I invite you to tour this website to witness the changing of the American automotive landscape.
Like all things innovative, the cost of entry is way too high for the general consumer at present, but we all know that the "better mousetrap" always catches on... and costs will drop (-and more players will get in the game)when demand rises.
This just might save us all... eventually. For now, a Dawg can deam.
Plus, it looks hotter than a Victoria's Secret runway model.
I heard about Tesla like a year or so ago, and have watched them progress. Very interesting. There have been a few more entries into the electric market as well, including Ronaele, who makes a Mustang conversion that puts out 600hp & 2000lbs torque that is all electric. Problem is that it's a 60k conversion on top of supplying the car.
But as the market changes, and technology advances, these prices should begin to come down, and more players will enter the market, and one of the next big automotive companies may rise from this field. Unless the major manufacturers come up with something, they may be left behind on this one.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
My wonder about electric cars is how they handle air conditioning and heating? Well out here I really don't need the heating. But with triple digit temperatures rather common having air is a must. And the heat is hell on current car batteries.
Amazing cars with amazing technology behind it.. One of the biggest drawbacks to this car is the time it takes to recharge it. 3.5 hours to full charge. Whereas a gas powered vehicle can be refueled in a matter of minutes..
A range of 220 miles on a charge is akin to the mileage my wife gets in her 07 TrailBlazer.. well actually, she gets more miles to a tank full,, but the point is that when she runs low on fuel, she can fill it up in minutes.
Where do you fill up an electric car? I promise you, if you are out on the road, and you pull into a rest stop on the Turnpike, they may, at first let you charge your car, but if enough people do it and they see a spike in thier electric bill, they will either stop allowing recharges or start charging for it.
I don't know how to calculate the cost of electricity..
What's gonna make this car really something special, is when they can charge it, then as it's running, it creates it's own electricity and keeps the batteries charged to full capacity..
Then they will have something.. either that, or a quicker way to charge them then 3.5 hours...
For short runs around town,, Hell, it would take me a week to use 220 miles.. so it would be super for me.. But with that performance,, I'd want to be out on the open road... wouldn't you?
Oh and one other thing,, look as some of the pics of the refueling of the car.. you will see that it's no ordinary plug... it's a special plug.. it's gonna take a while for the american infrastructure to catch up to that technology I think.
I love this idea, I hope they can work out some of those issues and get the price within reason. I'd buy one in a new york second...
Last edited by Damanshot; 05/13/0809:36 AM.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Cool !....Considering that gas is close to $ 4 per gallon , you would think someone would step forward and grab the market....Unfortunately , we continue to be led to believe that such an option that is affordable is not an option....As gas continues to up hopefully that will change....
So what am I missing here? It's an electric car. They've been making these for years. Sure it looks a little bit nicer than some electric cars we've seen, but it still has the same issues that we've seen with other electric cars ... mainly refueling, batteries, heating/ac, etc. I think that's why companies started looking more into the hybrid, because the ability to switch between gas and electric started to solve some of short comings of an electric car.
And I'm still not so sure electric is the way to go. Unless we gve a full green light to nuclear power, or finally figure out fusion power ... we're still looking electric bills going through the roof if everybody starts using their home utility to refuel their cars. My home electricity bill already exceeds my gasoline bill ... and it will probably quadruple if there is major demand for electricity as a "fuel".
Quote: What's gonna make this car really something special, is when they can charge it, then as it's running, it creates it's own electricity and keeps the batteries charged to full capacity
Well the laws of physics will tell you that's not possible.
Current hybrids already try to regenerate some of the energy used when braking, which is a good idea. That's probably the best you can do. You can't put a generator on during regular driving, you'll either stop the car or generate next to nothing in electricity.
Valid concerns, Dam... and very much based on our current reality. My basic point, beyond the "waycool factor," is the Big Pic.
Now that the ball has begun rolling, it's really only a matter of time before sharp minds find fixes for these current shortcomings... and they'll all be market-driven. Nothing makes a person want to improve the mousetrap like the lure of money.
Quote: Where do you fill up an electric car? I promise you, if you are out on the road, and you pull into a rest stop on the Turnpike, they may, at first let you charge your car, but if enough people do it and they see a spike in thier electric bill, they will either stop allowing recharges or start charging for it.
That's exactly what I expect... and it's not a prob for me. I don't expect to get my fossil fuel gratis, and I'd expect to pay for my "buzz" at any public place, as well. I DO expect that "charging stations" will be the next new thing... and those who get'em up first will reap the profits. Those who make the early deals with the local/regional electric utilities will hit the ground running. I basically see some of the first locations being 7-11 or Speedway-type places with charging units installed away from the gasoline pumps, perhaps on the opposite side of the building . Places like these are already established in good, well-known locations, and could probably add this service at minimal cost. As demand grows, the petrol pumps will be phased out.
Quote: Oh and one other thing,, look as some of the pics of the refueling of the car.. you will see that it's no ordinary plug... it's a special plug.. it's gonna take a while for the american infrastructure to catch up to that technology I think.
