Japan Striving For Energy Efficiency

diamond writes "The NYT has an article on how Japan is squeezing to get the most out of the costly fuel. 'The government recently introduced a national campaign, urging the Japanese to replace their older appliances and buy hybrid vehicles, all part of a patriotic effort to save energy and fight global warming.'"

1-liter houses in Germany? Bah.

[TERdON]

In Sweden, experimental 0-liter houses (without heating at all except inhabitants and appliances) have already been [miljoportalen.se] built [di.se] (sorry, Swedish only). Sweden is a bit colder than Germany (have lived in both countries so I have own experience about that one). Go figure. Or maybe we Swedes just tend to be more nerdy and more often have our own Beowulf clusters as heaters. :P

Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt

[Colin Smith]

What are you, marketing department for one of the big oil companies? Hybrids aren't perfect but you're talking out of your *arse*.

The batteries used in hybrids last as long as the vehicle, 150,000 - 200,000 miles at least and are guaranteed for at least 8 years. The batteries are NiMH, not lead acid or Nicad.

e.g.
http://pressroom.toyota.com/photo_library/display_ release.html?id=20040623 [toyota.com]

Re:This is not news.

[MtViewGuy]

Actually, Japan has to confront the issue of sea levels all the time due to the fact the country sits on one of world's most geologically active areas with both earthquake and volcano dangers, which puts much of Japan's coastline at risk. Also, Japan built up quite a lot of housing on landfill out to sea, and given the unstable geology of the country, it's small wonder why sea levels are closely monitored in that country.

Re:To all the American's

[MtViewGuy]

I remember reading some research done by Audi in the late 1970's that showed it's actually more fuel efficient to run the air conditioner than to open the window of your car if you drive faster than 70 km/h (43.5 mph). That's because open windows on a car cause considerable aerodynamic drag at high speeds, which can severely cut into fuel efficiency. Besides, today's automotive air conditioners are far more efficient in design, so they impose far less a drag on the engine than in the past.

Re:Huh? Where?

[Bushcat]

Noticed when you buy something now you can choose whether to pay the recycling tax now, or wait until the end-of-life in the hope it will be cheaper then? PET bottles in our area have to be returned to convenience stores and can't go in our trash. We also have to sort our trash into into abotu 6 categories. A fried down south has to sort into 12 categories. The ubiquitous water pot now uses up to 70% less electricity than models 3 years ago. All white goods have to carry efficiency ratings. 30% of the flat surface of new buildings must be grassed, including the roof. There's less wrapping on gifts at department stores now. Thermostats in government offices have been increased from 25 to 28 or 29 C for the summer. Government employees are being encouraged to stop wearing jackets and ties from June to September. Trucks and buses are encouraged not to idle when stationary. I dunno, maybe you don't watch Japanese TV.

It's real

[mattr]

It's real. Just about all major Japanese firms are taking serious steps to reduce environmental impact and also to comply with personal information protection act, all the way down to rewriting their articles of incorporation. The former is part due to the government and part due to pr benefits. The government is serious about it mainly I would expect because their claim to fame on the global stage, i.e. the proof they are fit to get a permanent seat on the security council, is their ability to lead Asia and be a diplomatic power.. the result of the Kyoto accord however is that it is very hard to live up to their promise. As it happens the Chairman of Toyota is also the head of the federal industry organization, and is located in Nagoya which is where the World Expo is currently running, neither of which hurt. Not versed in what other incentives may be provided though. Environmental programs are extremely visible in all parts of Japanese companies now, including product R&D, sales, advertising, etc. For example there is an air conditioner out now (EcoCute) that uses carbon dioxide as a refrigerant, and uses a heat pump to pull heat from the air and use only nighttime electricity for a 300% efficiency gain IIRC.

Re:Interesting fact from TFA

[the eric conspiracy]

Are factories in China that much less efficient than their Japanese counterparts?

Yes. The low cost of labor makes it economically unattractive to invest in capital equipment.

Re:To all the American's

[Anonymous Coward]

Completely random fact, but the TV show Mythbusters tested this and found that (at around 55mph) open windows is .7mpg more efficient.

Re:1-liter houses in Germany? Bah.

[Stalke]

Interesting, a quick look at that page (sorry, I don't read swedish) found a link to the english version of the manufacturer of the "zero-electricity concept house".

Follow: http://www.ncc.se/english [www.ncc.se] and click on the ncc concept house image.

Re:Does Buying Hybrid Vehicles Really Help?

