1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Volvo Showcases Rechargeable Hybrid Concept Car

Discussion in 'News' started by zekrahminator, Sep 7, 2007.

  1. zekrahminator

    zekrahminator McLovin

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    9,114 (2.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    321
    Location:
    My house.
    Fortunately for the environment, it seems as though hybrid cars are starting to catch on. In anticipation of the Frankfurt Motor Show next week, Volvo recently posted some information on their new concept car, the ReCharge. Based on the C30 Hatchback, the ReCharge concept boasts a Lithium Polymer battery that can drive the car for 62 miles without help from the motor, and an all-wheel-drive system. A flex-fuel four cylinder engine can drive what the electric system can't. However, Volvo added something that most hybrid owners have been expecting since the first retail models went to market: a charge cord. If the battery is low in the ReCharge, a customer can plug it in, saving the gasoline otherwise required to recharge the battery. As of yet, there is no word on when we can see a non-concept version.

    [​IMG]

    Source: EnGadget
  2. ryboto

    ryboto New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    294 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Finally plugin hybrids!
  3. jaxxxon New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    174 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    11
    Location:
    Wales
    Who cares, China with their 1.3 billion population burning fossil fules like theres no tomorrow dosen't care, so what the hell difference will a frikkin electric car make.
  4. mdm-adph

    mdm-adph New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,478 (0.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    340
    Location:
    Your house.
    Don't speak so soon -- all of China's population isn't like that; it's mostly just the coastal cities. From what I've heard, most of China's inland population is so agrarian they're still living like they were 1000 years ago. Not much pollution worries there. :p
  5. ryboto

    ryboto New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    294 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Plugins are the next progression of hybrids. It wont necessarily make sense from a fossil fuels point of view, since the majority of the power plants providing recharge electricity are coal fired. Until they start selling them with a solar recharge kit, or we build more Nuclear plants, fossil fuel consumption wont change.
  6. d44ve New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,521 (0.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    309
    whats the point of plugging it in.... the power plant used to for the electricity is most likely using fossil fuels?



    EDIT : Sorry, just saw your post there.
  7. Glump Bliermp New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    Messages:
    74 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    LOLO!L!OL why do people think that plugging your car in = emmission free? The Coal Fired power plant is not emmission free>!>>!:banghead: This global warming crap is just a scam. Just get on with the FUKING HYDROGEN!
  8. ryboto

    ryboto New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    294 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    and how do you plan on making hydrogen? from water? where are you going to get the power to crack that? The only alternatives are either use Nuclear, or dump money into research for bio-methanol/ethanol that we can reform to make H2. The CO2 produced will just be reused by the biomass that the fuel is derived from, essentially carbon neutral. As for plugins, if they upped the price a little and included a solar cell+battery that collected energy during the day, you could plug your car into it when you got home, essentially using no fossil fuels. Since Hybrids aren't cheap, it's not like it would be a huge risk to make a cheaper car, and bundle the solar/photovoltaic cell with it.
  9. Thermopylae_480

    Thermopylae_480 New Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    Messages:
    3,685 (1.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    393
    Location:
    Little Rock Arkansas, United States
    Emissions from bio-fuels, like ethanol, aren't neutralized by the crop they were produced from. Between pesticides, fertilizers, and harvesting equipment, bio-fuels are rather fossil fuel intensive. Not to mention you're removing plant mass from the land that, under normal agricultural conditions, would normally be re-incorporated into the soils. This results in numerous detrimental repercussions to the quality of the soil. The only thing bio-fuels are good for are reducing dependence of foreign energy sources. They're ultimately no more sustainable than fossil fuels. They also result in increased food prices for meats, milk, and other food products derived from livestock.
  10. ghost101

    ghost101 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,332 (0.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    165
    Location:
    London
    People should also understand that powerplants are far more efficient than your combustion engine. Just like hydrogen, which if done with large economies of scale through electrolysis will probably be more efficient than the combustion engine.

    As for the argument that this will have little effect as far as total CO2 emmisions go, thats true. But we have to start somewhere right? Otherwise we wouldnt progress at all.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combustion_engine#Engine_Efficiency
  11. mdm-adph

    mdm-adph New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,478 (0.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    340
    Location:
    Your house.
    1. Nuclear power plants. Just 400 more could provide all the power than even America needs daily.
    2. Store nuclear waste.
    3. Wait 100 years.
    4. Send into sun via space elevators.

    Problem of where to get electricity from: solved. (Even quicker if we develop nuclear fusion plants.)
  12. wazzledoozle

    wazzledoozle New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,414 (1.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    161
    Location:
    Seattle
    Nuclear + hydrogen is the answer to the end of fossil fuels.

    Unfortunately the sensationalist media has made Nuclear *anything* into a bogeyman.
  13. kwchang007

    kwchang007 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,979 (1.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    185
    Location:
    Severn, MD, USA.
    BYAH BITCHES (not intended at anyone...just felt like saying it) upwards of 90% of my electricty comes from nuclear power. Oh and there are kits for this for the prius...lol, taking ideas from the modding community basically.

    Also as far as future energy, nuclear power+high efficiency batteries for an electric car.
  14. DaMulta

    DaMulta My stars went supernova

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    16,117 (5.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,454
    Location:
    Oklahoma T-Town
    We need something like solar panel paint.

    Hey I should patent that idea.
  15. DaMulta

    DaMulta My stars went supernova

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    16,117 (5.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,454
    Location:
    Oklahoma T-Town
  16. WarEagleAU

    WarEagleAU Bird of Prey

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    10,796 (3.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    545
    Location:
    Gurley, AL
    Wow...pretty efficient. 62 Miles on a single battery charge.
  17. kakazza New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    470 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    No single nuclear plant in my country. But we produce more than half of our electricity with hydropower and together with other renewable energy sources such as wind, solar and biomass powerplants, the electricity supply from renewable energy amounts to nearly 80% of total use here.

    And wtf "just 400 more nuclear powerplants" how is that a good idea? >_>
  18. zekrahminator

    zekrahminator McLovin

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    9,114 (2.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    321
    Location:
    My house.
    Secret government plan to make the USA a nation of super-humans by irradiating the population when one of those explodes/leaks :p.
  19. wazzledoozle

    wazzledoozle New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,414 (1.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    161
    Location:
    Seattle
    Solar and wind have an extremely small power density. Powering New York City alone with Solar/Wind/Tidal is not feasible due to the population density and urbanization, there is simply not room for the square miles that would be required for solar panels and wind turbines. Those are excellent for rural areas, instead of using fossil fuels, but dont work on a large scale.

    Instead of going "omg nuclear power is teh evilz, RADIATION!", you should read up on modern nuclear power. Pointing out Chernobyl will just prove your ignorance.

    In the future we can have coastal cities using nuclear power locally and producing hydrogen as a fuel for engines. Rural areas and farms can use the hydrogen and renewable energy to get by.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power#Future_of_the_industry

    France gets 79% of its power from Nuclear, and has never had an accident.
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2007
  20. kwchang007

    kwchang007 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,979 (1.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    185
    Location:
    Severn, MD, USA.
    zomg what about 9 islands or w/e it was. j/k though, honestly nuclear power is safe people, and even if you don't think it isn't....then get legislature to get the cores under ground. Honestly though...that's an assload of money, nuclear power+electric cars=great future.
  21. kakazza New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    470 (0.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    I'm not saying that it 'omg shit fucking blows up', but dispensing the nuclear waste is still not easy. Stuff just piles up.

    I know the new generation of nuclear power plants are teh safe and high tech, but Europe for example runs those from what? 60s? 70s? Those are not exactly safe (a few at least, always causing problems)



    PS: And think about it, we don't want to fight a Godzilla!
  22. wazzledoozle

    wazzledoozle New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2004
    Messages:
    5,414 (1.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    161
    Location:
    Seattle
    All they have to do is stick in in containers>transport to storage facility deep in mountain> DONE!

    Unfortunately, bureaucracy gets the best of the whole transportation part. Lot's of places aren't willing to even have the trucks or trains with the waste roll through en route to storage. So instead of making a direct trip from reactor facility to storage, the waste is transported through a maze of BULLSHIT! Increasing risk of problems. However, when was the last time you heard of nuclear waste en route to storage being hijacked or crashing? Never.
  23. ryboto

    ryboto New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    294 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    The CURRENT method for production of biofuels does require fertilizers and other fossil fuel dependencies. There are fossil fuel independent processes that can be carbon neutral. Cellulosic ethanol is one process that could be carbon neutral. Using corn for ethanol is ridiculous, that's not the solution. There's also a lot of potential for Biodeisel from algea.
  24. Glump Bliermp New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    Messages:
    74 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0

    NUCLEAR, DUH!!!! However, too many liberal activists have a problem with nuclear who push wind and solar, however they have no business sense and know nothing about economics. Wind and Solar is TOO expensive compared to nuclear. If we had one nuclear powerplant devoted to converting sea water to hydrogen (also would combat rising seas due to man-created-global-warming :) :) We'd be able to power an S-load of HydrogenCars.

    Hydrogen is inevitable. All this other crap is just weak transitional garbage that won't have any positive effect on the environment comparing it to the world of hydrogen cars.
  25. ryboto

    ryboto New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    294 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    I did mention nuclear in my post....and my point was that with the current infrastructure, a hydrogen infrastructure is impossible unless the government sucks up the cost of the fuel. how can a carbon neutral bio fuel cycle be negative? If we can develop a fossil fuel independent biomass growth/collection/conversion to ethanol, we'd have a safe, non-toxic fuel. You'd have no sulfur, and all you would produce is CO2 if you used it in a combustion engine. I'm working on the direct alcohol fuel cell in my lab. If higher energy conversions are achievable in the cell it might just be viable. The low temperatures mean no NOX production either.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page