nescio" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >>>> What a ripoff to we taxpayers who pay extra taxes so tax giveaways
> >>>> are given to rich people who buy expensive hybrids that actually
> >>>> guzzle more gasoline than regular cars you and I are destined to
> >>>> purchase! Write your Congressperson today and tell her/him just
> >>>> how you feel about getting the shaft without the benefit of K-Y
> >>>> Jelly. If a hybrid doesn't get at least 15% better gas economy,
> >>>> than it
> >>>> does with its battery removed, tax it double for extra damage it
> >>>> does to the economy and Nation by using a lot of
> >>>> contaminating elements in it's battery pak.
> >>
> >> Lemee see, there's only *one* source of energy for these vehicles.
> >> Anyone surprised at the real outcome? BTW, one doesn't run around
> >> town on electric power for long before the gasoline engine is needed
> >> to charge the batteries that are powering the electric motor. There
> >> ain't no free lunch.
> >
> > Well, if the hybrid uses regenerative braking, it's entirely possible
> > that it will get better economy in stop and go driving.
> >
> > nate
>
> How's that? To use regenerative braking, the car needs to be moving.
> Gasoline is required to get the car moving either from a gasoline charged
> battery or directly from the gasoline powered engine. There are considerable
> losses involved in converting gasoline to electricity and the reverse. If
> the manufacturers really are saving energy with Hybrids, they could do
> exactly the same thing with gasoline only powered vehicles. In fact, they
> should be able to do better since these vehicles wouldn't be carting extra
> batteries, a heavy electric motor and assorted control doodads around. I
> think Hybrids buyers are being had. On the other hand, they are probably
> funding some research that may prove useful in the future so it might not be
> all bad.

It's real simple. In a gasoline powered car the energy used to
accelerate a vehicle to whatever speed it achieves is basically lost
forever, as when the vehicle coasts down or brakes the kinetic energy
is converted into heat. With regenerative braking, some of it
(theoretically all, but minus various losses and inefficiencies) gets
converted back into electricity and stored in the batteries. Not a
perfect system, but better efficiency-wise than a pure gasoline engine.
In fact, it's city driving where hybrids can really shine. In steady
state highway driving, it's a wash, with a slight advantage to the pure
gasmotor due to lighter weight.

nate

N8N wrote:
> FanJet wrote:
>> N8N wrote:
>>> FanJet wrote:
>>>> Jonathan Race wrote:
>>>>> Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed to
>>>>> increase fuel economy more than a few MPG but rather to reduce
>>>>> emissions. Since the most emissions are generated in slow speed
>>>>> stop-and-go driving, the use of an electric motor for that type of
>>>>> movement reduces emissions on these vehicles to somewhere between
>>>>> 1/2 and 1/3 of the amount a non-hybrid version of the same vehicle
>>>>> produces.
>>>>> Cheers - Jonathan
>>>>>
>>>>> "Nomen Nescio" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> What a ripoff to we taxpayers who pay extra taxes so tax
>>>>>> giveaways are given to rich people who buy expensive hybrids
>>>>>> that actually guzzle more gasoline than regular cars you and I
>>>>>> are destined to purchase! Write your Congressperson today and
>>>>>> tell her/him just how you feel about getting the shaft without
>>>>>> the benefit of K-Y Jelly. If a hybrid doesn't get at least 15%
>>>>>> better gas economy, than it
>>>>>> does with its battery removed, tax it double for extra damage it
>>>>>> does to the economy and Nation by using a lot of
>>>>>> contaminating elements in it's battery pak.
>>>>
>>>> Lemee see, there's only *one* source of energy for these vehicles.
>>>> Anyone surprised at the real outcome? BTW, one doesn't run around
>>>> town on electric power for long before the gasoline engine is
>>>> needed to charge the batteries that are powering the electric
>>>> motor. There ain't no free lunch.
>>>
>>> Well, if the hybrid uses regenerative braking, it's entirely
>>> possible that it will get better economy in stop and go driving.
>>>
>>> nate
>>
>> How's that? To use regenerative braking, the car needs to be moving.
>> Gasoline is required to get the car moving either from a gasoline
>> charged battery or directly from the gasoline powered engine. There
>> are considerable losses involved in converting gasoline to
>> electricity and the reverse. If the manufacturers really are saving
>> energy with Hybrids, they could do exactly the same thing with
>> gasoline only powered vehicles. In fact, they should be able to do
>> better since these vehicles wouldn't be carting extra batteries, a
>> heavy electric motor and assorted control doodads around. I think
>> Hybrids buyers are being had. On the other hand, they are probably
>> funding some research that may prove useful in the future so it
>> might not be all bad.
>
> It's real simple. In a gasoline powered car the energy used to
> accelerate a vehicle to whatever speed it achieves is basically lost
> forever, as when the vehicle coasts down or brakes the kinetic energy
> is converted into heat. With regenerative braking, some of it
> (theoretically all, but minus various losses and inefficiencies) gets
> converted back into electricity and stored in the batteries. Not a
> perfect system, but better efficiency-wise than a pure gasoline
> engine. In fact, it's city driving where hybrids can really shine.
> In steady state highway driving, it's a wash, with a slight advantage
> to the pure gasmotor due to lighter weight.
>
> nate

