Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
the point is that the Prius is a big car
Not that old chestnut again. In terms of interior space it's certainly not a big car. If I drove at the speed limit I'd get pretty close (if not better) your figures in what is really a large car - can certainly manage 50+mpg with a light right foot. Oh, that's a 10 year old large car.
That's not true with fuel injected cars, and it's never been true of diesels.
LOL
You SURE of that?
On some of the VERY latest diesels, yeah you're right. But on just about anything else, regardless of whether or not it's fuel injected, the engine is still burning a very small amount of fuel (approx the same amount as if it were sat idling).
Molgrips, your right he didn't get 80 mpg from an old passat on average, he only manages about 77-8mpg then. :p
He can get the 80+ on a trip from Nailsworth to Gloucestershire airport, but can't do as well on the way back.
That Prius planetary gear setup is nothing new, and I'm not being funny. That setup, albeit with 3 planetary gears (instead of 4 and a multiplate clutch pack) is what connects the rear wheels of my Cavalier 4x4 with the front axle.
You SURE of that?On some of the VERY latest diesels, yeah you're right. But on just about anything else, regardless of whether or not it's fuel injected, the engine is still burning a very small amount of fuel (approx the same amount as if it were sat idling).
Well I'm sure - on overrun the fuel injection will shut off.
Oh, almost forgot 😆 😆
I get 53mpg on tank from my 1.7 non-turbo diesel 1998 Vauxhall Combo, just shows that the prius is nothing remarkable. Though my van won't do more than 88mph downhill lol.
Agreed. Some creative maths here methinks. I've now got an N plate Golf (no company car when you're on the dole! ) with the same 1.9TDi engine. It's a great engine for what it is, remarkable in fact when you consider at the time it came out all other diesels were crap underpowered junk with nowhere near the economy. But in my Golf, a lighter car than the Passat, the absolute best I've achieved when driving very sensibly is about 56mpg out of a tankful. More normally I achieve between 48 and 52mpg depending on whether or not that's more town or open road driving.
You have to realize, that the driver in questions has spent years perfecting a technique of engine off coasting, shutting the engine off at lights and absolutely no change in throttle travel. I've been a passenger on several occasions, and I'm not suprised, its quite scary his approaches into roundabouts etc 😆
Well I'm sure - on overrun the fuel injection will shut off.
LOL
[Tommy Cooper Impression Voice]"Just Like That!"[/Tommy Cooper Impression Voice]
Just shuts off does it? What tells it to start again? 😉
It's the way a car is mapped... Some very modern cars are mapped so that the engine is indeed burning no fuel under deceleration (which is still less efficient than an electric motor actually recharging a battery, but nuff said there!). Only some very modern cars though.
I'd absolutely LOVE to hear how a diesel engine with Mechanical fuel injection doesn't provide fuel to the engine under deceleration still. Otherwise it would never tick over! 😕
You have to realize, that the driver in questions has spent years perfecting a technique of engine off coasting, shutting the engine off at lights and absolutely no change in throttle travel.
OK fair enough, and I suppose the route that you described takes in a big section of downhill the one way too, hence why he can't manage the same MPG on the return route.
In terms of interior space it's certainly not a big car
It's bigger than a Golf - as big as an older Passat. You talk like I've never been in one.
You SURE of that?
Yes. The forward motion of the car is what keeps the engine turning. Why inject fuel?
That Prius planetary gear setup is nothing new, and I'm not being funny
Planetary gears have been around for years. The use of that setup with two motor/generators for driving a car is new. The MkI Prius was the first car to have it - 1997.
As for the 80mpg story - he must've been driving like a snail. Anyone else who's driven one of those cars (and there are a lot of us about) can tell you that's not practical for normal driving ie not stupidly slowly.
In my other car, a Passat 2.0 TDI, I have got 54mpg on a long 70mph run on summer diesel, but the long term average since September is about 42 or so. What's interesting though is that that can drop to the low 30s when you get stuck in traffic. The Prius handles traffic way way better, which is where we came in isn't it? Suitability of different drivetrains for different conditions?
Yes. The forward motion of the car is what keeps the engine turning. Why inject fuel?
Totally, why inject fuel indeed...
Only something that has been addressed MUCH more recently than you might think though!
I'd absolutely LOVE to hear how a diesel engine with Mechanical fuel injection doesn't provide fuel to the engine under deceleration still. Otherwise it would never tick over!
