|
To answer some of the chages levied, both implied and explicit:
1) I'm not a communist. 2) I'm not a tree hugger. 3) I am a liberal––meaning I'm an objective thinker––therefore I vote for "conservative" Rebublican candidates exclusively. 4) I'm not bitter about losing half the value of my home. 5) I'll not live in an apartment or condo unless and until my life depends on it. (To get close enough to work to be able to drive an electric car.) 6) I'm not high on the electric car. 7) I recognize the validity of the counter to this discussion: What's keeping us from having $1.00/gal fuel? 8) Everything I wrote is communist crazy-talk if/when fuel costs are low. 9) I want cheap fuel; I want elctric car talk to remain the darling of the tree huggering Left. 10) I DESPISE the Left. |
|
Batteries are gigantic, heavy, unreliable, toxic, and extremely expensive. Unless that changes, no pure electric car will ever work.
Even if it did, what would be the effect on our already overloaded and aging power grid? Converting only 10% of the cars in the US would (rough guess) double the residential electricity load. Combined with Obama's promise to "bankrupt the coal industry" and "necessarily skyrocket" energy prices... why are the Democrats pushing electric cars again? |
|
I think it's both funny and telling that California, where green ideas go to die, has recently instituted a tax for people who drive electric vehicles.
You see, those people don't pay gas taxes but their cars still create wear and tear on roads, so some measure was necessary to see that they pay their fair share... |
|
They are a new Tech and it will be about a decade before they are a reality. Gas prices in the US will top $5 in the next few years and that is when the research for viable non-gas/diesel cars will go full bore. I think that we will see hydrogen fuel cells be the solution, not electric battery based power as it will be easier to build the infrastructure.
Gas is on the cheap(in relative terms) now, but in the next decade, it will top $6/gal easy. As China and India's middle class grows, their consumption will outdo us and prices will go through the roof. Daily Drivers will mostly be Electric/Hydrogen Cells, while those who need pulling power will still be using Diesels/Gas powered engines. Like it or not, the Internal Combustion engine as we know it is heading to the end of its lifespan. Many ARFcommer's grandchildren won't ever own a gasoline powered car. ETA:And much to the Greenie's dismay, along with that Hydrogen Cell/Electric car, will be Nuclear power as the energy will have to come from somewhere. The big plus is that it will make the race for Fusion power stronger, as the first people to get Fusion will make insane $$$$$. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Heard a great line from one of Hannity's guests yesterday when talking about green energy. "In order for it to be an alternative energy, it first has to be an alternative." Get the price down to about 15K and have a 500 range per charge and people might start looking into them more. What about a 25-30 mile range and about $5,000? 25-30 miles from the house charge and 25-30 miles from the at-work charge. I'm suggestting a near-term way to have the electric car supplement the real car in the garage, not replace it. My wife has a car and I have a truck. Are you suggesting that we would be likely to buy a third car for tooling around locally, within that 25-30 mile range? Where would we put it? We certainly can't park it in the street because it has to be plugged in to be of even limited use. |
|
Quoted:
Fundamentally, it's a stupid idea. The energy to charge the batteries has to come from somewhere. There is no magic. Quoted:
Batteries are gigantic, heavy, unreliable, toxic, and extremely expensive. Unless that changes, no pure electric car will ever work. Even if it did, what would be the effect on our already overloaded and aging power grid? Converting only 10% of the cars in the US would (rough guess) double the residential electricity load. Combined with Obama's promise to "bankrupt the coal industry" and "necessarily skyrocket" energy prices... why are the Democrats pushing electric cars again? I'm more inclined to support building more power plants (coal, nuclear, whatever) and enhancing the electrical infrastructure than I am inclined toward funding the enemy while I drive to and from work. On the other hand, find a way to put $1.00 gas (just a low number for illustration purposes) or similarly cheap home-grown fuel and I'm all-in. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Fundamentally, it's a stupid idea. The energy to charge the batteries has to come from somewhere. There is no magic. Quoted:
Batteries are gigantic, heavy, unreliable, toxic, and extremely expensive. Unless that changes, no pure electric car will ever work. Even if it did, what would be the effect on our already overloaded and aging power grid? Converting only 10% of the cars in the US would (rough guess) double the residential electricity load. Combined with Obama's promise to "bankrupt the coal industry" and "necessarily skyrocket" energy prices... why are the Democrats pushing electric cars again? I'm more inclined to support building more power plants (coal, nuclear, whatever) and enhancing the electrical infrastructure than I am inclined toward funding the enemy while I drive to and from work. On the other hand, find a way to put $1.00 gas (just a low number for illustration purposes) or similarly cheap home-grown fuel and I'm all-in. That is another solution that is being researched, BTW. There are scientists at the U of M who are using a certin type of Algae to produce Bio-diesel from. They are pretty much fed from CO2, so you could theoretically route scrubbed CO2 emissions from a power plant into a Algae tank to feed the critters that produce Bio-diesel. Of course, at this point, this is all under reasearch, but it is possible. |
|
Quoted: They are a new Tech and it will be about a decade before they are a reality. Gas prices in the US will top $5 in the next few years and that is when the research for viable non-gas/diesel cars will go full bore. I think that we will see hydrogen fuel cells be the solution, not electric battery based power as it will be easier to build the infrastructure. Gas is on the cheap(in relative terms) now, but in the next decade, it will top $6/gal easy. As China and India's middle class grows, their consumption will outdo us and prices will go through the roof. Daily Drivers will mostly be Electric/Hydrogen Cells, while those who need pulling power will still be using Diesels/Gas powered engines. Like it or not, the Internal Combustion engine as we know it is heading to the end of its lifespan. Many ARFcommer's grandchildren won't ever own a gasoline powered car. Okay, Al Gore ..... Let me make this as perfectly clear as possible - THE ELECTRIC CAR WILL NEVER BE A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE. Never. Ever. It's this little thing we like to call "science" - factors like energy density, transportability of said energy source, energy storage ........ that's the best part. There is no way that battery technology will ever provide enough energy density to top the energy density of simple solid fuel sources like coal or wood, let alone liquid transportation fuels. It is more likely that we'll return to coal-fired Stanley Steamers than all-eletric vehicles if petroleum runs short, and petroleum will only run short due to political shenanigans. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Heard a great line from one of Hannity's guests yesterday when talking about green energy. "In order for it to be an alternative energy, it first has to be an alternative." Get the price down to about 15K and have a 500 range per charge and people might start looking into them more. What about a 25-30 mile range and about $5,000? 25-30 miles from the house charge and 25-30 miles from the at-work charge. I'm suggestting a near-term way to have the electric car supplement the real car in the garage, not replace it. My wife has a car and I have a truck. Are you suggesting that we would be likely to buy a third car for tooling around locally, within that 25-30 mile range? Where would we put it? We certainly can't park it in the street because it has to be plugged in to be of even limited use. If it saves money in the long run, and apart from the shortcomings of the electric car already cited, why not? I find the notion our real, ~$80,000 car and truck lasting ~15 years instead of ~8 years, is quite attractive. How many chassis, motors batteries and electricity will $150,000 buy over a 15 year span? (Don't bother challenging the numbers––it's was made up to make a point.) I don't know where y'all'd charge y'all's car(s). |
|
Quoted:
It is more likely that we'll return to coal-fired Stanley Steamers than all-eletric vehicles if petroleum runs short, and petroleum will only run short due to political shenanigans. Serious question: how stupid is that idea? I imagine it's stupid and I"m sure I wouldn't like it but I'm curious. |
here's why. in the late 70's, early 80's we had a gas shortage. we had lines, we had odd and even days, we had stations all closed on Sundays. So these cars were modified to run on batteries and I had a friend who bought one. they were a POS. a year later gas was again plentiful and headed back down in price. So until they are giving away electric cars, and long term they are a solution to a problem, they arn't going anywhere.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
300 mile range and 5 minute charges. Why no diesel hybrids? Why no diesel Eurovan? Dammit, I would buy a brand new TDI Eurovan. With RES and NAV. Because those silly Germans want to breathe polluted air and our EPA is so much smarter. I'd like a diesel VW Polo myself at 70+ MPG for commuting and short trips. |
Well contrary to popular belief, the electric car has NO political affiliation. My brother (who is a staunch Conservative) drives a Nissan Leaf and loves it. The beauty of it is when he sees a Prius with an Obama sticker on it and tells him/her that they are hurting the environment driving that gas guzzler.  And another fact that people are forgetting is there is another recharging method that does not rely on oil... Solar. That is what he uses. If the electric car is not for you then... its not for you. That is the beauty of this country... we have choices and do what we want. Watching some of you get bent on other people's choices is entertaining. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Cost and technology mainly....As Keith mentioned, when you have an EV that gets 200-300 miles range and only take 5-10mins to charge safely, (swipe at the Volt there,) then you'll have a viable option. If the Volt could go for 300 miles on a safe 5 min charge for 40K, GM literately couldn't make enough of them quick enough. In fact I'll go so far that GM would have to halt production on all gas cars and start making Volts to keep up with demand. The Volt HAS an unlimited range, you need to do your homework. It just does not have unlimited BATTERY range, once the battery reaches a specified discharge level, the engine comes on and provides charging power to the battery for as long as you need to drive the car. It gets about 40mpg with the engine charging the battery. Technically, the Volt still has the ability to drive the wheels directly with the gas engine, it is not strictly gas-electric in the locomotive sense. A physical connection is available. While this ability is indeed a broken promise from the original specs, it is actually a good thing, as it's the most efficient way to put power to the wheels. As far as I know, if traveling at highway speeds where consistent high power is needed, the gas engine is doing most of the work even if the battery is not expired. My brother works on the development of the Volt, it does not have a direct connection between the engine and the wheels in any sense that a normal car does. The car runs on battery for up to 40 miles with a full charge in optimal conditions (not running heat or AC etc) until the battery reaches about 40% and then the engine starts and runs at a speed that varies by about 1500rpm. I rode in one and the engine did not start until the battery was down to where the engine is supposed to start. At speeds above 60mph the engine starts and provides power to the electric drive motor as a supplement to the battery and to retain battery charge. Once the engine is running, it really isn't any better than any other small 4cyl car and that IMHO is the car's downfall. The Prius has similar disadvantages but costs a lot less because its sticker price is lower AND it gets a hefty tax incentive. Even with the incentive, the Volt is still not a budget car. At this stage everyone is probably better off saving fuel by driving a Cruze. To make matters worse, GM is going to roll out a Cruze Diesel in 2013 that is expected to do pretty well on fuel. If we see gas at $6 a gallon, I think you will see a lot more interest in plug-ins for people that live within 20 miles or so of where they work. The Volt's charger uptake consumes about as much power as leaving a 40 inch flat-screen on in your garage overnight. In other words, the charging costs would barely be noticed by the average family. Most small Hybrid vehicle are a waste of money that are sold mostly on hippie hype IMHO. Most of what they achieve is already available in small commuter cars with 2 liter engines without the battery packs and electric motors. Larger hybrids actually make more sense than small ones because they run on battery power when large vehicles are at their worst...In city traffic. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
They are a new Tech and it will be about a decade before they are a reality. Gas prices in the US will top $5 in the next few years and that is when the research for viable non-gas/diesel cars will go full bore. I think that we will see hydrogen fuel cells be the solution, not electric battery based power as it will be easier to build the infrastructure. Gas is on the cheap(in relative terms) now, but in the next decade, it will top $6/gal easy. As China and India's middle class grows, their consumption will outdo us and prices will go through the roof. Daily Drivers will mostly be Electric/Hydrogen Cells, while those who need pulling power will still be using Diesels/Gas powered engines. Like it or not, the Internal Combustion engine as we know it is heading to the end of its lifespan. Many ARFcommer's grandchildren won't ever own a gasoline powered car. Okay, Al Gore ..... Let me make this as perfectly clear as possible - THE ELECTRIC CAR WILL NEVER BE A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE. Never. Ever. Assume the above is true on face value.....I'm not saying it is, just assume it is: the idea being presented is for the electric car to supplement the real car in the commuter role.....in light of > $5.00/gal gas being a reality in the near future going straight into the pockets of the enemy. I'm not suggesting the electric car as a replacement for a real car/truck. |
|
Quoted:
Epiphany: When you realize your "Green" car is actually powered by this. 