[the eric conspiracy]

So far as I know, manufacturers have made no commitment to recycling the batteries.

Toyota certainly has. And they are NiMH, not Li Ion.

Not just w/o heating; it's w/o an electricity bill

[CrystalFalcon]

You forgot to mention that the second article describes a house that is not without heating per se, but rather, describes a house that uses heating/cooling/electricity so efficiently that it is designed to survive off-grid (and still have today's expected standards with AC, lighting, heating etc) -- it's built to be self-sufficient energy-wise.

Quite a step forward from just "not having heating". Especially considered it's not a residential house, but a business conference center.

Re:Australia and Kyoto

[The Original Yama]

I don't know exactle what area is affected by bushfires in Australia every year, but I do know that Australian forests burn easily. They have evolved to be very dry, and in fact many plant/tree species need to burn in order to reproduce. Australia is a very dry country with little rainfall in most parts. Fires spread very quickly and are extremely difficult to put out. I would imagine that the problem is much worse than in Canada.

Things change fast - try to keep up.

[Tau Zero]

It wasn't practical then, it isn't practical now- it is estimated that Toyota (not to mention, the Japanese government) subsidized the Prius to the tune of at least $17,000.

I assume you are referring to this CATO Institute piece [cato.org].

Even if it was correct (CATO's impartiality is doubtful), it is four years out of date. Less than two years later Toyota was reporting per-vehicle profits on the Prius [gaspig.com]. Batteries and the like have only gotten cheaper since then, and it's not like Toyota has to offer incentives to move them!

It's a common myth that the hybrid system is what gives it such good gas mileage. It isn't. It's narrow, hard tires and good aerodynamics.

If you are talking about constant-speed cruise on flat highways, you'd be right; a car with only those features and no hybrid hardware would be lighter and get even better mileage (as long as it didn't have to climb hills). But that isn't "where the rubber meets the road"; hybrid drivetrains pay off big due to:

1. Regenerative braking in traffic.
2. Reduced engine friction due to smaller engine.
3. Reduced throttling losses, ditto.
4. Idling losses reduced or eliminated under many operating conditions.

Then there are the people putting bigger batteries in their Priuses and running off grid electricity for short trips [calcars.org]. They may or may not be saving energy, but it's a fact that the juice is not coming from petroleum and it has the potential to come from non-polluting sources either now or in the future. That's going to be the next big thing.

Run the numbers, or just LOOK.

[Tau Zero]

The claim is absurd on its face. A 3000 pound car getting 30 MPG burns its weight in fuel in 15,000 miles; do you realize how little fuel it would take to melt the metal in entire car? Even if you postulate that the entire car is made of aluminum at 15 kWh/kg [cwru.edu] the 3000 lb (~1400 kg) car would only take 21,000 kWh to make. That electricity would cost about $2100 at current rates, and could drive a 250 Wh/mile electric vehicle about 84,000 miles. The typical car goes a lot farther than that before being scrapped, and I don't know of one that's 100% metal.

Of course, a search on "car manufacture energy consumption" would have turned up this page [ilea.org] which shows that manufacture accounts for about 10% of life-cycle energy; fuel accounts for nearly 75%.

(I can't believe someone rated you "Insightful".)

Re:New trend?

[evilpenguin]

The Clinton administration signed the Kyoto treaty, which the Bush administration withdrew from. The Clinton administration set up the "million solar roofs" program. Those are just two things I know off the top of my head.

That said, I don't think any American administration has taken energy seriously. Oddly, I think the Bush administration does, but only because the oil peak [lifeaftertheoilcrash.net] is something the oil-industry connected administration understands well.

Make no mistake. I like much of what is in the Bush energy bill (although I don't think it goes nearly far enough and my personal repulsion for the man and his politics is boundless). Before you assume too much about me from these statements, one of the things I wholeheartedly endorse is streamlining licensure of nuclear power plants (despite the fact that he [Bush] continues to call them "nucular" plants).

The oil supply is going start shrinking soon folks. When it does, the price is going to shoot up and the oil companies will make even more money than they do today, but not for too much longer. We have very few alternatives to oil. Yes, solar and wind can supplement. And we'll build that. But they aren't there all the time. Yes, coal is there. But it is just as exhaustible as oil and we'll face the problem again in the future.

Splitting those atoms is the only sure way we have to keep our economy alive and to do so without destroying our climate. Yes, the waste is a problem, but nothing compared to inaction when the oil supply begins to shrink.