You really want me to dig out the schematics for the Bosch VE pump? From memory there's a governer that shifts the control collar to provide more fuel to the plunger when rotation speed drops below a certain amount. That's how it idles when you have your foot off the pedal, and also why it uses no fuel when the forward motion of the car is spinning the engine and hence governer and your foot's off the pedal.
You have to realize, that the driver in questions has spent years perfecting a technique of engine off coasting, shutting the engine off at lights and absolutely no change in throttle travel. I've been a passenger on several occasions, and I'm not suprised, its quite scary his approaches into roundabouts etc
So he's an ultra-miling tw*t then? The record fuel economy for my Prius model was 112mpg averaged over a whole tank, using a coast and burn stragety on empty flat rural roads. Not really a very useful thing to be able to boast about is it?
As for the 80mpg story - he must've been driving like a snail. Anyone else who's driven one of those cars (and there are a lot of us about) can tell you that's not practical for normal driving ie not stupidly slowly
No driving like a snail, coast as fast as you like, and you'd be surprised how far you can coast if you really put your mind to it. He'll still achieve 75+ on average on a tank. He will stick to around 55mph, but only in suitable areas and I say 'around' because he doesn't lift or press the throttle harder for to keep the speed the same, just flat level.
So he's an ultra-miling tw*t then? The record fuel economy for my Prius model was 112mpg averaged over a whole tank, using a coast and burn stragety on empty flat rural roads. Not really a very useful thing to be able to boast about is it?
Why isn't a useful thing to boast about? Why buy a Prius if its not about the 'not burning precious natural resources'? He's got a 15 year old car, its not digging more raw materials out for a new one every 3 years and its achieving a approx 75% improvement in fuel economy. Way I see it, thats far more cleaner and greener than your Prius will ever be.
Bored now.
How about a diesel hybrid, 1960's style?
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_55 ]Old tech[/url]
I think we should move to the 'Flintstones' model.
However you do it, moving a ton of metal at 60mph needs too much energy
Stick to your bike ❗
Why isn't a useful thing to boast about?
Cos it's not practical to drive that way, and it's not really safe either. There's a load I could do in my car to increase MPG, and if I was prepared to drive erratically and get in other drivers' way I could increase it much more.
Whilst we're on about ideal journeys, I once got 78mpg coming from my sister's in Bucknell, Shropshire to Ludlow. It's up a steep hill then down a very long gradual one, and since the Prius automatically coasts under light throttle I got good results. Also got a similar figure driving to town from my house, 5 miles or so, slightly downhill, when there was no traffic.
Sticking to your bike is best naturally, as long as you don't need to move anyone else around and you don't need to travel hundreds of miles away from railway stations 🙂
He's got a 15 year old car, its not digging more raw materials out for a new one every 3 years and its achieving a approx 75% improvement in fuel economy. Way I see it, thats far more cleaner and greener than your Prius will ever be.
That car was new once mate. How do you know how long I'm keeping my Prius for? Being a bit presumptious are't you?
Also, bear in mind that his diesel produces more CO2 than my petrol, so 60mpg of petrol is worth about 70 ish mpg of diesel in terms of carbon emissions. Also his old diesel produces a hell of a lot of NOx which my petrol doesn't, not to mention all the particulates since he has no filter. So it's not significantly greener in terms of emissions really. And in 15 years time maybe I can boast the same abotu my old Prius..?
How do you know how long I'm keeping my Prius for?
15 years? That would be far longer than normal for a Prius owner (can I point out that we're not specifically having a go at you - unlike many Prius owners you do appear to have a clue). Of course despite some people getting a new car every 3 years, that doesn't mean cars get scrapped after 3 years, however it would seem that scrapping after 10 years is now the done thing...
I don't see what is inherently unsafe about ultra-miling either (assuming you're not into tricks like drafting 3ft behind HGVs).
Hyper miling is only practical if you have empty roads. It would really get up other drivers noses if you did it in traffic. Thereby leading to great rage perhaps and more agressive overtaking etc although the responsibility for keeping calm lies with every driver not the thing annoying them. So I guess unsafe isn't the right word, but impractical for sure. For starters, if everyone did it it wouldn't work.
As for normal Prius owners - I don't know if there's a 'type' for Prius owners. If there is, round by us it's old folk since they seem to be the most common drivers I see. I guess the reason you only see newer Priuses is because they've only been out (in a decent form) since 2003, and they only started selling in reasonable numbers in 2005 ish. Check back in 2015 maybe 🙂
On the other hand, changing cars every year isn't really related to what car you buy, is it? I mean I'm sure people did this before hybrids were invented... So I suppose if you are going to change your car frequently it might as well be an economical one.
As for scrapping older cars, this is an intersting topic. Where my wife's from in the States cars are kept far longer than they are here. Maybe because used car prices are very high, which is odd because new car prices are quite low. Certainly cars that would be junked here would be worth several thousand there; you need a good few thousand to get anything decent to drive and if you only have say one thousand you get a complete wreck. It could be something to do with them having no MOT requirement tho, cos that's usaully what kills cars here. The market for spares and tools to fix your own cars is high over there, and there are plenty of mechanics willing to work on old cars unlike here where they tend to just fob you off with the excuse that it's only old rubbish.
It is true then that pepole buying new cars frequently trickles down the market with the result that most people are now driving a modern efficient safe car, but that in turn means more perfectly viable cars ending up on the scrap heap. This has to have good implications for safety and tailpipe emissions.. but not necessarily manufacturing. Then again, that leads on to the debate about traditional economic growth vs eco friendlyness - whether or not the two are mutually exclusive, as I suspect they are.
Then again, that leads on to the debate about traditional economic growth vs eco friendlyness - whether or not the two are mutually exclusive, as I suspect they are.
correct.
<<prius is nothing remarkable.>>
yer i had one on hire and got the mpg down to 26mpg! lol - only seems efficent at 55mph - fully loaded and flat out you would be better of in a decent diesel - even my dads 4.2 twin turbo Audi A8 will for 40mpg on a run...
anyhow a good thing out electric cars is that whilst there are issues about moving emissions and transmision losses in the nationa grid they do remove emissions from towns and to large point sources such as power stations - easier to abate one large source than lots of little ones.
addtionally as district/micro generation picks up then transmission gris losses will be reduced.
nothing is clear cut in the environment game!
Maybe for now TJ, but people are trying to find better paths:
[i]Prosperity without Growth[/i]
Economics for a Finite Planet
http://www.earthscan.co.uk/ProsperityWithoutGrowth/tabid/102098/Default.aspx
What annoyed me about the scrappage scheme was the complete lack of measurement. Why didn't they insist the new car must be at least, say 15mpg better than your old car?
<<What annoyed me about the scrappage scheme was the complete lack of measurement. Why didn't they insist the new car must be at least, say 15mpg better than your old car? >>
yep too right - poor use of government instrument.
So are they greener then, there seems to be much umming and ahhing here? I'm the OP and I'm none the wiser.
It seems that were we using renewables for all our electricity then electric cars are viable but as it stands today there is very little environmental benefit to going electric. A conventional deisel built for low fuel consumption is the way to go.
If I, for example, wanted a new car next year waiting for an uber tricky electric hybrid doo dad to come out is pretty pointless.
Joolsburger - not significantly if at all is the answer.
It really depends on what you are wanting to achieve. Better air quality in towns - good for that. Reduced greenhouse gas emmisions in total - not so good.
If you are wanting a "green car" and no such thing actually exists then a small light car with a long life and an economical engine is as good a bet as any - [i]imo[/i]
What annoyed me about the scrappage scheme was the complete lack of measurement. Why didn't they insist the new car must be at least, say 15mpg better than your old car?
Well to be fair, it would seem that the vast majority of new cars bought under this scheme were cheap small cars which are relatively economical (doesn't make so much sense saving £2k off a £20k car as off a £8k car, where it makes a brand new car just as cheap as a s/h one).
You are making the mistake though of assuming the scrappage scheme has anything to do with the environment - is all about economic stimulus, and see comment above from molgrips!
Joolsburger, I think you sum it up pretty well.
Here and now in 2010, small light economical cars are the best bet for emissions (thats why I drive an Audi A2).
However as a country we WILL have lots of wind power over the next decade, and using the battery storage of electric cars will be part of that energy solution. My own thought is that even if in the short term the electricity comes from coal or gas then thats the price that has to be paid to generate the market for electric cars.
Small cars are best - of course, some folk need something larger when they have kids and whatnot.
fully loaded and flat out you would be better of in a decent diesel
Not really. Like I say I get 60mpg in the summer time at the speed limit, goes down to 52-54 on an 80mph run down the M4. At the time I bought the car there was nothing in diesel that could compete with that, for a similar size. Now a bluemotion Passat can beat it in terms of mpg but produce more CO2. Then again the new Prius is better still.
Molgrips - no matter how you try to justify it to yourself you know you are wrong. The prius simply is not a green option. It is designed for places where you get tax breaks for zero tailpipe emissions. Its lifetime environmental footprint is poor.