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad259/Gyrene84/carbon-emissions.jpg That and not very many people have enough money to have an extra car just for commuting. Two cars means more money in registraion and insurance too. Just add a button on the charging station with a windmill and a smoke stack picture so consumers can choose what type of energy their car is charged on. (Will work best on people who think the light stays on in the fridge all the time.) |
|
Fools. The electric car is being held back by secret, shadowy forces of evil: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSpOjj4YD8c |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
300 mile range and 5 minute charges. Why no diesel hybrids? Why no diesel Eurovan? Dammit, I would buy a brand new TDI Eurovan. With RES and NAV. Because those silly Germans want to breathe polluted air and our EPA is so much smarter. I'd like a diesel VW Polo myself at 70+ MPG for commuting and short trips. I'd like a diesel motorcycle, I could get 90mpg! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The common denominator of the comments so far are "poor range and high cost". Both are addressed in the body of what I wrote. It seems no one read it.  I read it. You lost me at tax incentives. The government has no business deciding which cars people should use. Your "bedroom community" house dropped in value because it was artificially inflated to begin with. This guy has it. When there is a legit market, they will be built. Any meddling is just....well...meddling. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: It is more likely that we'll return to coal-fired Stanley Steamers than all-eletric vehicles if petroleum runs short, and petroleum will only run short due to political shenanigans. Serious question: how stupid is that idea? I imagine it's stupid and I"m sure I wouldn't like it but I'm curious. Did you read the whole post? Transportability of the energy source, which in this case is (A)cheap, and (B) readily available just about everywhere. It's simple logistical physics - As long as you have water and some way to keep a fire in the boiler, you're GTG. I'm sure the old school technology can be upgraded with modern technology to make it viable, even so most weekend mechanics would be able to maintain the vehicle without having to drag it to some expensive repair shop, unlike the electric car ...... Read up on the use of home-built gasifers during WWII. The preppers will know what I'm talking about. |
|
I think there really would be a market for a very compact, minimalistic, short range, INEXPENSIVE, electric car (with regenerative braking) that would supplement gas cars, for a daily commuter vehicle. To work and stop at the store on the way home.
If designed well, it may not need AC, power windows/seats/mirrors/back massagers/coffee makers/etc. 2 seats, room for an armful of groceries. It would have to charge from a standard wall socket, or at most from a refrigerator/AC/stove/dryer socket. I'd buy one for $7k or less. |
|
Standardized batteries would solve a lot of issues. Imagine if the stations could get a shipment in daily from the power plant - sounds great, but that 18wheeler would probably have more stored energy than a moab. I like to recall the shorting out the capacitor scene in Demolition Man. ––- What would save more energy is ultimately to come up with an efficient grid of mass transit and something to solve the last mile dilemma. An electric scooter (not a motorcycle want to be - thinking lightweight segway) is more practical at that point than an electric car. I see the using something like a metro owned go-segway for the final mile. |
|
Quoted:
They are a new Tech and it will be about a decade before they are a reality. Gas prices in the US will top $5 in the next few years and that is when the research for viable non-gas/diesel cars will go full bore. I think that we will see hydrogen fuel cells be the solution, not electric battery based power as it will be easier to build the infrastructure. Gas is on the cheap(in relative terms) now, but in the next decade, it will top $6/gal easy. As China and India's middle class grows, their consumption will outdo us and prices will go through the roof. Daily Drivers will mostly be Electric/Hydrogen Cells, while those who need pulling power will still be using Diesels/Gas powered engines. Like it or not, the Internal Combustion engine as we know it is heading to the end of its lifespan. Many ARFcommer's grandchildren won't ever own a gasoline powered car. ETA:And much to the Greenie's dismay, along with that Hydrogen Cell/Electric car, will be Nuclear power as the energy will have to come from somewhere. The big plus is that it will make the race for Fusion power stronger, as the first people to get Fusion will make insane $$$$$. They will be driving vehicles with internal combustion engines fueled by bio based diesel fuel and gasoline. Once the country comes to its senses and converts to an economy powered by electricity generated in nuclear fueled plants, the rest will be easy, and cheap. We'll still need coal fired plants to feed CO2 to bio fuel reactors, but the cost of electricity will be so low that we will be able to afford to capture all the left over CO2, at least until the greenies figure out that we need a little to feed plants. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They are a new Tech and it will be about a decade before they are a reality. Gas prices in the US will top $5 in the next few years and that is when the research for viable non-gas/diesel cars will go full bore. I think that we will see hydrogen fuel cells be the solution, not electric battery based power as it will be easier to build the infrastructure. Gas is on the cheap(in relative terms) now, but in the next decade, it will top $6/gal easy. As China and India's middle class grows, their consumption will outdo us and prices will go through the roof. Daily Drivers will mostly be Electric/Hydrogen Cells, while those who need pulling power will still be using Diesels/Gas powered engines. Like it or not, the Internal Combustion engine as we know it is heading to the end of its lifespan. Many ARFcommer's grandchildren won't ever own a gasoline powered car. Okay, Al Gore ..... Let me make this as perfectly clear as possible - THE ELECTRIC CAR WILL NEVER BE A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE. Never. Ever. Assume the above is true on face value.....I'm not saying it is, just assume it is: the idea being presented is for the electric car to supplement the real car in the commuter role.....in light of > $5.00/gal gas being a reality in the near future going straight into the pockets of the enemy. I'm not suggesting the electric car as a replacement for a real car/truck. I do not accept that premise due to the fact that the only thing holding us back from being energy independent (continentally speaking) is pure politics. We're heading for $5/gal gas ONLY because of the EPA/Obama/Demtards/political correctness. Unless of course you're refering to the oil companies as the "enemy" .... .......... or are you refering to the Obama zombies?
