Japan Striving For Energy Efficiency 540
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.'"
New trend? (Score:5, Interesting)
Government in bed with manufacturers again? (Score:4, Interesting)
The compulsory registration fees already make it expensive enough to run a car here, and suspect this is more of the same - "keep people purchasing, and keep the economy afloat." After all, it has worked for the last 50 years here.
Re:Just trading problems? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Does Buying Hybrid Vehicles Really Help? (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, that's easy. They burn gasoline. They just use it in a way that allows them to manage the energy produced in a slightly different way. So you're in effect asking if they get better mileage than an internal combustion car.
I personally have my doubts that at its current stage of development hybrid technology is an improvement, at least compared with the best that internal combustion vehicles can achieve. However it's remarkable that it can hold its own given how new it is. It isn't necessarily an immediate solution to energy efficiency or global pollution, but it is a good spot solution to the issue of localized pollution.
I think it's also a good bridge technology to a future all electric vehicle. As petroleum becomes more scarce and batteries get cheaper and better, a the experience, technology and infrastructure used to design and service hybrid vehicles may stand us in good stead.
How much harm is done by disposing of the batteries that are no longer of use?
Current hybrids, IIRC use lithium ion technology and contain no heavy metals or other hazardous materials that can't be disposed of in a municipal landfill. Some small run all-electric cars use lead acid batteries to keep costs down, which are a huge environmental issue, not only for disposal, but from the mining of the lead through every intermediate engineering process. But this is not an issue for the hybrids on the market. PbSO2 batteries are just too heavy to acheive the performance and range they need to compete.
You raise an important issue though. So far as I know, manufacturers have made no commitment to recycling the batteries. At this stage it doesn't matter; throwing away a hybrid battery pack is probably not as environmentally bad as throwing away a car transmission. And there are far fewer of them at this point.
However, if they don't start recycling batteries sooner or later, it would be too bad. I personally think that rather than selling and warrantying a battery pack, they should at some point start leasing the battery packs and refurbishing them.
Interesting fact from TFA (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:In addition... (Score:5, Interesting)
So, what we're talking about is more like an oportunity to sell Godzilla a more energy efficient water heater.
Australia and Kyoto (Score:5, Interesting)
The reason why australia didn't ratify kyoto is because kyoto also counts all forest fires as emissions of CO2, because, well, they are emissions of CO2.
Australia has forest fires larger than engliand in the western australian forests every year. If australia ratified kyoto and got on the emissions trading scheme, australia would be economically crippled by having to buy emissions credits all the time. So Howard looked after the bottom line and refused to sign.
Now, if only we could find a way to prevent forest fires. I have a friend who is trying to get a job as a postgraduate research assistant at the Victorian Fire Prevention Center with her very good botany degree... maybe she can help.
Re:Woah! (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:New trend? (Score:2, Interesting)
Bravo, Japan. Brilliant.
Re:Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (Score:5, Interesting)
I thought the Prius batteries were warrantied for 10 years, not 8.
I drive one... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:New trend? (Score:2, Interesting)
"Japan vetoes suits in summer heat" (Score:3, Interesting)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/459
Re:New trend? (Score:2, Interesting)
Research that I have seen in the past shows that often the environmental cost of creating a new car or appliance is higher than using the old one, even if it's less efficient. The major benefit I can see from Japan's standpoint is that many of the parts and products would be produced offshore. The energy consumption and pollution would be elsewhere but Japan would reap the energy and environmental benefits of the churn--assuming they can dump their old stuff offshore.
Re:Woah! (Score:3, Interesting)
- Some species of whales (Fin and Sei, IIRC) are approaching or exceeding historcal population levels, though data on their historical population numbers are scarce.
- Cetacean whales are large, grazing planktivores... i.e. analogous to cows. There is almost no scientific data to support (or oppose) any intelligence claims for large cetaceans (as opposed to the smaller odontocetes, dolphins and their ilk, which have been shown to have excellent problem solving and communication abilities).
Agreed, some species of whales are endangered, and Japanese hunting practices have been shown to be indiscriminate (genetic testing of market whale meat), but unconditionally opposing the hunting of whales while eating steak has an odor of hypocrisy.A more reasoned approach would address issues such as acoustic pollution (cutting off large cetacean communication), shipping deaths (Northern Right Whale), and bioaccumulation in the food chain (several of the top predators, including killer whales, belugas, and polar bears). To do this, though, we have to change our way of life, consuming less and more locally produced stuff and reducing chemical use.
Save the Whales! Looks great on a poster, but IMHO it's horribly simplistic and ignores much more serious systemic problems.