You may [i]want[/i] a largeish luxury car. You do not [i]need[/i] one. A fiat panda would do all; the practical tasks just as well.
addtionally as district/micro generation picks up then transmission gris losses will be reduced
Sadly not quite as simple as that. It may make them go up or down depending on the generation penetration in different areas. We are already exporting distributed generation (11kV or LV connected stuff) on to the supergrid (National Grid to you) and transporting the power off to other areas - in the company for which I work as the design manager, so that's first hand experience. Why not use it locally? Because it is a generation rich area, not load rich. And that sadly leads to more "grid" losses. Other places it does save losses.
The prius simply is not a green option. It is designed for places where you get tax breaks for zero tailpipe emissions.
I don't believe so. Wanna show me the unbiased scientific studies so I can change my mind?
PS they are still selling fast in the US and there are no longer any tax breaks. They are selling based on high fuel economy.
As for needing a big car, well we don't need a car at all do we if you're going to split hairs. You also don't need a computer to come on STW, how green is that? Your house doens't need heating either for that matter. You could live off-grid with super insulation and solar powered LED lighting. But you don't, do you? Why not?
When I bought that car the Prius was the greenest car that I could fit me, my wife and my biking stuff in. According to the Green Car Congress website and some other stuff I'd read (which included ashes to ashes energy costs).
Also, [url= http://blog.toyota.co.uk/prius-tsutsumi-eco-factory ]check this out[/url]. The factory that makes Priuses gets half its electricity from solar power.
PS they are still selling fast in the US and there are no longer any tax breaks. They are selling based on high fuel economy.
Not because of the "looking like you're being green" factor?
The thing is, whilst the economy on runs might be very good, it's not really all that special - I can get 50mpg at 80 with something rather bigger than yours (and 10 years old). Why would you expect otherwise given all the clever electric stuff is just so much dead weight on such a run, and the only reason for the slightly better figures is very careful tweaking of aero, engine performance etc.
Aracer - so what? Prius CO2 emissions are lower than any other car, including your ten year old one. So when I was shopping for a new car in 2006 what should I have bought? Should I have bought a diesel that emitted a third more CO2, had loads of NOx, and got less to the gallon?
Please bear in mind that a 50mpg diesel emits more CO2 than a 50mpg petrol.
I'm keen to know - what would you rather I have got? If I were buying now I'd seriously have considered a bluemotion Golf, but they still have higher emissions than a new Prius. So please tell me what I should be driving.
A Prius obviously - just pointing out they're not the "solution" some people seem to suggest (I appreciate that's probably not you - we probably agree more than disagree).
Maverickboy speaks the truth:
The answer also lies with not changing our cars every 3 years (or however long) with them being designed for a 10 year shelf life. It is far less environmentally damaging to keep a 10 year old car running that perhaps does 30mpg than it is to go out and buy a new equivalent that does 45mpg! Mainly because the amount of energy required to make a car in the first place is estimated to equal the equivalent amount of fuel a car will burn in an average 7 years on the road milage!
I've often thought of replacing my 16 year old Isuzu 4wd with something newer - but why? It's still pretty reliable, costs pennies to service & repair and it's FAR kinder to the planet to keep the thing going a few more years than seal the fate of more CO2 emissions buy buying a new or newer car.
People sometimes ask me what car they should get. My answer is "The one you've already got".
I think you will find that a diesel emits less CO2 than a gasoline one. I am also quite sure that the company car tax is higher for diesels to account for this.
molgrips - you mis the point entirely.
You have a car plus a battery. Your improved fuel economy does not cover the poluting cost of the battery and there are many cars with better lifetime polution than a prius bwecause of this. any small supermini for example.
there are no good figures becauswe toyota will not release them. its all about the production and disposal of the battery - that cause more polutiopn than is saved by the hybrid tech.
just stop fooling yourself - the prius is a greenwash.
As a genuine question does anyone have any info on the carbon footprint of Lithium ion batteries, and also info on recycling of them?
Its the recycling thing that intrigues me, as I suspect that (like aluminium and titanium) the engergy to reprocess and OLD cell into a new cell might be much lower than to make one fresh from stuff dug up from the groumd.
just pointing out they're not the "solution" some people seem to suggest
Absolutely. Only thick people think that though. Prius and other eco models are only a very small step. Given the choice I'd rather work from home and not drive anywhere apart from on holiday.
TJ - tell me about the environmental impact of making batteries please. I mean with evidence..? How much worse is a Prius than a normal car in construction? Some figures would be nice.