|
|
Quoted:
Another problem will be that fact that this is America. We have a long love affair of horsepower and speed. True, but with the muscle car generation getting older and eventually dying off will there be enough gear heads left to carry on that love affair. In some respects there is a newer generation of horsepower/speed worship, but they maybe smaller in numbers and influence. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
They are a new Tech and it will be about a decade before they are a reality. Gas prices in the US will top $5 in the next few years and that is when the research for viable non-gas/diesel cars will go full bore. I think that we will see hydrogen fuel cells be the solution, not electric battery based power as it will be easier to build the infrastructure. Gas is on the cheap(in relative terms) now, but in the next decade, it will top $6/gal easy. As China and India's middle class grows, their consumption will outdo us and prices will go through the roof. Daily Drivers will mostly be Electric/Hydrogen Cells, while those who need pulling power will still be using Diesels/Gas powered engines. Like it or not, the Internal Combustion engine as we know it is heading to the end of its lifespan. Many ARFcommer's grandchildren won't ever own a gasoline powered car. Okay, Al Gore ..... Let me make this as perfectly clear as possible - THE ELECTRIC CAR WILL NEVER BE A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE. Never. Ever. It's this little thing we like to call "science" - factors like energy density, transportability of said energy source, energy storage ........ that's the best part. There is no way that battery technology will ever provide enough energy density to top the energy density of simple solid fuel sources like coal or wood, let alone liquid transportation fuels. It is more likely that we'll return to coal-fired Stanley Steamers than all-eletric vehicles if petroleum runs short, and petroleum will only run short due to political shenanigans. I am not a enviormentalist and I will have to say this-NEVER say never. We are consuming oil faster than ever, and as many countries hit 1st world status, the demand will skyrocket. Unlike what many here seem to think.... Oil supplies on the earth are NOT unlimited..we will tap them at some point or the demand will be so high, it will make other power sources cost effective. Battery tech? No, that's not the solution. I think hydrogen cells will be the solution and thanks to that, Nuclear Research will skyrocket. The move from Petro powered cars to Hydrogen will push reseach for Fusion fast and hard, mark my words. Current Fission tech will be made more efficent and we will start using Breeder Reactors to reprocess the spent fuel for even more power. We will be digging up places like Yucca Mt. to get at the used fuel! Believe me..we want the US to get Fusion tech first, hands down. If we don't, we will get passed up on many things. The reality is that Gas Powered Commuter Cars will become obsolete by 2100, if not sooner. Accept it now, techology moves on, and the internal combustion engine's days are numbered. Internal Combustion would still be used for heavy hauling untill the tech catches up most likely. ETA:I did post up in the thread a bit back that there is Research into a Algae that can be used for Bio Diesel that is under research at the U of MN. They are fed by CO2 and there is a possiblity in the future that we might get bio-diesel produced from this. You could route the scubbed CO2 from power plants into the tanks to feed the Algae. Although, I see this Bio-Diesel used to power trucks/haulers not everyday drivers. And I say all of this from a economic/scientific standpoint; Technology moves on and things change without question. Who would have thought in the 60s that we would have compact telephone devices that have more power than they could have dreamed? We should be happy that society is trying to move past the gasoline powered engine for one reason, and one reason alone: it means that we are pushing Technology foward, or at we are at least trying to. It is also a sign that we can adapt to changing conditions, economically and scientfically. Yes, we love our cars as they are now, but future generations may not, leaving the car/truck as we know it behind..and this is not a bad thing. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm one of the few that would make the leap for what it's worth, so here are my two reasons: 1) Tech isn't there yet, battery technology/weight just can't provide enough range beyond short jaunts. 2) Once "1" is there, it must be affordable to the masses. I would dig having one... Couldn't have said it better myself. Once they have more range and a lower price, I'm in. But you gotta start somewhere, and they are improving. Early adopters and tech super-enthusiasts of today will fund the development of tomorrow's electric vehicles. Being able to have a spare battery at home that you can quickly swap out would also be a nice plus for those times you can't wait for a recharge. Or something like a propane cylinder exchange at fuel stations, but I don't think that's going to work in this case. I like your battery exchange idea. We'd need an industry standard "cell", and we'd also need to realize that I would be trading in my brand new cells to get some other guys 3 year old cells. Who would want to trade in a new cell? Again, I like this idea, but it needs tweaking. |
|
Quoted:
Well contrary to popular belief, the electric car has NO political affiliation. My brother (who is a staunch Conservative) drives a Nissan Leaf and loves it. The beauty of it is when he sees a Prius with an Obama sticker on it and tells him/her that they are hurting the environment driving that gas guzzler.