The other big thing to do is go after EFFICIENCY. The good news is that the price of energy will force it (again, this left-leaning liberal might suprise you by saying "markets work."), but the bad news is that we might not be able to make the needed changes quickly enough.

I'm genuinely worried about the next 25 years and energy. I'm far more worried about this than the "terrorist threat." Why? Because when gasoline rises to $10+ USD per gallon it will affect many more people than any suicidal maniac possibly could, even with NBC weapons.

A world without oil (or oil prohibitively expensive) is a world where everything you have must be made and moved with your own hands. Take a look around you and ask yourself how much of what you have now you could have in such a world?

Obviously human ingenuity and engineering skills won't disappear. We'll come up with things. The new computer controlled phase driven electric motors being developed might very well give us a way to do our transport and civil engineering with electricity instead of oil. Other developments will come. But how soon?

I can imagine a return of regional food production. The return of railroads for the bulk of freight and interstate travel. Etc.

Our present just-in-time economy is based on cheap oil. It won't be with us much longer.

Re:New trend?

[despisethesun]

"Splitting those atoms is the only sure way we have to keep our economy alive and to do so without destroying our climate."

So what happens when we hit peak uranium? There are two major uranium isotopes, only one of which is suitable for use as nuclear fuel. It's also the one that there is the least supply of. The two isotopes together can be used to create vast amounts of plutonium, but nobody considers that a viable alternative because it could mean the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The only REAL alternative is not splitting atoms, but fusing them [efda.org]. That technology is being developed, but it won't be ready till mid-century. When it gets here, the use of deuterium and tritium as fusion fuels will provide us with enough energy for several million years (though our lithium supplies will run out much earlier, still well beyond even our great-grandchildren's lifetimes), but we need something to sustain us till then. Fission may help as a stopgap measure, but it's no replacement for oil.

And of course all of this ignores oil as used in the production of goods, such as plastics. Processes such as thermal depolymerization may assist in this, but that's still largely unproven technology.

It's gonna be a rough couple of decades, children. Better buckle up.

Re:And Japan will suceed

[moz25]

The main fallacy you're using here is False Dilemma. Obviously, there are a lot more options than the two extremes you're giving and it's easily observed that he's using one not in your list: making a complaint about the way things are going, likely in an attempt to go for improvement. Possibly, you're just trolling. In that case: congratulations, someone took the bait.

Re:Huh? Where?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I don't watch Japanese TV very much. Just the news sometimes. And I guess for me to know about it, a national campaign would have to have posters all along my bike ride to work, and perhaps on the door to my office, and one on my pillow, since that's about all I see these days.

That being said, most everything you just mentioned has been going on for years. I guess I was looking for some big "Kyampeen Chuu" posters or something.

Moreover, I live 30 minutes from Tokyo Station and I just had to furnish another Japanese apartment. I bought a fridge, my hated oven, a combo washer/dryer (that eats tons of electricity and does a terrible job on the latter to boot), and a gas range all at once. My Japanese is excellent (I have taught university Japanese courses in the US) and I can tell you there was no discussion of a recycling tax on my 20 man en (about $2000 US) order. I have purchased other such items since and still haven't heard a word of it. I separate my trash into burnable, non-burnable, and conmingled recycling--just like everywhere I've lived around this country, except the one place where recycling was not even an option--you put that into the non-burnable. My office is running at 23 (granted, it is private). I don't see grass on any buildings anywhere... I'd understand if I were still out in Hokuriku, but I'm in the heart of Kanto, and I'm not seeing many of the things you mention at all. So where do you live???

Re:New trend?

[mjbkinx]

here's one [nasa.gov] and another [ucsd.edu].
there's plenty more [bbc.co.uk].

Re:New trend?

[4of12]

They (the peak oil doom crowd like the site I referenced) assume that the peak itself will be a catastrophic moment. I'm not sure I believe that. I think we've just seen the start of a steady,

Kunstler's book about the long decline down the tail of Hubbert's peak agrees with you.

Rather than an abrupt panic, he predicts a "Long Emergency" [truthout.org].

While I agree with much of Kunstler's pessimism, I believe he dismisses the propects of technological innovations too quickly. Not that such innovations will be a panacea and enable everyone in the world to increase their per capita energy consumption to the exhorbitant levels of the American average, but that innovations will cushion what would otherwise be a very jarring hard landing.

Nuclear power will be an important ingredient to our energy future, but implementing it safely with a well-thought out plan for waste holding will require leadership with a strong record of credibility. An irrational debate between emotional extremists on both sides of the issue is going to be too costly for all of us.