[url= http://hybridblog.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/08/about_that_cnw_.html ]Here are some studies[/url] that support the idea that hybrids are overall eco friendlier than conventional powertrains. However I will accept that they are American studies and therefore compare hybrids with normal petrol rather than diesel cars. However, that is a fair point since hybrids make far more of an impact in the States where smog related restrictions on NOx emissions are very stringent and prevent most diesels being sold.
Absolutely. Only thick people think that though.
Lots of thick people drive Priu.
[i]...Prius and other eco models are only a very small step...[/i]
Exactly!
'We' are not going to magically move from hydrocarbon-guzzling raw material-hogging machines to super clean transport in one jump.
OK the Prius may not be [i]the[/i] solution but it's certainly an improvement not least because it takes 'environmentally friendly transport' from the domain of the tofu wearing green freaks into the public consciousness.
Green or dirty, our economy is always going to be consumer led - anything that raises awareness/enthusiasm will make each subsequent step easier...
Lots of thick people drive Priu.
Lots of thick people drive cars mate, not just Priuses.
Another point about all these cars that are somewhat greener is that they need to sell in order to encourage the markets. Don't forget the normal everyday diesels people are talking about 20 years ago were weirdo eco cars. Only because some people bought them were the manufacturers able to develop them and now they are a major contribution to reduced fuel usage; we're on here talking about 50mpg instead of 35mpg.
One of the reasons I bought a 104g/km Prius was to support the technology. Overall it was a success and now there's an 89g/km Prius available, which is still selling well. Toyota are now working on a range of hybrids including a small Yaris sized one, which will be interesting.
OK the Prius may not be the solution but it's certainly an improvement not least because it takes 'environmentally friendly transport' from the domain of the tofu wearing green freaks into the public consciousness
This is the key IMO. Cars like the Prius (right or wrong) are seen as an alternative and do make people think. Lentil-wearing, sandal-eating greenie-crusties going on about coasting/etc are too easy to sideline and ignore. Even if the execution of the Prius isn't right (eg it's not actually greener) it's a general step in the right direction of acceptance of non-hydrocarbon (only) cars.
hilldodger, molgrips and clubber have summed it up perfectly for me in the above three posts. It's about accepting that we have a transport tech transition to go through. Some people will want to be early adopters, others will wait until there is no other choice. Me, I like to be ahead of the curve so will be keen to get a rechargable electric (or hybrid) when they are available.
Good points, reminds me of a show I heard regarding energy saving light bulbs the other day. So many manufacturers desperately trying to make them look and operate like existing filament bulbs. So much inertia in the consumer market. They could be made any way they like, to be more effective etc. but they're constrained by the willingness of the consumer to accept change. "I have to wait two seconds for my bleedin' bulb to turn on!"
"Why can't an electric car be exactly the same as a petrol one but run off of leccy?"
Amazing how little change people are willing to accept.
Amazing how little change people are willing to accept.
It does of course depend whether the change is neutral or negligible as you're suggesting, or actually seriously inconvenient (which is I suspect how most people would feel about having to stop overnight to recharge half way up to Scotland).
It All sounds like “Blue sky” Bullshit now to me if I’m honest…
We are told all the answers are coming, Low carbon modern living is always, it seems, just around the corner…
The only real workable “here and now” answer to reducing CO2 is to actually use less energy full stop….
All the talk of incremental technological advances to effectively try and let us live the same lifestyles we do today with a bit of offset guilt are pointless.
Whatever the Car of the future may or may not be most people are still driving the Car of today, and pretty inefficiently too, I’m a prime offender this morning I drove 20 miles in a petrol powered vehicle weighing about 2 tons on my own, to an office where I have currently got no work to do, and later I’m going to drive 20miles home, that if I’m honest should be a crime, I’m sure I’m not the only one wasting resources so needlessly…
The fact of the matter is that just about everything we do these days produces more CO2 than it should do; I eat Imported food, I drive an imported car made of materials themselves mined, refined and exported to the manufacturer, I burn Imported Gas to keep me and My family warm in our under-insulated Home, and I waste Energy using a computer for fruitless activities like posting on various forum’ and looking at shit I don’t really need to purchase on the internet…
I’m not going to make excuses I’ve fallen into Bad, wasteful habits and I know I’m not the only one. The only real way to pollute less is to literally Do less, be more efficient in your day to day energy use, Car pooling is a start, Cycling and Walking more will help, Growing some of your own food, Insulating the Loft and wall cavities in your home, low energy Bulbs, watch less TV and have a conversation instead. We all know 100 ways to reduce our “Carbon Footprint” yet instead people get all excited over little wisps of information on the “Car of the Future” which, when it gets here, will probably only save a Net ~5% in total Energy use over the car of today, a saving you could probably make right now by leaving your current motor on the drive once a week and cycling…
Buying another overpriced Tin box that claims to run on carrot juice is all well and good, but I think in all honesty the real answer is to scale back energy consumption thus requiring us to burn less fuel…
or actually seriously inconvenient (which is I suspect how most people would feel about having to stop overnight to recharge half way up to Scotland).
