If planning a European road trip type vacation, DEFINITELY consider renting a hybrid!!
Jul 30th, 2005, 06:24 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If planning a European road trip type vacation, DEFINITELY consider renting a hybrid!!
We rented a hybrid from Avis; picked up in Stockholm, drop in Oslo. Toured for 10 days; definite savings on fuel cost. The hybrid surprised us with a very good pickup (power). Overall a smooth performer and the way to go if on a European road trip. A word of advice: familiarize/read the manual ahead of time. It is a bit strange at first (press a button, you are on your way!?). Loved it, highly recommend it!
Jul 30th, 2005, 09:27 AM
#9
Sheila, "hybrid" is a U.S. term for automobiles using a combination of fuels or energy sources. Toyota is currently selling (here) the very popular Prius which runs on both electricity and gasoline/petrol.
My neighbor drives a car that runs on hydrogen (We call it the H-bomb!) because he can then utilize the carpool lanes on the freeways even though he's alone in the car. All of the city-owned cars (except police and fire) in the town where I live operate on natural gas. Most of the buses in all of Los Angeles County are now operated on alternative fuels.
Baby steps from our dependence on petroleum-based fuels.
My neighbor drives a car that runs on hydrogen (We call it the H-bomb!) because he can then utilize the carpool lanes on the freeways even though he's alone in the car. All of the city-owned cars (except police and fire) in the town where I live operate on natural gas. Most of the buses in all of Los Angeles County are now operated on alternative fuels.
Baby steps from our dependence on petroleum-based fuels.
Jul 30th, 2005, 10:06 AM
#10
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hybrid = savings on fuel cost??????
this is ABSURD!!!! hybrids pollute less when driving in the city cause they use electric power. this electric power would have been generated by the petrol engine earlier on. there are no savings on fuel!!!
if you want to save on gas just choose a rental car with the smallest petrol engine you feel comfortable with.
this is ABSURD!!!! hybrids pollute less when driving in the city cause they use electric power. this electric power would have been generated by the petrol engine earlier on. there are no savings on fuel!!!
if you want to save on gas just choose a rental car with the smallest petrol engine you feel comfortable with.
Jul 30th, 2005, 10:18 AM
#11
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
little:
what about hydroelectric or wind farmed electric or as W would say "newcler energy"? I think that hybrid is just the start in the direction we should be taking to rid our dependance on oil.
V:
Was the rental costly?
what about hydroelectric or wind farmed electric or as W would say "newcler energy"? I think that hybrid is just the start in the direction we should be taking to rid our dependance on oil.
V:
Was the rental costly?
Jul 30th, 2005, 10:28 AM
#12
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,049
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"hybrid = savings on fuel cost??????
this is ABSURD!!!! "
Hardly absurd.
A hybrid does use less fuel than the typical internal combustion engine. The internal combustion engine of the hybrid is both more efficient, and less dirty, as it can be designed to run at a constant speed.
A further efficiency is called regeneration. When you decelerate the typical hybrid, the kinetic energy turns the electic motor, which then functions as a generator, adding charge to the battery.
While hybrids are an improvement, I think there is no technology available today that will solve our dependence on fossil fuels.
this is ABSURD!!!! "
Hardly absurd.
A hybrid does use less fuel than the typical internal combustion engine. The internal combustion engine of the hybrid is both more efficient, and less dirty, as it can be designed to run at a constant speed.
A further efficiency is called regeneration. When you decelerate the typical hybrid, the kinetic energy turns the electic motor, which then functions as a generator, adding charge to the battery.
While hybrids are an improvement, I think there is no technology available today that will solve our dependence on fossil fuels.
Jul 30th, 2005, 11:14 AM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, Diesel engines can burn vegetable oil. Any gasoline engine can be modified to burn alcohol. Alcohol can be made from trees. Millions of cars in Brazil run on alcohol. Methanol is race car fuel is alcohol.
The technology is there, the delivery infrastructure is not there. The cars have to be modified.
Hybrid makes sense. An electric only car with a 100 mile range carries about 3,000 lbs of baterries and costs like $10,000 to replace the batteries a few years down the road (GM only leased their all electric cars).
The technology is there, the delivery infrastructure is not there. The cars have to be modified.
Hybrid makes sense. An electric only car with a 100 mile range carries about 3,000 lbs of baterries and costs like $10,000 to replace the batteries a few years down the road (GM only leased their all electric cars).
Jul 30th, 2005, 11:26 PM
#14
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"hydroelectric or wind farmed electric"
you think that europe is powered by wind or hydroelectricity?this is no more than a pet project.
hybrid is only good to reduce smog in one place by pre-generating the (nuclear) smog in another place a few hundred km away (like Ukraine).