And another fact that people are forgetting is there is another recharging method that does not rely on oil... Solar. That is what he uses. If the electric car is not for you then... its not for you. That is the beauty of this country... we have choices and do what we want. Watching some of you get bent on other people's choices is entertaining. Sorry. I must have missed when I was asked about giving that shit ton of money to GM to finance the Volt. I didn't get my choice to opt out. |
|
Quoted:
Let me make this as perfectly clear as possible - THE ELECTRIC CAR WILL NEVER BE A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE. Never. Ever. It's this little thing we like to call "science" - factors like energy density, transportability of said energy source, energy storage ........ that's the best part. There is no way that battery technology will ever provide enough energy density to top the energy density of simple solid fuel sources like coal or wood, let alone liquid transportation fuels. It is more likely that we'll return to coal-fired Stanley Steamers than all-eletric vehicles if petroleum runs short, and petroleum will only run short due to political shenanigans. There is always some fool trying to introduce truth and logic into subjects like this. That's two of us. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Well contrary to popular belief, the electric car has NO political affiliation. My brother (who is a staunch Conservative) drives a Nissan Leaf and loves it. The beauty of it is when he sees a Prius with an Obama sticker on it and tells him/her that they are hurting the environment driving that gas guzzler. And another fact that people are forgetting is there is another recharging method that does not rely on oil... Solar. That is what he uses. If the electric car is not for you then... its not for you. That is the beauty of this country... we have choices and do what we want. Watching some of you get bent on other people's choices is entertaining. Sorry. I must have missed when I was asked about giving that shit ton of money to GM to finance the Volt. I didn't get my choice to opt out. That's not what I am talking about and you know it. That is a different subject altogether. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Cost and technology mainly....As Keith mentioned, when you have an EV that gets 200-300 miles range and only take 5-10mins to charge safely, (swipe at the Volt there,) then you'll have a viable option. If the Volt could go for 300 miles on a safe 5 min charge for 40K, GM literately couldn't make enough of them quick enough. In fact I'll go so far that GM would have to halt production on all gas cars and start making Volts to keep up with demand. The Volt HAS an unlimited range, you need to do your homework. It just does not have unlimited BATTERY range, once the battery reaches a specified discharge level, the engine comes on and provides charging power to the battery for as long as you need to drive the car. It gets about 40mpg with the engine charging the battery. Technically, the Volt still has the ability to drive the wheels directly with the gas engine, it is not strictly gas-electric in the locomotive sense. A physical connection is available. While this ability is indeed a broken promise from the original specs, it is actually a good thing, as it's the most efficient way to put power to the wheels. As far as I know, if traveling at highway speeds where consistent high power is needed, the gas engine is doing most of the work even if the battery is not expired. My brother works on the development of the Volt, it does not have a direct connection between the engine and the wheels in any sense that a normal car does. The car runs on battery for up to 40 miles with a full charge in optimal conditions (not running heat or AC etc) until the battery reaches about 40% and then the engine starts and runs at a speed that varies by about 1500rpm. I rode in one and the engine did not start until the battery was down to where the engine is supposed to start. At speeds above 60mph the engine starts and provides power to the electric drive motor as a supplement to the battery and to retain battery charge. Once the engine is running, it really isn't any better than any other small 4cyl car and that IMHO is the car's downfall. The Prius has similar disadvantages but costs a lot less because its sticker price is lower AND it gets a hefty tax incentive. Even with the incentive, the Volt is still not a budget car. At this stage everyone is probably better off saving fuel by driving a Cruze. To make matters worse, GM is going to roll out a Cruze Diesel in 2013 that is expected to do pretty well on fuel. If we see gas at $6 a gallon, I think you will see a lot more interest in plug-ins for people that live within 20 miles or so of where they work. The Volt's charger uptake consumes about as much power as leaving a 40 inch flat-screen on in your garage overnight. In other words, the charging costs would barely be noticed by the average family. Most small Hybrid vehicle are a waste of money that are sold mostly on hippie hype IMHO. Most of what they achieve is already available in small commuter cars with 2 liter engines without the battery packs and electric motors. Larger hybrids actually make more sense than small ones because they run on battery power when large vehicles are at their worst...In city traffic. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile The article I read was wrong then, they specifically used the terms 'directly connected'. I own a Prius, and there is no more tax incentive. The credits were allotted only to the first X amount sold (60,000???) of a specific type, and the Prius probably passed that in '03. The volt will have its incentive for a long time based on the numbers they're selling. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well contrary to popular belief, the electric car has NO political affiliation. My brother (who is a staunch Conservative) drives a Nissan Leaf and loves it. The beauty of it is when he sees a Prius with an Obama sticker on it and tells him/her that they are hurting the environment driving that gas guzzler.
And another fact that people are forgetting is there is another recharging method that does not rely on oil... Solar. That is what he uses. If the electric car is not for you then... its not for you. That is the beauty of this country... we have choices and do what we want. Watching some of you get bent on other people's choices is entertaining. Sorry. I must have missed when I was asked about giving that shit ton of money to GM to finance the Volt. I didn't get my choice to opt out. That's not what I am talking about and you know it. That is a different subject altogether. Not really. The question posed by the OP was "what is keeping the electric car from catching on". The forced governemtal meddling trying to create a market that would otherwise not exist is a big part. |
|
Quoted: Fundamentally, it's a stupid idea. The energy to charge the batteries has to come from somewhere. There is no magic. That's part of the point. Instead of refined crude oil alone, you can use energy from natural gas, nuclear, coal and hydro. There is no magic, but using electricity will give more options as to the ultimate source of the energy. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well contrary to popular belief, the electric car has NO political affiliation. My brother (who is a staunch Conservative) drives a Nissan Leaf and loves it. The beauty of it is when he sees a Prius with an Obama sticker on it and tells him/her that they are hurting the environment driving that gas guzzler.
And another fact that people are forgetting is there is another recharging method that does not rely on oil... Solar. That is what he uses. If the electric car is not for you then... its not for you. That is the beauty of this country... we have choices and do what we want. Watching some of you get bent on other people's choices is entertaining. Sorry. I must have missed when I was asked about giving that shit ton of money to GM to finance the Volt. I didn't get my choice to opt out. That's not what I am talking about and you know it. That is a different subject altogether. Not really. The question posed by the OP was "what is keeping the electric car from catching on". The forced governemtal meddling trying to create a market that would otherwise not exist is a big part. I don't see that as a reason that the electric car won't catch on, but rather as further evidence that it won't in its current condition and environment. Even epic and sustained government fucktardery can't skew the market enough to make it sensible and profitable. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
300 mile range and 5 minute charges. Why no diesel hybrids? Why no diesel Eurovan? Dammit, I would buy a brand new TDI Eurovan. With RES and NAV. Because those silly Germans want to breathe polluted air and our EPA is so much smarter. I'd like a diesel VW Polo myself at 70+ MPG for commuting and short trips. I'd like a diesel motorcycle, I could get 90mpg! IIRC the Indian built Enfield motorcycles were offered for a while with a diesel motor. Don't think they ever imported them to the USA though.
Back in the '80s a guy I worked for had a beater VW diesel Dasher wagon that IIRC got ~45mpg....& that was late '70s-early 80s tech in a heavier wagon. I'd love to have a diesel powered stripped down subcompact for commuting to work & general farting about town. Might actually start saving my milk money & keep an eye out for one of the old Chevette diesels.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Fundamentally, it's a stupid idea. The energy to charge the batteries has to come from somewhere. There is no magic. That's part of the point. Instead of refined crude oil alone, you can use energy from natural gas, nuclear, coal and hydro. There is no magic, but using electricity will give more options as to the ultimate source of the energy. That is the whole point I have been trying to bring across. If Oil becomes too expensive to put into our gas tanks(which it will sooner than you think), other energy forms will get a second look and become viable. The big one there is Nuclear, hands down. Fusion may be a myth now, but in the next century, it may be the way we generate power. We have to move foward, not back. And once the economic factors are there(Oil being too expensive, Fuel Cell cars being affordable and having the preformance we want, etc.), it will happen. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Cost and technology mainly....As Keith mentioned, when you have an EV that gets 200-300 miles range and only take 5-10mins to charge safely, (swipe at the Volt there,) then you'll have a viable option. If the Volt could go for 300 miles on a safe 5 min charge for 40K, GM literately couldn't make enough of them quick enough. In fact I'll go so far that GM would have to halt production on all gas cars and start making Volts to keep up with demand. The Volt HAS an unlimited range, you need to do your homework. It just does not have unlimited BATTERY range, once the battery reaches a specified discharge level, the engine comes on and provides charging power to the battery for as long as you need to drive the car. It gets about 35mpg with the engine charging the battery. Its biggest problem is that at its price, it has no real advantages over a Chevy Cruize getting almost 40mpg on the highway for 2/3 of the price. The only way this car works is if the person lives 10 miles from work and the gas engine never comes on. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Yeah but it uses gas skippy...Just how far can you go before the gas engine kicking in? The whole "educate" yourself on the Volt is over played. |
|
The electric car is inevitable. Right now they are not common not due to a lack of demand, but simply a lack of supply. They will never replace all of the cars on the road, but with the average American family owning 2.3 cars, I would see a say where most households have 1 EV and one ICE vehicle. There is a un-tapped demand for these vehicles, but right now, consumers are forced to choose between affordable price and sufficient range. As battery prices continue to drop, and gas prices continue to rise, the Electric car will become a good choice for more and more people, particularly in 2 car households.
There are currently 3 EV's that are readibly available in the US, and 2 sort of EV that is Available EV's: Tesla Roadster Nissan Leaf Mitsubishi MiEV Sort of EV's : Chevy Volt Fisker Karma Of the true EV's on the Tesla has the range to be a practical vehicle for anyone other than a city dweller with a short commute. The roadster has incredible performance (0-60 in 3.6 seconds) and good looks, but is TINY and incredibly expensive (starting price is 108K) Latter this year, the Tesla Model S will start shipping. With a base price of 57K (under 50K after the federal tax credit) and a range between 160 and 300 miles, depending on what battery options you go with, seating for up to 7, good looks, 0-60 times as low as 4.4 seconds, and more cargo space than some SUV's, Tesla will sell a lot of these (so far they have approximately 10,000 reservations, all paying at least $5,000 for a spot in line) There are a lot of people who buy $50K cars, and the Model S is in a good position to compete in that category. I think that is battery prices continue to fall at their current rate, there will be Electric cars the people actually want to buy (unlike the leaf and volt) that are at a price point where people can actually afford them. Tesla is already on the record stating that their third gen car will be out in late 2014, early 2015, and have a price point of $30K. If it looks and performs like the model S, and gas is $5-$6 a gallon at that point, they will not be able to make these cars fast enough. If a small start up can do what Tesla has done, it is only a matter of time until other car makers are also building affordable EV's that meet the needs of the consumers who would buy them. |
|
Quoted: You're in luck...I think there really would be a market for a very compact, minimalistic, short range, INEXPENSIVE, electric car (with regenerative braking) that would supplement gas cars, for a daily commuter vehicle. To work and stop at the store on the way home. If designed well, it may not need AC, power windows/seats/mirrors/back massagers/coffee makers/etc. 2 seats, room for an armful of groceries. It would have to charge from a standard wall socket, or at most from a refrigerator/AC/stove/dryer socket. I'd buy one for $7k or less.  |
|
Israel is testing a VERY good concept for electric car technology.
150mi batteries per charge, when it's time to get a fill up you take it to a local gas station and there's a automatic battery changing device. 3m to replace your batteries with new ones which then get charged. Here's a example of something I Think that would sell well in the US : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1xFXHOuBGA |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I was listening to a a radio show yesterday that went over the chevy volt costs and stats. Most users were getting 25 miles per charge on a 16 kilowatt. At or around the 25 mile mark it would go to its 9 gallon fuel tank and the car then only got 25-27 MPG. The radio host said that after some math he came up with that it took a little over 70 cents per mile to run a chevy volt (between fuel costs and charging costs) at $45,000 Retail but only cost 10 cents per mile to run a $20,000 economy car. At $3.00 a gallon for gas and 40 mpg fuel is .075 cents per mile. I generally agree with where you're going, but I think he's being generous with his figures. He probably was being generous. By my calculations with my personal vehicle I get the following: Fuel: $3.32 (as of this morning) Tank size: 14 gal So it costs me $46.48 to fill up I get 29-30 MPG (2003 Honda Accord 4cyl) 30 (MPG) x 14 (gal) = 420 (Mi per tank) $46.48 divided by 420 = .110 Now granted mileage and other things will vary (type of travel, frequency in stopping, ect...) but as of right now mathematically it only costs me 11 cents per mile to run my car in terms of fuel costs. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Back in the '80s a guy I worked for had a beater VW diesel Dasher wagon that IIRC got ~45mpg....& that was late '70s-early 80s tech in a heavier wagon. I think you'll find that those cars were far lighter than their contemporary counterparts. Too true, less mandated safety nerfing & less gorked up with power everything, AC, etc.
|