[Quietcars] Are hybrids anti-driver safety and anti-environment?

[Ken Stewart]

At that NYC public hearing on Hybrid taxis I reported
on previously, and on another occasion, I heard a
claim that the huge batteries carried in the front of
hybrids, seriously reduce "the crunch zone".  That is
the area in the front of a conventional auto which
compresses during a front-end crash, thus absorbing
much of the impact and is therefore safer for the
driver.  I have also read concerns expressed by
environmentalists that when these batteries lose their
effectiveness (Claimed to be only five years), they
will be a serious negative addition to our trash
heaps.  The negative environmental impact of the
mining of one of the chemical components of the
vbatteries, has been the subject of worry also.
--- michael townsend <mrtownsend at optonline.net> wrote:

> >From the New York Times:
> 
> Resource:
>
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/12/06/health-risks-o
>
f-hybrid-cars-have-been-misrepresented-by-the-media.aspx?PageIndex=2
> 
> 
> 
> After my comments, a very interesting article as
> I've cited the resource.  
> 
> I'm on a quiet car list sponsored by the NFB, but
> found this after dealing
> with some other issues of quietness, and finding
> that a solution of making
> hybrids noisy enough to hear them but quiet enough
> to make tem a
> satisfactory vehicle is more impossible that real.  
> 
> This article points out some of the misconceptions
> and idiosyncrasies of the
> hybrid issue as a whole and it just goes to show
> that nobody's satisfied.
> It's time for tree huggers and power trippers to
> unite and do something for
> the good of the nation in these troubled times.  
> 
> Mike T in New Jersey
> 
> Health Risks of Hybrid Cars Have Been Misrepresented
> by the Media
> hybrid, electric car, prius, EMF, electromagnetic
> fields, gauss
> A New York Times
> article published earlier this year raised questions
> about the health risks
> of electromagnetic
> fields (EMFs) in hybrid or electric vehicles.
> EMFs have been linked to serious health matters,
> including cancer and a
> potential
> risk of leukemia among children, so limiting
> exposure is in your best
> interest.
> However, a safety report by
> Stan Hartman
> , an environmental health consultant in Boulder, CO,
> specializing in
> electropollution,
> found that hybrid vehicles are not a problem for
> your health.
> “There were a lot of misleading statements in the
> recent NY Times article,
> including
> claims of 100 mG fields, which are causing alarm,”
> Hartman said.
> “It's next to impossible to get accurate readings in
> a moving vehicle. Since
> there
> was no lift available to simulate road resistance to
> the drive train in a
> constant
> external EMF atmosphere, the results of this testing
> are only approximate at
> best.”
> Sources:
> The New York Times April 27, 2008
> Enjoy a Happy Digestive System Once and for All*
> Find Out More
> Dr. Mercola
> Dr. Mercola's Comments:
> There’s no disputing that hybrid cars are good for
> the environment. But
> lately another
> issue has been raised: Are hybrids healthy for the
> drivers and passengers?
> It’s a legitimate question. I’ve written extensively
> on the
> dangers of electromagnetic fields (EMF)
>  myself, and have previously warned you about the
> potential dangers these
> hybrid
> vehicles might pose.
> The flow of electrical current to the motor of a
> hybrid vehicle produces
> magnetic
> fields, which studies have associated with serious
> health risks, including a
> heightened
> risk of leukemia among children.
> Additionally, since the batteries and power cables
> in hybrids are often
> placed close
> to the driver and passengers, it’s likely that some
> exposure to
> electromagnetic fields
> is unavoidable. And the exposure is a prolonged one
> as many drivers spend
> hours each
> day at the wheel.
> So, should you buy a hybrid? Or are you gambling
> with your health while
> making an
> effort to go green?
> Electro-Pollution Specialist Weighs in On the
> Potential Dangers
> Stan Hartman is an environmental health consultant
> in Boulder, CO,
> specializing in
> electro-pollution. He believes the article featured
> in
> The New York Times
>  contains many misleading statements that may
> frighten people unnecessarily.
> “There's no more difficult a situation to try to get
> accurate EMF readings
> in than
> a moving car, and the errors will almost certainly
> be to exaggerate toward
> the high
> end,
> he states.
> With instruments that tend to do that already, and
> don't claim high accuracy
> to begin
> with (6 decibels compared to less than 1 for a good
> professional meter),
> they end
> up scaring people unjustifiably.”
> Hartman, who conducted his own EMF safety test of a
> 2007 Toyota Prius
> Hybrid, offered
> the following corrections and explanations to the
> Times article above:
> 1. Trifield meters are useful, but it's important to
> be aware of their
> sensitivity to
> high frequencies when trying to determine ELF
> levels, and of the fact that
> standard
> Trifields, unlike most gaussmeters, are
> frequency-weighted. Higher
> frequencies read
> as higher magnetic fields.  So a 120 Hz field will
> read twice as high as a
> 60 Hz
> field, a 180 Hz field three times too high, etc.,
> and they have significant
> sensitivity
> as high as 100 kHz, and some residual sensitivity to
> 100 MHz – on the
> magnetic, not
> radio/microwave setting. This can result in wildly
> high readings if they're
> interpreted
> as ELF when higher frequencies are present (like
> near the floorboards of
> cars with
> electronic ignitions, which include many more
> vehicles than just the Prius
> and other
> hybrids).
> 2. AC magnetic field readings were consistently
> higher on the rear seats
> than on the
> front seats. Measurements in the rear passenger
> compartment were made in the
> center
> of the seats, away from the doors, to avoid
> confusion with the ELF magnetic
> fields
> from the magnetized, revolving steel wires in the
> tires.  Tire fields are
> too low-frequency
> to be detected by most gaussmeters, which have 30 or
> 40 Hz low-frequency
> filters
> to keep them stable while moving in the earth's
> field, but they're present
> in most
> if not all vehicles, even those with
> "polyester-belted" radials, which still
> have
> significant steel in them. They're usually confined
> to within a few inches
> of the
> back doors.
> 3. ELF magnetic fields were highest when both the
> gasoline engine and the
> electric motor
> were running – when the vehicle was warming up,
> accelerating, climbing even
> slightly,
> or charging the battery. During hard acceleration,
> they could reach 6 or 8
> mG at
> seat level on the rear seats, diminishing higher up
> from the seats.
> 4. Operating on the electric motor alone, the
> readings in the back were
> usually less
> 
=== message truncated ===