Car That Has a Gas VS Rechargeable Battery
By Secret
@IntrovertShy (2780)
Marikina, Philippines
October 4, 2011 1:59am CST
I heard from a friend that there is a rechargeable battery in a car which helps to run even if it does not have a gas. It temporarily serves as back up if ever the gas is empty. I do not know how to drive. I do not know much about a car, but I was thinking if all cars use rechargeable battery to run rather to use a gas, what do you think will happen? Is it worth? For example, you can easily charge the battery to become full again if the battery is already low. After this, you can use it again and drive it anywhere you want.
So instead of "gasoline station", we had a "rechargeable station" ... oh my ... is it worth? 

2 people like this
3 responses
@owlwings (43897)
• Cambridge, England
4 Oct 11
There are two basic types of electric car on the market today. The one you are referring to (where the battery is used as a backup) is called a "hybrid" because it can use both gasoline and electricity to power it.
Even though battery technology has made some very significant advances lately, the distance that a car can go on electricity alone is still rather small and batteries are still quite heavy (though they have become much lighter in relation to the amount of power they can store).
Conventional cars waste a great deal of power, especially when braking and the principle behind the best hybrid designs is to recover some of that wasted power by converting it to electrical energy which can be stored and reused. This means that less gasoline is used per mile and therefore it is not only cheaper to run but also has less impact on the environment.
Unfortunately, such cars are more expensive to manufacture because they require some very sophisticated automatic controlling circuitry to make sure that they are as efficient as possible.
Pure electric cars would certainly have the least environmental impact (though electricity still has to be generated and this still involves some carbon dioxide emissions). 'Free' energy, such as solar power, wind and hydroelectric stations and nuclear power, is still several times more expensive than coal or oil powered generators.
Batteries also take time to charge, so you cannot simply pull up at a filling station, plug in and be ready to go in minutes. You need to be able to leave the car on charge for an hour or two, at least, so pure electric cars are most suitable for short, city journeys and commuting.
1 person likes this
@rogue13xmen13 (14402)
• United States
5 Oct 11
Well, I like hybrids, because they have both which means that they are more fuel efficient, but if it is a straight rechargeable battery, I am not so sure.
You will be paying more in electric bills, there are not that many charging stations, yet, and not very many people have electric cars, yet. They are a great concept, but they need to be improved and people need to really be convinced that they are better to use than gas, and right now, it's not a guaranty that they are better than gas cars.
@IntrovertShy (2780)
• Marikina, Philippines
6 Oct 11
Pure electric cars take years to create and it is very expensive too. He he he
It is very expensive that people would rather choose gas than a pure electric cars.
It is very expensive that people would rather choose gas than a pure electric cars. @frontvisions101 (16043)
• Philippines
4 Oct 11
We should take care of our environment and should use the battery-powered car as much as possible because gas-powered car is harmful to our ozone layer.
@IntrovertShy (2780)
• Marikina, Philippines
6 Oct 11
Oh yes. The dark smoke that come from the car causes air pollution too. This also harm our ozone layer 