It's not really all that simple and that is the basis for my gripe with the
manufacturers. For example, you ignore the inefficiencies involved with
converting the DC derived from the batteries to the AC required by the
electric motor. Then additional inefficiencies when the AC is converted to
mechanical energy by the electric motor. These inefficiencies generate heat
which is wasted. Then there's the viable possibility of using a less
expensive version of regenerative braking on a gasoline engine only powered
car. Equipped with an ECU controlled alternator clutch, regenerative braking
could be used to charge the car's battery. Using relatively simple
technology, heat from the brakes could be used to assist in heating the
passenger space too. There are many possibilities and some far less
expensive than those used by current hybrids. However you look at it, none
are as simplistic, clean, or effective as the manufacturers would have us
believe.

FanJet wrote:
>
>
> Lemee see, there's only *one* source of energy for these vehicles. Anyone
> surprised at the real outcome? BTW, one doesn't run around town on electric
> power for long before the gasoline engine is needed to charge the batteries
> that are powering the electric motor. There ain't no free lunch.
>
>

And, the extra weight of the battery packs, electric motor and
controllers all works against improved fuel economy. One also has to
wonder how much more energy is consumed in the production process for
all that extra complexity and how much pollution is created in the
production process.

John

"Jonathan Race" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed to
increase
> fuel economy more than a few MPG but rather to reduce emissions.

Wrong! Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed
to increase fuel economy more than a few MPG, but rather to INCREASE
POWER, espically 0-60 accelleration. The fuel economy in MPG is the
same, ful consumption is the same, you just get a higher rated HP.

You didn't read No-man's article, I quote:

"The Environmental Protection Agency puts the hybrid and non-hybrid
Accords in the same emissions category."

Next time read what your replying to. And yes, No-Man is correct,
the tax credit needs to be revoked for these "green turbocharged" vehicles.

Ted

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> "Jonathan Race" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
>
>>Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed to
>
> increase
>
>>fuel economy more than a few MPG but rather to reduce emissions.
>
>
> Wrong! Many of the new generation hybrids aren't specifically designed
> to increase fuel economy more than a few MPG, but rather to INCREASE
> POWER, espically 0-60 accelleration. The fuel economy in MPG is the
> same, ful consumption is the same, you just get a higher rated HP.
>
> You didn't read No-man's article, I quote:
>
> "The Environmental Protection Agency puts the hybrid and non-hybrid
> Accords in the same emissions category."
>
> Next time read what your replying to. And yes, No-Man is correct,
> the tax credit needs to be revoked for these "green turbocharged" vehicles.
>
> Ted
>
>
i just think a larger gas guzzler tax needs to be invoked for these
large suv's.... .. what needs does a person living in the city have for
a huge expedition when a winstar does the same thing in town. I could
see if you lived in a rural area or a contractor farmer etc but the
average businessman driving to work in a 30 storey building needs to pay
a guzzler tax... dont ask me how to incorporate it but still it needs to
be done.