Surprise! They've already thought of it... in the trunk, there's an adapter that allows the car to be charged from standard electrical service. I don't know if it's as efficient as the one shown, but at least the issue has been addressed. Now, as it applies to "charging stations," there's always a chance that competing car companies will be stupid, and design proprietary connex, beginning a vhs/betamax or miscrosoft/apple- type market war... but to be honest, that's in noone's best interest. Folks is dumb on a regular basis, tho- and it's not out of the realm of possibility.
For me, there's one more important asset to this what this car represents... and it's why I said "this could save us all" in my first post. My best friend, a Colonel in the USAF, explains it best. After I posted here, I sent the same to him in an e-mail. He responded within the hour:
" I'm a huge fan! I've seen these before...and certainly it's the face of the future. We can no longer depend on fossil fuels! It's the same with your water heater! The future is tankless...but the cost is still too high in the US because they are not the norm yet. Maybe this round of gas prices will finally begin the shift to alternative energy development. As long as we allow ourselfves to be held hostage for oil...we will continue to be embroiled in the madness in the middle east. Our very freedom and national identity depend on alternate energy sources!
Not that I'm on a soapbox..."
That's what has me so fired up more than anything else, Dam. This car could be huge. It's the first high-end offering that will have mass-market appeal... it isn't some limp-wristed oddity like that tool Ed Bagley Jr. drives. It has beef, is almost affordable, and will spawn other less exotic versions for the middle class consumer. When the public wants something, someone ALWAYS finds a way to make it happen. For the first time since "alternative fuel sources" became a buzzword 3 decades ago, I see a real chance for things to take off.
The timing has never been better for a huge public paradigm shift... and it will be the kind that begins to solve many of our country's most immediate and pressing concerns. Global warming, pollution, Middle East involvement, stagnating economy... the trickle-down could be breathtaking.
The optimist in me sees mostly good things coming from this. The realist in me expects to see it happen over the next 10-20 years. If I'm lucky enough to make another 20, I'll leave a very different America than I entered.
And yeah, man... like you, I'm ready to do this in a heartbeat, too.
Quote: Well the laws of physics will tell you that's not possible
That is what I was thinking.
Physics wasn't my deal, but that would more or less be perpetual motion if it could charge itself once running.
I suppose you could have some type of mechanical generator or dynamo attached to the drive to create some sort of charge to delay wearing down the batteries.
If that could be done, why burn coal to create steam to run turbines?? If you can build it small, you sure as heck can build it big.
To your big point, I agree.....unless fusion becomes a reality, we best get started on the next generation of nuclear reactor.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.
There are some that say they can recharge in 15 minutes.
As far as the deal since electric cars have been around for 30-40 years. They used to be those little 2 seater funny cars that did like 30mph, these are sports cars, 0-60 in under 4 secs, and your talking max torque all the way through the rpm band, that's the advantage to electric motors.
Now, I see this as advancing solar cells, imagine, an electric motor car that has solar cells on the roof and maybe trunk lid, that recharge, run, or lengthen the runtime whenever possible. Imagine on a sunny day being able to drive 500+ miles, and then being able to stop for a bathroom and food break, plug the car in and have the car recharge in the 15-20 minutes you spend in the store.
No to mention even most fuel cell technology is still most likely not going to be direct combustion, but conversion to electricity to run an electric motor. So the technology they learn building all-electric cars aids them in creating better more efficient use of the electricity in the future.
it's all a stepping stone in the development of transportation. Think, at one time, people thought horses would be it forever, and cars were just a gadget for the rich to waste money on.
Not to mention that Americans are the only ones that drive on long trips on a regular basis.
Last edited by FloridaFan; 05/13/0812:01 PM.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
As far as "recharging stations", I pose this question...
How long will it take to "charge up"?
The tiny battery in my cell phone takes a couple hours. Can't see how that would work unless there was a way of rapid charging.
some of you are missing the point. 90% of Americans don't travel more than 200 miles a day. So as long as it can be charged while you are sleeping, you never have a problem. For road trips, or for people who travel over 200 miles a day, this car isn't right for that. But if we could reduce our oil dependency by 90 %, what's stopping us?
Most of you, if you are married, have two cars. If one is electric and used for most of the driving, and the second car is a hybrid that can be used on long trips and as a second car, you do an amazing reduction on you gas bill. And the electric bill will go up, but the overall cost you will save. Reduce foreign oil dependence, help local economy by using coal for electricty, which nowadays is cleaner than gas, and open up the possibility to use wind/water/solar energy in the future to stop using fossil fuels altogether, save for space shuttles and such. That would help this country tremendously.
Doing that would kill our economy, unless the rest of the world is going to do it at the same time.
The best option is to drill for oil on our own soil, update all of the oil refineries, build new ones if nessessary. Then in the mean time develop technology and intergrate it into our system over a period of time in a way it doesn't kill our economy.
Quote: As far as "recharging stations", I pose this question...
How long will it take to "charge up"?
That remains to be seen.
Just a few years back, it took a cell phone overnight to recharge.