Re:New trend? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:New trend? (Score:5, Interesting)
The somewhat hyperbolic site I link to in my parent post gets one major thing wrong, IMHO. He points out that the energy return on energy invested in making hydrogen from water by is 1/1.7, which he says makes it impossible. If solar photovoltaics are used to provide that electricity, however, it becomes totally feasible. Hydrogen can be the storage medium and transportable form for renewable electricity.
That said, all the energy density problems and economies of scale issues are still there. We will all have to do with less. Right now oil's EROEI is about 30/1, which is just phenomenally good. That free ride is coming to an end.
Still, I tend to be an optimist. I do believe we will shift resources. I do believe we can get public-spirited conservation. I do believe we can actually substantially reduce oil demand (we will have to) and the market will make us do it. I'm not sure there will have to be "oil panic" scenario the doomsayers paint. The price will make us do things differently. 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, perhaps accelerating rise in prices. But I promise you, that will reach a point where it reduces demand and where it will drive investment in new technologies.
As for the other uses of oil in making plastics, drugs, paints, etc. Well, the switch to alternatives will "free up" some of that supply. Also, it is possible to synthetically produce many of those products from more basic organic compounds, it is just too expensive to o so right now.
No, my big worry is fertilizer and the food supply. I don't see how we can avoid a decrease in food production. Still, from Paul Erlich onwards, those who have given us predictions of doom by such-and-such a time have been consistently wrong. And I think that is only because their predictions are based on an "all things being equal" basis. The trouble is things change. New technologies, new efficiencies, clever ideas. That won't stop happening.
The one thing we can be sure of, however, is that the world 50 years from now will not look much like the world of today. And I'd say that might be a very good thing. Sure, it might be an epoch-shattering disaster. But I'd prefer to work on making it a good thing.
It is going to be a challenging time. I sure agree with you on that!
They could try using insulation (Score:1, Interesting)
And it wasn't just his house, his friends out there had similar problems with their houses.
Coming from the UK, it was wierd, them not having roof insulation or central heating.
Re:Australia and Kyoto (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah right.
Kyoto is about fossile fuels adding pre historic CO2 to the global atmosphere.
Forest fires are are a form of recycling and not covered by the treaty.
Talking about a myth...
Re:New trend? (Score:3, Interesting)
This sounds like a new twist on the same thing. Sorry, excuse my scepticism, but as soon as I read the story, my reaction was "they need to *buy* new products to replace old ones? How convenient..."
Here's what I want from Japan (Score:3, Interesting)
Even better, a _diesel_ Toyota Prius that can recharge the same way. That thing would get 50mpg from the engine alone, plus synergy drive would probably drive fuel consumption down even further.
Re:Dieselveg.com (Score:2, Interesting)
However, how would it function in turbine engines, such as those used in helicopters, jet aircraft, etc.? Is it possible to refine vegeteble oil so that it can be used in these types of engines?
As for being a "net importer" of many things, that's true. I don't know if the US is a net importer of food, however...I seem to recall the US having the capacity to produce vast amounts of grain and other staple foods, quite a bit of which is donated to international food programs.
Everyone keeps talking about "outsourcing this" and "outsourcing that"...but I still note that, what, 95% of people in the US are employed? People are able to have a roof over their head, electricity, running water, a car, 50% in the US have computers, internet access, and so forth.
While I agree that moving to a "service-based" economy is silly, it still is able to employ a bunch of people, produce enough goods, and provide enough services to the point where the US economy is growing. Whether or not the economy is gong to be sustainable is a matter for the economists to work on. I'll stick with hard science, thank you.
Re:You fail to give one other reason for SUVs... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:New trend? (Score:3, Interesting)
I was rewatching a copy of The Ipcress File the other night and at the beginning we see Michael Cane's Harry Palmer. The opening scene is constructed to show what a sophisticated goumet, bon viveur and babe-magnet he is. They demonstrate this by showing him opening a tin of tiny mushrooms in brine , labelled 'champignon'.
Laughable, but back in the 60s, it was hip to use refined, tinned goods, rather than the fresh stuff, white bread, central heating avocados, they were hip baby. The fact that you could afford white bread showed you weren't a peasant. Hell, when I was in S. America several years ago, tinned goods were produced for honoured guests, rather than the papayas growing outside.
Now rustic loaves, wood burning stoves and locally produced produce are hip - at least around here.
I suspect it won't be long before conspicuous consumers are seen as old fashioned dullards.
Do the Math (Score:3, Interesting)
150 ma of idle current is a tad high, by the way. It's closer to
If you can pull your head from your rectum long enough, you might find that there is this concept known as "common ground", and while you'd rather be bashing Bush, you should be working with him.
Food supply (Score:1, Interesting)
I will admit to not being a farmer, although I grew up in a fairly rural area, but my understanding is that today, we produce too much food, enough that governments (particularly the US government) have had to subsidize not growing certain products to keep the market from crashing. *shrug* The problem, as usual, is distribution.