"A hybrid does use less fuel than the typical internal combustion engine. The internal combustion engine of the hybrid is both more efficient,"
WRONG! a hybrid uses less fuel when u compare it to a gas guzzler of similar HP. There are many rental european/japanese sub compacts with teeny petrol engines (700cc) which are much more fuel efficient than the larger engines hybrids in current production (1500cc).
hybrids allow you to combine the horse power of the petrol engine and electric motor to give you a whopping 140HP
of course the ego of some people cannot be satisfied by driving a sub compact with only 30HP.
you think that europe is powered by wind or hydroelectricity?this is no more than a pet project.
hybrid is only good to reduce smog in one place by pre-generating the (nuclear) smog in another place a few hundred km away (like Ukraine).
"A hybrid does use less fuel than the typical internal combustion engine. The internal combustion engine of the hybrid is both more efficient,"
WRONG! a hybrid uses less fuel when u compare it to a gas guzzler of similar HP. There are many rental european/japanese sub compacts with teeny petrol engines (700cc) which are much more fuel efficient than the larger engines hybrids in current production (1500cc).
hybrids allow you to combine the horse power of the petrol engine and electric motor to give you a whopping 140HP
of course the ego of some people cannot be satisfied by driving a sub compact with only 30HP.
Jul 31st, 2005, 02:55 AM
#15
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Jean
>My neighbor drives a car that runs on hydrogen ...All of the city-owned cars ...where I live operate on natural gas. ...Baby steps from our dependence on petroleum-based fuels.<
Unfortunatley, H2 is manufactured from natural gas - a petroleum product. All the alternative fuels do is move the pollution source from one place to another.
Reduction in energy use will be achieved when we get out of our cars and use mass transit.
>My neighbor drives a car that runs on hydrogen ...All of the city-owned cars ...where I live operate on natural gas. ...Baby steps from our dependence on petroleum-based fuels.<
Unfortunatley, H2 is manufactured from natural gas - a petroleum product. All the alternative fuels do is move the pollution source from one place to another.
Reduction in energy use will be achieved when we get out of our cars and use mass transit.
Jul 31st, 2005, 03:25 AM
#16
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alas, ira, where I live we have no masses to transit. 
So mass transit as a rule doesn't pay for us - with a few urban exceptions, there simply aren't the economies of scale. And while I suppose one could argue that a 767 is a form of mass transit, can we really claim that air travel is efficient in terms of energy use, especially given the distances involved?
So that takes us back to new developments like the hybrid. Littlesthobo, I see your point, but one has to start somewhere. So it is exciting just to see any kind of alternative to a conventional vehicle.
Viajero2, people might enthusiastically agree or passionately disagree with your conclusions, but have no fear that it isn't a most interesting thread you've started.
So mass transit as a rule doesn't pay for us - with a few urban exceptions, there simply aren't the economies of scale. And while I suppose one could argue that a 767 is a form of mass transit, can we really claim that air travel is efficient in terms of energy use, especially given the distances involved? So that takes us back to new developments like the hybrid. Littlesthobo, I see your point, but one has to start somewhere. So it is exciting just to see any kind of alternative to a conventional vehicle.
Viajero2, people might enthusiastically agree or passionately disagree with your conclusions, but have no fear that it isn't a most interesting thread you've started.
Jul 31st, 2005, 06:24 AM
#17
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 871
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One part of the solution to our energy dependence is to stop suburban sprawl.
I remember reading that 50% of our energy is consumed by our buildings - cars only 25%. Better designed buildings that work with the environment instead of sealing them and air conditioning them hell out of them would be better - of course that's why I love and appreciate little Croatian, Spanish, Mexican and Italian villages.
And then there's the issue of time wasted sitting in a car, which is why I don't own one and live in NYC....
I remember reading that 50% of our energy is consumed by our buildings - cars only 25%. Better designed buildings that work with the environment instead of sealing them and air conditioning them hell out of them would be better - of course that's why I love and appreciate little Croatian, Spanish, Mexican and Italian villages.
And then there's the issue of time wasted sitting in a car, which is why I don't own one and live in NYC....
Jul 31st, 2005, 07:18 AM
#19
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Cost. We rented an automatic hybrid for 10 days to be picked up in Stockholm Airport and dropped off at the Oslo Airport. The bill came to $690 total, a portion of that was a surcharge dropoff fee (Oslo vs. Stockholm).
I have read with great interest the discussion (I am an Environmental Engineer) and will only say that the FACTS as we EXPERIENCED were LESS FUEL COSTS, smoother ride, and overall great road performance.
I have read with great interest the discussion (I am an Environmental Engineer) and will only say that the FACTS as we EXPERIENCED were LESS FUEL COSTS, smoother ride, and overall great road performance.
Jul 31st, 2005, 08:11 AM
#20
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 22,979
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Viajero,
If you could have rented a regular car for $100 less, it would probably would have been cheaper for you. I would guess that the hybrid is worthwhile in terms of cost only over longer periods of time.
If you could have rented a regular car for $100 less, it would probably would have been cheaper for you. I would guess that the hybrid is worthwhile in terms of cost only over longer periods of time.