Although this is a step removed from the very small inconveniences I was relating to but it's along the same lines. I may be in a minority but i regard it as a pretty incredible privilege to be able to jump in a car and [i]expect[/i] to be able to go wherever the hell we want non-stop. Anyway, a journey the length of the country is a pretty extreme example of car use. Most people I know could use an electric car without even realising considering their average journey length.
As has been pointed out ad infinitum, it all depends on what lengths we're willing to go to lower energy wastage/use. These lengths vary wildly and I would suppose that not many people would take the sacrifices necessary to mitigate fossil fuel usage to the levels claimed. (I would include myself in this number just in case you had yourself poised to jump down my throat).
As has been pointed out ad infinitum, it all depends on what lengths we're willing to go to lower energy wastage/use. These lengths vary wildly and I would suppose that not many people would take the sacrifices necessary to mitigate fossil fuel usage to the levels claimed. (I would include myself in this number just in case you had yourself poised to jump down my throat).
If that’s the general consensus then as a species we’re probably ****ed…
A society too lazy to make what are effectively pretty simple changes to what has become over the last 50 odd years probably the most Decadent and wasteful way of living in Human history, probably deserves to be wiped out…
cookeaa,
Although in my darker musings I might be persuaded to agree, I generally think that we can adapt as a species but not through any inherent right or even ability. We'll change our behaviour when environmental pressures dictate that we have no choice. I cynically think that political pressure is never going to be sufficient. Man has always tended to live to the limit of capable means. When these means are reduced, mankind will follow.
Sorry for dragging this a little ot 😕
Yes cookeaa, I think you are a little fatalistic there.
Of course there is a chance you are right, but if you proceed on the "we're doooomed! and everythings futile" train of thought then you start acting like a grumpy EMO.
One idea with electric cars in the future is quickly swapped batteries - you drop into a service station and swap them quicker than it takes to fill with petrol. In that model you don't actually own the battery itself - bit like Calor Gas bottles. Obviously the car itself needs to be designed to suit, but a good lateral idea all the same.
Cookeaa.. you are right, that brings us back to the problems of conventional economic growth. Economies have been based for decades on the idea that we make more things and make more money - the only problem with that is that it requires more and more resources and energy. The thing is now that we are beginning to depend on things that needs lots of energy ie the company I am now working at depends on people for thsi project who are having to drive 1-2 hours each from different places. To start substantially reducing our production we would either need a depression that'd make the great depression look like tiddlywinks, or a radical rethink which I think is currently beyond us as a society. Although I do believe we'll get there at some point.
The point you make about leaving the car in the drive one day a week instead of getting a more efficient car is nonsense tho. You should leave it in the drive one day a week AND get a more efficient car. People tend to think that if they make a saving, then that's ok - but you need to make ALL the savings you can, even if it means cycling to work every day and only using your fuel efficient car at weekends.
Personally I'd telecommute at the drop of a hat, if I could.
Most people I know could use an electric car without even realising considering their average journey length.
I suspect most people might not be too happy if the range of their car was based on their average journey length.
The thing is with all this "we need to change our behaviour" stuff is that even if we all drove electric cars (including all the new car buyers in China) AND they were as environmentally wonderful as some people seem to think, it would still only make a tiny difference. Not really that useful an area to concentrate resources on.
Perhaps I'm being fatalistic, But I really Can't see how peoples energy use will change anytime soon, entrenched expectations ...
You're Right Molgrips we do have an economy geared towards consumption, Growth driven by unsustainable consumption is what primarily drives our Economy at the moment, if all the talk of a "Low Carbon Economy" is to come to anything then I think Businesses that manage to offer goods and services which actually do the opposite; actually capitalize on opportunities to reduce consumption, need to be encouraged, some true innovation is required, not just repackaging the consumer world we already live in with the strap line "Low Emissions" thrown in for good measure.