interesting. this is one of the toughest things about our move toward sustainable living: it's the things we don't think to think about that will continue to undermine the effort.
this is interesting. if you follow the link from 'doors of perception' to 'the reason foundation', where the original information seems to have come from, you can read about the 'dust to dust' research that someone has done.
this is an incredibly detailed study of the energy consumed through the lifecycle of the car, from r+d to scrap and including things like how far the employees of the company drive to get to work.
looking at it in this context you could argue that the comparison is not like for like, as hybrids use relatively new technology, and therefore r+d costs will be higher per vehicle.
for example, the article states: 'the biggest reason why a Hummer's energy use is so low is that it shares many components with other vehicles and therefore its design and development energy costs are spread across many cars.'
as hybrid technology developes in the future this part of the argument could become obsolete.
as steven says, it is the things we don't think about that have a huge impact, and this research highlights them, which i believe is a good thing, however it is a real shame that the findings are interpreted in only one sensationalist way and don't look into other areas. for example how the car manufacturers can reduce their energy consumption by streamlining their manufacturing methods, and encouraging their employees to be 'green' too.
Apr 4, 07 8:38 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
2 Comments
interesting. this is one of the toughest things about our move toward sustainable living: it's the things we don't think to think about that will continue to undermine the effort.
this is interesting. if you follow the link from 'doors of perception' to 'the reason foundation', where the original information seems to have come from, you can read about the 'dust to dust' research that someone has done.
this is an incredibly detailed study of the energy consumed through the lifecycle of the car, from r+d to scrap and including things like how far the employees of the company drive to get to work.
looking at it in this context you could argue that the comparison is not like for like, as hybrids use relatively new technology, and therefore r+d costs will be higher per vehicle.
for example, the article states: 'the biggest reason why a Hummer's energy use is so low is that it shares many components with other vehicles and therefore its design and development energy costs are spread across many cars.'
as hybrid technology developes in the future this part of the argument could become obsolete.
as steven says, it is the things we don't think about that have a huge impact, and this research highlights them, which i believe is a good thing, however it is a real shame that the findings are interpreted in only one sensationalist way and don't look into other areas. for example how the car manufacturers can reduce their energy consumption by streamlining their manufacturing methods, and encouraging their employees to be 'green' too.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.