Print 75 comment(s) - last by Eug.. on May 1 at 1:12 PM

Auto exec admits his company may have to develop a hybrid powertrain in the U.S.

Harald Wester -- CEO of Fiat S.p.A.'s (BIT:F) high-end subsidiaries Alfa Romeo and Maserati -- admits his performance luxury car firm may be forced to make a hybrid powertrain to satisfy U.S. CAFE standard regulations.  But while his peers like Ferrari S.p.A.Porsche Automobil Holdings SE (ETR:PAH3), Bayerische Motoren Werke (BMW) AG (ETR:BMW), and McLaren Automotive are at least feigning genuine enthusiasm about their upcoming hybrid or electric vehicle (EV) sports cars, Mr. Wester didn't candy-coat his opinions: he thinks that EVs are "nonsense".

At the Shanghai Auto Show he said in a keynote:

It looks like something we will have to, but the only reason to do it is to meet regulations. We don't see it as a significant business.

All this discussion about zero emissions is nonsense. Nobody talks about the efficiency of how the battery is charged. It varies strongly from region to region, depending on how the energy is produced, nuclear, coal and so on, but even the best is not ahead of the internal combustion engine.

Diesel and CNG are the more obvious answers if CO2 is the focus. Both are more viable answers than hybrid. If they gave us a CO2 target instead of imposing technology then we would go that way.

If we want a realistic solution to emissions then the regulators need to be more honest in how they calculate emissions. Electric cars are not the answer.

2014 Maserati Ghibli
The 2014 Maserati Ghibli -- not an EV

By his estimates electric vehicles have a plant-to-road lifecycle output of 86g of CO2/km in Europe, 110g/km in the USA, and 191g/km in China.  In other words, he's arguing that EVs are far from zero emissions -- and he's right.

To be fair, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the agency tasked with CAFE regulation, does somewhat take this into effect via its mpg-e (electric vehicle mpg) numbers.  That said, the numbers do seem a bit skewed -- EVs are scoring 100 MPGe or more.  To put that in context the 1.4L engine Chevy CRUZE from General Motors Comp. (GM) puts off only about 161 g/km, meaning that it may produce less emissions in regions like China where much of the power comes from "dirty" sources.

Source: Autocar

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Truer Words
By euler007 on 4/25/2013 10:22:02 PM , Rating: 2
SSD use less power at idle and more at peak power draw.

But they spend a lot more time at idle than a HDD for any amount of work.

RE: Truer Words
By mcnabney on 4/26/2013 10:35:13 AM , Rating: 1
You also have to have a bunch more SSDs to gain the same storage capacity. People are comparing a 480GB SSD with a 3TB HDD.

For example:
3TB Green drive - 3.65W idle, 7.15 load
480GB SSD - 1W idle, 1.5W load

However since you need SIX SSDs to get to 3TB, the power requirement goes up to 6W idle, 9W load - which is much higher than the HDD.

RE: Truer Words
By Etsp on 4/26/2013 11:40:35 AM , Rating: 2
SSDs do save power in enterprises. Generally, the requirements that datacenters have for storage is for IOPS primarily, as the to reach the level of performance they need, they end up with a lot more capacity than they require.

With SSDs, they require less capacity, and a LOT less physical drives.

RE: Truer Words
By BRB29 on 4/26/2013 1:53:19 PM , Rating: 1
I call BS.

First of all SSD are 2.5" drives. You cannot compare it to a 3.5" drive.

Here's some SSD power consumptions

Here's a comparison between SSD and HDD drives power consumption.

Notice there's very little difference between 2.5" HDD and 2.5" SSD? All the big 3.5" HDD take up more power because they're bigger.
Even the 1TB velociraptor only takes 6 watts at load. That thing is spinning at 10k rpm.

Note that the Seagate Momentus XT 750GB is using only 3.1 watts at load. That thing has an SSD AND HDD. If it was only the HDD then it would be 2.x watts. So yeah, you are wrong.

The only thing you got right was that SSD has a lower idle than HDD.

RE: Truer Words
By The0ne on 4/26/2013 2:55:19 PM , Rating: 2
I think you shut everyone up, Nice!

RE: Truer Words
By RedemptionAD on 4/27/2013 9:48:27 AM , Rating: 2
Shhhhhh! This is a non confrontational e-comment discussion and facts have no place here. Let the lashings commence.

RE: Truer Words
By Reclaimer77 on 4/27/2013 11:07:05 AM , Rating: 3
This is hilarious.

The point was do we want the Government deciding what we can buy, use, or what the market can produce.

The point was NOT a technical discussion about storage devices. Analogies are rarely perfect, they are an illustrative literary construct that uses metaphor, to help explain something.

The idea that people are crawling over themselves in an attempt to "pwn" me on trivial facts, that have no bearing on the discussion, is a sad display to be sure. They don't want to discuss anything that doesn't fit their world view, so it's easier to just attack the source, me.

p.s. his "facts" are highly skewed and his approach flawed. Because SSD's perform their tasks much faster than those crappy low-powered 5400RPM 2.5" drives. So in the end SSD's still consume less overall power, which anyone with half a brain already knew!

"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki