[SGVLUG] [OT]Hybrids and trains (was fuel prices and the dollar)

[Mike Rubel]

I know this isn't Linux-related, but I have to take issue with a few of
these points.  Others have already written in, but I like to hear myself
talk, so...  :)

Disclaimer: I don't own a hybrid, but I do commute by train and bicycle.

> Hybrids use internal combustion engines no more energy-efficient than
> the engines on non-hybrids.

I fear this is a misleading statement.  The engines may or may not have a
higher Carnot efficiency, but if they are used more efficiently, then they
can consume less fuel per mile, and that is what happens in practice.

> They also waste a lot of energy converting the gasoline motor power to
> electricity, charging a battery, and then withdrawing energy from the
> battery to power an electric motor to move the car.

This isn't how most hybrids work; instead, they have multiple energy
pathways.  In the case of the Prius, there is a purely mechanical linkage
from the engine to the drive wheels, and most of the power goes over that
linkage.  There is another, more lossy, pathway via the motor/generator
and batteries, which is used to smooth out power delivery during
variable-speed driving.  It comes at a cost in weight and complexity, but
obviously that cost is offset by other gains, or they wouldn't bother.

> All this energy conversion wastes energy and adds to the
> weight of the car.  The reason hybrids get good mileage is not because
> they are inherently efficient, but because people don't know how to
> efficiently drive a non-hybrid and because laws and car design, etc.,
> impede one from efficiently driving it.

Yes, all else being equal, a non-hybrid could be driven more efficiently
under approximately constant-speed conditions, due to its lower weight. 
Under real driving conditions, however, hybrids do better.

> Efficient driving will mean doing a lot of coasting but coasting in
> neutral is illegal.

In which states is coasting in neutral illegal?  When driving a manual, I
coast when possible, especially down long hills.  I never realized I was
breaking the law.

> As for trains vs. airplanes, it turns out that they are about equally
> energy efficient, and we don't save energy by taking the train.

That's simply too strong a statement, it depends on a lot of variables,
including the fraction of filled seats, the number of stops, the length of
the trip, and the efficiency of the equipment.  It may be that Amtrak
trains, which often run with only a small fraction of seats filled and are
typically used for short trips, have comparable per-passenger fuel
consumption to airplanes, which are almost always packed and are used for
longer trips.  It does not follow that "we don't save energy by taking the
train" in general.

-Mike