It seems to me that the practicability threshold is around 15 minutes. If that's the case "recharge/comfort" stations will become the norm on multi-lane limited access highways like 80-90. In many ways, the practical infrastructure is already in place for long-distance driving. On the 'pike, rest havens are roughly 30 miles apart from Indiana to the Penn border. In my interstate travels, I've found this to be about the norm for most heavily-populated states. Big Sky/desert states are the exception, not the rule. That's more than adequate to suit the average driver's needs. Hell, folks with gas-guzzling Lincoln Navigators can make it from coast to coast without any real concern. Retrofit each of those rest areas with charging units, and the interstate system is ready to go. Most folks stopping at Blue Heron rest area are going to take bathroom breaks, hit BK/Starbucks, and generally kill 10-15 minutes anyway.
According to the website, the lithium ion technology they employ doesn't require a total recharge anyway, so a shorter fill-up would be the equivalent of a 3-5 gal "quick fill" at your local gas station. Only in the tightest of timeframes can the average person not afford to spend 10 minutes parked.
In some ways, this is doable almost immediately. Bugs will inevitably need to be worked out, but that's always the case with anything new. I guess my point is this: If we wait until all the potential bugs are sorted out, we'll be waiting another 30 years- while we (and Big Oil) make excuses for not implementing this enthusiastically.
Time and again, we've seen that necessity is the mother of invention (innovation).
From my p.o.v, the current geopolitical climate makes this almost an imperative. We (US) can't afford to continually endanger ourselves in culture clashes with the middle east. Neither side likes the other, neither side is willing to substantially change... and the only thing binding the two in this unhappy, delicate dance is oil. If we can free ourselves from our dependancy on them to fuel our lifestyles, we leave them to each other. They become marginalized on the world economic scene, and revert to the feudal states which existed before WWII. Fine with me- let'em jihad each other into extinction, for all I care. They want us out? I say fine- give them what they want, and turn a deaf ear on their cries for us to come back.
Oil has had it's hundred years in history. I say it's time to move on.
And no- I'm not opposed to nuclear resources. The same ingenuity that spawned the advances in petroleum for the last century will be placed on making nukes safer, less toxic and more efficient, as well. It's human nature.
Doing that would kill our economy, unless the rest of the world is going to do it at the same time.
The best option is to drill for oil on our own soil, update all of the oil refineries, build new ones if nessessary. Then in the mean time develop technology and intergrate it into our system over a period of time in a way it doesn't kill our economy.
Most of the electric car advances have come from private companies. So I don't see where money has anything to do with it. This is why these cost so much, they have alot of their own money tied up in research and production.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
Quote: some of you are missing the point. 90% of Americans don't travel more than 200 miles a day. So as long as it can be charged while you are sleeping, you never have a problem. For road trips, or for people who travel over 200 miles a day, this car isn't right for that. But if we could reduce our oil dependency by 90 %, what's stopping us?
Well for one ... money. I think you missed my point earlier. While we may ween ourselves off of foreign oil, we are not weening ourselves off of "fuel" usage. While 90% of us wouldn't be paying for gasoline anymore ... that's 90% of us that are going to create a huge demand for standard electricity. Have you noticed your power bill lately? It isn't exactly cheap. Now slap on the demand of 90% of the country using that same power to fuel their car, and you're talking about a HUGE increase in utility bills.
And that's the same power that's needed to run every business in the country. Everyone complains now that gas prices are driving up the cost of standard goods because the cost of shipping goods is passed on to the price of an item ... what happens when the price of electricity skyrockets? Not only will that effect shipping expenditures (from electric cars), it would effect daily operation expeditures as well. If electricity costs go up 4 fold ... then the cost to light a building, run manufactuering equipment, run computers, etc ... is going to go up four fold as well.
Everyone forgets the whole, "cause and effect" relationship. People thought ethanol would be a great secondary fuel source, and now the increased demand for corn has caused food prices to go up ... and that's for something that's barely a dent in the overall fuel usage picture.
Quote: Most of you, if you are married, have two cars. If one is electric and used for most of the driving, and the second car is a hybrid that can be used on long trips and as a second car, you do an amazing reduction on you gas bill. And the electric bill will go up, but the overall cost you will save.
I agree ... but what about the cost of other goods that now go up because the demand for electricity has caused it's price to go up?
Quote: Reduce foreign oil dependence, help local economy by using coal for electricty, which nowadays is cleaner than gas, and open up the possibility to use wind/water/solar energy in the future to stop using fossil fuels altogether, save for space shuttles and such. That would help this country tremendously.
I agree ... using coal rather than oil would be better. Don't get me wrong, I think there is a place for electric over oil ... I just don't want it to be the be-all-end-all solution, because I'm not sure it is. I'd love to see electric cars as a more viable means though.
But coal cleaner than oil?? Coal is the dirtiest fossil fuel around, isn't it?
Quote: some of you are missing the point. 90% of Americans don't travel more than 200 miles a day. So as long as it can be charged while you are sleeping, you never have a problem.
This has been responded to based on the economy... but what about the DC economy.. so I have 2 cars.. so now I need to get rid of them and get 2 electric cars for day commuting, then I need a 3rd car that I can take on trips and such... so I'm now out tens of thousands of dollars.
Secondly, what about the extreme demand on our already taxed electrical power distribution grid every night when MILLIONS of these buggers get plugged in all at the same time?
Nighttime is when electrical grids have the least demand.
No one is forcing you or anyone to buy a new vehicle now or ever. It's an option available to people, and a technology that can and may help lessen our dependency on oil. Gas cars will be around for as long as any of us are alive probably.
but just think, if 50% of the US buys electric cars, then demand on gas is lessened. By oil companies own admission that prices are dictated by supply and demand, then with demand down, prices should go down a bit right.
There are way to rapid charge in 15 minutes these large batteries. 15 minutes is just a little bit longer than the average person stops for gas and bathroom breaks during long trips. and since these vehicles get roughly the same mileage per charge as gas cars get per tank, it about equals out.
It's all just options. Without people trying and looking for new ideas, we would all still be riding horses or taking steam trains to work everyday.
Besides, how often does the average American family take a trip that is longer than 250 miles one way? I'd say on average 1-2 times a year. now before anyone says "I travel 400 miles to Cleveland every Sunday during football season" I said the "average" family. Would it not be possible for it to be more economical to have gas rental cars, that you rent when you need to travel cross country?
Who knows, there is research going on now that increases the battery power by 10x. By the time we all have to seriously look at electric vehicles, they could possibly go 1000 miles on a charge.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
Good points, I'm just throwing possible obstacles out there for debate and consideration... Too many pie-in-the-sky people talk about how great it would be to lessen oil dependence and it would... but there are serious obstacles to consider, it's not just about building a slightly more efficient car... I'm all for it, just trying to put some "realism" to it... In short, I'm being the engineer to their architecture...
My father, who was an inventor and held over 40 patents, worked on developing a quick charge photocell battery 30 years ago. He could never get the process to work but he was absolutely sure that it was posible and would completely change the world when it did hit. Much the way the technological advances and declining prices of computer memory have changed the world in a million myriad ways in the last two decades.
It's just now starting to become a reality. My dad, who used to read through the new patent pages of the NYTimes every week saw a blurb about 6 years ago that Toshiba had figured out a managed thermoelectric version and quietly got the patent through with little fan fare. Then this last year... Quick Charge Battery I'm no expert but I'd predict this technology being effectively used in auto's in the next few years. The technology is still rudimentary but we all know how fast things develop in the new world when there's obsene amounts of money to be made.
Still does not clear up the valid issue of how all that electricty gets produced and the environmental issues surrounding that but hey, one hurdle at a time.
Oh, and a little heads up, maybe you want to buy a little Toshiba stock. Might be a decade before anything blows up but who knows.
"Team Chemistry No Match for Team Biology" (Onion Sports Headline)
Quote: Oh, and a little heads up, maybe you want to buy a little Toshiba stock. Might be a decade before anything blows up but who knows.
When does the patent expire?
Probably 20 years from patent date. I'm culling this from memory. I know it was a year or two before my dads death 5 years ago. So it being approximately 6 or 7 years old, that'd be 13 or 14 years from now.
"Team Chemistry No Match for Team Biology" (Onion Sports Headline)
The next big prize goes to the entrepeneur who figures out Massive hold batteries. A solar powered filling station with underground battery systems that can maintain massive charges. Two issues, the batteries themselves and solar panels that run to over 30%-35% efficiency. We're at about 27% now. Anybody got a $50 million in seed money?
"Team Chemistry No Match for Team Biology" (Onion Sports Headline)
Doing that would kill our economy, unless the rest of the world is going to do it at the same time.
The best option is to drill for oil on our own soil, update all of the oil refineries, build new ones if nessessary. Then in the mean time develop technology and intergrate it into our system over a period of time in a way it doesn't kill our economy.
It won't mess up the economy at all. It might help it if anything.
1. less money being exported for oil, more money staying in the US for electricity. 2. as someone mentioned, most charging takes place at night, when the powergrid can handle it. The cost of electricty going up will still be less than the amount spent on gas. 3. If anythign, a large demand suddenly for electric cars will create jobs in car companies converting their factories to electric and electric companies expanding. 4. the thing that makes prices of everything so high lately is the price of oil. Almost everything we buy is shipped to us from somewhere else. as transportation costs go up, so does the cost of everythign else. If we use electric, gas is much cheaper again for semis and airplanes. 5. Electric cars don't have to be more expensive than cars today. mass production brings the price down, as does tax credits, which is a great idea to get things moving. If a small business can get a tax credit for a Hummer (ridiculous) than we can offer tax credits for electric cars.
When we had to convert this nation into a war machine in WWII, it improved the economy drastically. Mass demand for new technology is great for the economy, particularly when you consider it will keep more money in the US, it will reduce our dependence on the middle east, and creates new jobs.
Quote: Most of the electric car advances have come from private companies. So I don't see where money has anything to do with it. This is why these cost so much, they have alot of their own money tied up in research and production.
Not to stray too far off topic, but one thing that really irks me is how a lot of the technology that we develop doesn't, in fact, come from private companies, but rather from government institutions (mainly Defense). What you see a lot of - and I don't know that this is pertinent in the case of electric cars - is the government developing these concepts and turning them over to private companies, who in turn charge the people for something that they essentially paid to be developed.
Quote: Most of the electric car advances have come from private companies. So I don't see where money has anything to do with it. This is why these cost so much, they have alot of their own money tied up in research and production.
Not to stray too far off topic, but one thing that really irks me is how a lot of the technology that we develop doesn't, in fact, come from private companies, but rather from government institutions (mainly Defense). What you see a lot of - and I don't know that this is pertinent in the case of electric cars - is the government developing these concepts and turning them over to private companies, who in turn charge the people for something that they essentially paid to be developed.
You are partially right, the government invents the idea, and private companies improve upon them for mass production and usage.
but it's like anything else, when it's new it costs alot, then as it becomes standard, they become much cheaper. Hence why we don't still drive Edsels, and why cars keep getting new gadgets every year, people won't pay the higher prices if they aren't thinking they are getting more. Just 10 years ago, A/C and power windows were options, now they are standard, it's actually an option to NOT have them on most cars.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
1. less money being exported for oil, more money staying in the US for electricity.
Yes, I can agree with that ...
Quote: 2. as someone mentioned, most charging takes place at night, when the powergrid can handle it.
Do you know that for sure? People use lights and other things at night as well. The reduction of electricity use at night is mostly due to businesses not running A/C and equipment that they do during the day, but it's not dropping down to zero at night. What if 300 million Americans are plugging their cars in at night? Do you think the power grid is going to handle THAT much demand? A lot of power companies also use the night time to "backup" their power supply so they can feed the increased demand during peak hours. If there is a high demand around the clock, then there is no chance to store up any power.
Quote: The cost of electricty going up will still be less than the amount spent on gas.
You don't know that for sure, and you are also only looking at it from a direct relationship, and in today's costs. Granted if you look at it from a myopic view ... where a certain amount of horsepower per hour can be generated slightly cheaper through an electric motor and utility made power vs. that same amount of power generated through a gas engine ... yes you're right. It's cheaper ... TODAY. What happens when 90% of the country uses electricity for cars, and the demand skyrockets? Do you honestly think it will be cheaper? By the way ... My monthly gasoline costs have probably gone up a total of $30 the last 5 years, while my utility bill has gone up $50.
Then you have to look at the indirect relationship like I said ... Prices of items have sky rocketed because of the cost it takes just to transport goods. That's due to the rise in gasoline. Now raise the price of electricity, and you are talking about a HUGE price increase in everything, because rather than effecting just the cost of transport ... you're effecting pretty much the entire overhead of a company, due to increased utility bills. So even if the direct relationship of cost of gas versus cost of electricity balances out in the end ... you are going to see a huge indirect inflation of costs due to the higher cost of electricity.
Quote: If anythign, a large demand suddenly for electric cars will create jobs in car companies converting their factories to electric and electric companies expanding.
Possibly ... who says ALL of those jobs will be created domestically? You're essentially just replacing current auto jobs with electric jobs. There might be an initial glut of jobs due to the demand to replace current auto, but it will soon return to what we see today with the current auto market. Is that a bad thing? No. I just don't see it as completely saving the domestic auto manufactuering market once and for all.
Quote: 4. the thing that makes prices of everything so high lately is the price of oil. Almost everything we buy is shipped to us from somewhere else. as transportation costs go up, so does the cost of everythign else. If we use electric, gas is much cheaper again for semis and airplanes.
True, but like I said before, the cost of pretty much everything else is more expensive due to higher electric bills.
Quote: 5. Electric cars don't have to be more expensive than cars today. mass production brings the price down, as does tax credits, which is a great idea to get things moving. If a small business can get a tax credit for a Hummer (ridiculous) than we can offer tax credits for electric cars.
A lot of states already do this, even for hybrids.
Quote: The reduction of electricity use at night is mostly due to businesses not running A/C and equipment that they do during the day, but it's not dropping down to zero at night. What if 300 million Americans are plugging their cars in at night? Do you think the power grid is going to handle THAT much demand? A lot of power companies also use the night time to "backup" their power supply so they can feed the increased demand during peak hours. If there is a high demand around the clock, then there is no chance to store up any power.
As with any new technology, use begins at a trickle. It grows to a flow, then becomes a torrent. If Power companies are savvy, they already know this, and can begin building for the new demands. For the time being, the infrastructure can support the new usage, but they must be smart (and gamble a litte) and begin R&D TODAY... if they want to take it all from Big Oil.
Quote: Do you know that for sure? People use lights and other things at night as well. The reduction of electricity use at night is mostly due to businesses not running A/C and equipment that they do during the day, but it's not dropping down to zero at night. What if 300 million Americans are plugging their cars in at night? Do you think the power grid is going to handle THAT much demand? A lot of power companies also use the night time to "backup" their power supply so they can feed the increased demand during peak hours. If there is a high demand around the clock, then there is no chance to store up any power.
See my answer above. Wait five years, then invest heavily in electric utilities. There will be a building boom on the same order as what we saw in the 1920's/1930's, when Big Oil got its major startup.
Quote: You don't know that for sure, and you are also only looking at it from a direct relationship, and in today's costs. Granted if you look at it from a myopic view ... where a certain amount of horsepower per hour can be generated slightly cheaper through an electric motor and utility made power vs. that same amount of power generated through a gas engine ... yes you're right. It's cheaper ... TODAY. What happens when 90% of the country uses electricity for cars, and the demand skyrockets? Do you honestly think it will be cheaper? By the way ... My monthly gasoline costs have probably gone up a total of $30 the last 5 years, while my utility bill has gone up $50.
Then you have to look at the indirect relationship like I said ... Prices of items have sky rocketed because of the cost it takes just to transport goods. That's due to the rise in gasoline. Now raise the price of electricity, and you are talking about a HUGE price increase in everything, because rather than effecting just the cost of transport ... you're effecting pretty much the entire overhead of a company, due to increased utility bills. So even if the direct relationship of cost of gas versus cost of electricity balances out in the end ... you are going to see a huge indirect inflation of costs due to the higher cost of electricity.
Not necessarily true. What I think we'll see is merely a redistribution of our expense. The money that's used to go toward petroleum products will now go to the electric utilities. If they are set up to handle the new demands, Big Buzz of the future will become the Big Oil we all now loathe today. Pick your poision. As we reach the 50/50 point, decreased demand will force petrol prices through the basement floor. All will even out, given time. At the same time, increased demand for electricity will spwan the building of new power plants, keeping the consumers' costs fairly flat- and stimulating the local/regional building trade (who'll, by the way, be making the switch to Big Buzz, as well...)
I prefer to pick the poison that's less poisonous to our world.
Bottom line- it's possible that you won't see a dime more of your personal income go towards transportation... it'll just be going to someone other than BP or Shell.
Bottom line: A new paradigm is in the works, if we decide to run with it. As far as conventional wisdom can see, it's a change for the better. Smaller carbon footprint per household. Less smelly/toxic air. Less reliance on oil supply from unstable (and possibly hostile) governments. New, energetic entries into the Wall St./S&P Top 500.
Americans are going to spend what they must to satisfy their quality of life. If they choose to run headlong into an ever-increasing world of mobility-based technology, they can at least do it with an eye to the environment they inhabit.
Trust me- smart folks should start NOW investing in electric utilities, companies that make cars like this, and solar/electric/wind technology. Those who do will be the Fat Cats of the new millenium.
I'm Excl, but people confuse us all the time anyway.
Quote: As with any new technology, use begins at a trickle. It grows to a flow, then becomes a torrent. If Power companies are savvy, they already know this, and can begin building for the new demands. For the time being, the infrastructure can support the new usage, but they must be smart (and gamble a litte) and begin R&D TODAY... if they want to take it all from Big Oil.
Why haven't they done this already then? Energy demand has already gone up, and companies have done nothing. Like I mentioned before, my utility bill has gone up much quicker than my gasoline expenses.
Quote: See my answer above. Wait five years, then invest heavily in electric utilities. There will be a building boom on the same order as what we saw in the 1920's/1930's, when Big Oil got its major startup.
Big oil got it's major startup because it was a fledgling industry that suddenly had huge demand. The power industry is already well established. While there might be some "boom" to match demand, I don't see them bending over to great lengths to make electricity super cheap. They'll run into much of the same issues that Big Oil has now ... where environmentalists will block some development of plants ... plus there is no need to spend a great deal of money to make things cheaper, when people will happily pay 4 times the cost anyway. Like I mentioned above ... demand in California is so high, that we have rolling blackouts during the summer months. Utility companys aren't piling on top of each other to generate more product now, who's to say they'll go crazy to meet demand if suddenly the whole country wanted E-cars?
Quote: Bottom line- it's possible that you won't see a dime more of your personal income go towards transportation... it'll just be going to someone other than BP or Shell.
And that was my point ... even if it is "possible" that dime for dime I end up paying the same for TRANSPORTATION... my ELECTRIC bill has now gone up four times as much. And that's something that's going to effect every single business now ... and something that will quickly be reflected in the price I pay for just about everything else.
One of America's most enduring conspiracy theories, right up there with Roswell and the Grassy Knoll, is that Big Auto conspired with Big Oil to kill the electric car. The mass reclamation of leased EV1s that ended GM's troubled electric-car program (as chronicled in filmmaker Chris Paine's disingenuous documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car?") was all the most rabid theorists needed to prove their point.
GM didn't kill the electric car. Big Oil didn't kill the electric car. The EV1 was dead on arrival.
Back in the early 1990s, I attended an electric-vehicle conference where one of the speakers was a Hughes Aircraft vice president called Howard Wilson. Hughes had been acquired by GM in 1985 for $5.7 billion at the urging of chairman Roger B. Smith, who somehow reasoned a company that built rockets might have some useful technology to transfer to a company that built Chevys. Wilson was the man Hughes put in charge of figuring out exactly what those technology transfers might be.
Wilson had worked on the GM Sunraycer, the solar-powered car that drove 1867 miles across Australia on the energy equivalent of five gallons of gas. But he was at the conference to talk about GM's electric-car program, which was then taking shape back in Detroit.
GM's electric car was based on the Impact concept unveiled by Roger Smith at the Los Angeles auto show in January 1990. Smith was anxious to prove his expensive Hughes acquisition actually delivered technology transfer to the auto industry, even though Hughes technology used in the car was minimal. The Impact, like the Sunraycer, was largely done by engineers at AeroVironment, the blue-sky engineering shop run by Paul MacCready in California's San Gabriel valley. To everyone's surprise Smith announced GM would build a production version.
Apparently encouraged by Smith's commitment to the Impact, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) announced in September that year plans to mandate that two percent of all cars sold in the state by 1998 would be zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) -- to all intents and purposes, electric vehicles. Only problem was, electric vehicles were a long, long way from being viable alternatives to conventional gas-powered cars for L.A. commuters. And Howard Wilson knew it.
The problem, as always, was the battery. "Scientifically [battery] storage is all right," wrote Thomas Edison in 1883, "but commercially, as absolute a failure as one can imagine." More than a century later, nothing had changed.
For reasons of durability and reliability, the GM team had decided to stick with tried and true lead-acid batteries for the EV1. A battery is merely an energy storage device, not a source of energy. Even today, a kilogram of the very best performing lead-acid battery can store barely 0.4 percent the energy contained in a kilogram of gasoline. (By way of comparison, a kilogram of the latest, most efficient lithium-ion batteries, can only store about 1.2 percent the energy contained a kilogram of gasoline.)
The 2970-lb EV1 needed 1175-lb of lead-acid battery to go just 90 miles on the highway, and 70 miles in the city -- and could manage those distances only because the rest of the car had been carefully (and expensively) optimized for light weight, reduced aerodynamic drag, and had one of the most efficient and sophisticated electric powertrains in existence.
Howard Wilson was painfully aware of the EV1's shortcomings when we spoke at that EV conference, well before the car's launch. "What I'd really like to do," he said, "is install a small gas turbine engine that could run at a constant speed to provide the electricity for the motors." Wilson was, in effect, proposing a hybrid that made the most of the astonishing efficiencies built into the EV1's basic design to compensate for the pitiful energy density of the lead-acid battery pack.
The reason he wanted to use a gas turbine was that it could be made to run on anything from gasoline to cooking oil, and running at a constant speed would reduce emissions surges caused by the need to throttle up the engine to overcome load. "The emissions would be tiny," said Wilson, "but we can't do it because the CARB mandate insists on zero emissions."
A hybrid along these lines, which would have had decent range, and not be dependent on being plugged in to a charger for hours at a time, might have made an ultra-low emission -- and therefore ultra-fuel efficient -- commuter car a lot more attractive to a lot more L.A. commuters, although it's far from clear demand would've been enough to bring the price of the vehicle down to more realistic levels (the EV1 reportedly cost GM $80,000 each to build).
In the end, though, the price wasn't an issue. The reality is the EV1 was hostage to a technology the engineers knew from the get-go just wasn't able to do the job Roger Smith and the California Air Resources Board believed it could. That's what killed the electric car.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- One of the things that popped out at me was the energy comparisons. Even today, a kilogram of the very best performing lead-acid battery can store barely 0.4 percent the energy contained in a kilogram of gasoline. (By way of comparison, a kilogram of the latest, most efficient lithium-ion batteries, can only store about 1.2 percent the energy contained a kilogram of gasoline.) Now we can even handicap the gasoline even more by saying that 70% of the energy created from it is heat. And we are still talking 30 TIMES more energy per unit of weight advantage for gas. And the heat generated can be used in the cold seasons to good use. With the battery you have to take power and subsequently mileage to heat the vehicle.
The Tesla is a really cool car. I would love to have one. But in all honesty. It is no more functional than a 2nd car/sports car. There is no storage. It is not built for long trips. And it costs more than twice of a luxury commuter. I love Corvettes. It is probably my favorite car in the world. And one day, I will have one. But it will NOT be as a primary vehicle.
I could buy 5 Economy cars getting at least 35 miles to the gallon or 3 hybrids getting close to 50 miles to the gallon for the same price of JUST THE RESERVATION FEE of the Tesla. And I would have a place to put the groceries or additional people.
Frankly, The reason for me to buy a hybrid or electric car is going to be fueled(pun intended) more by cost, with the environmental impact being a fantastic bonus. I don't see how much savings in gas costs I will be making with a $111,000 vehicle. In fact I am not quite sure I could drive it long enough for it to pay for itself. And that would just be considering the straight purchase of the vehicle and not any of the maintenance.
I, like Excl, don't think the electric car is the end all be all answer. especially with our electricral infrastructure. Personally I like the direction of the Hydrogen and fuel cell technologies. I think Electric can be a better solution for denser population centers. So It could provide "some" answers for Large Cities and the places like Europe and Japan where the population is densely compacted. But much if not most of America is Suburban in nature and electric does not lend itself as solutions at the current progression of the technology.
The most expensive of technologies that are producing the greatest amounts of electricity (whether in solar cells or in fuel cells,or Lithium Ion Batteries, or whatever) cannot come anywhere close to the amount of energy produced by fossil fuels that do it at a cost that is monumentally less.
That is not to say they are not worth investigating and continuing their progresssion. But it is to say that we should not panic and rush to "solutions" such as the Tesla as the consequences may put us into situations worse than we are already in.
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
Again, no one is saying you have to buy a 100k electric car. But one of the problems that kept electric cars from becoming more common, was that they were ugly boxes on batteries that did 35mph tops. And Americans like style and design in their vehicles.
So companies like Tesla come out with sporty designs to show that you can have style and power, and still be electric. It's not for everyone, it's mainly for the wealthy, but it's a start, and Tesla is one of several dozen electric car makers out there. There are still plenty of those boxes on batteries being made that do 35mph as well, and some for as little as 8k.
Hydrogen fuel cells seem to be the best of both worlds as far as pollution and distance go, but then again, how much will it cost to fill up with hydrogen? Honda currently has the FCX Clarity available for lease in CA, at around $600/mo. A Pretty hefty lease if you ask me. But like everything, if it works out and becomes available to the masses, the price comes down.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
I'm Excl, but people confuse us all the time anyway.
It's ok, I pretty much agree with all of your concerns.
People are looking at this very linearly... if 'x' happens, then 'y' has to happen. And in such a complex global economy, those simple assumptions can really get you in trouble. In fact, if it was that simple, no president would EVER have a bad economy....
I agree with much of what jobe says, but what he's talking about is a 20-30 year plan, which isn't a bad thing, but it IS going to involve spending a fortune on the electrical infrastructure, auto maker swithover, etc. All of the homes which currently have 200amp service might need to be upgraded, I don't know, I'm not an electrician. And what about people in the city or people without driveways and garages? People who park in parking garages or on the street or in the lot of their apartment complex? What are they going to do?
I'm not opposed to starting the process, but what happens if we dump billions and billions into this electrical infrastructure changeover and then find out that hydrogen cars are really the way to go? Do we tear it out and start over? This is my concern, I'm all for alternative energy and decreasing our oil consumption, but with the 3 or 4 viable technologies out there, we really need to make sure we pick the right one before we jump in with both feet.
Doing that would kill our economy, unless the rest of the world is going to do it at the same time.
The best option is to drill for oil on our own soil, update all of the oil refineries, build new ones if necessary. Then in the mean time develop technology and integrate it into our system over a period of time in a way it doesn't kill our economy.
It won't mess up the economy at all. It might help it if anything.
1. less money being exported for oil, more money staying in the US for electricity. 2. as someone mentioned, most charging takes place at night, when the powergrid can handle it. The cost of electricty going up will still be less than the amount spent on gas. 3. If anythign, a large demand suddenly for electric cars will create jobs in car companies converting their factories to electric and electric companies expanding. 4. the thing that makes prices of everything so high lately is the price of oil. Almost everything we buy is shipped to us from somewhere else. as transportation costs go up, so does the cost of everythign else. If we use electric, gas is much cheaper again for semis and airplanes. 5. Electric cars don't have to be more expensive than cars today. mass production brings the price down, as does tax credits, which is a great idea to get things moving. If a small business can get a tax credit for a Hummer (ridiculous) than we can offer tax credits for electric cars.
When we had to convert this nation into a war machine in WWII, it improved the economy drastically. Mass demand for new technology is great for the economy, particularly when you consider it will keep more money in the US, it will reduce our dependence on the middle east, and creates new jobs.
Like others have said the demand would be extremely high for electricity. That means everyone will pay higher electric bills including businesses, homes, schools and so on. Do you think businesses will eat the cost? NO they will pass it on to us the consumer.
Meanwhile the rest of the world will see a flood of oil reaching the market, lowering their cost on just about everything related to gas. Thus making their market stronger while ours will get weaker.
You want to create jobs in the USA? Fine, drill for oil in ANWAR, the Continental Shelf, and the Gulf of Mexico. Open up new refineries and/or update the ones we have. That will create jobs here in the USA, as well as get more oil onto the market which will in turn lower the cost of gas.
The cost of electricity will rise, perhaps, but the cost of oil, if we remain dependent, will rise without a doubt. Oil is a finite resource. whether you believe we'll run out in 50 years or 500, the more we use, the less we have, the more expensive it gets.
Electricity is not a finte resource. We create it. And more and more we create it with things like wind and sun. Which we won't run out of (or if we do, we've got much bigger problems than the price of electricity).
Right now, at least the studies i've read, and i agree they are not conclusive by any means, point to the cost of electricty for your car coming to approximately 1 to 10 cents a mile. If you presently drive a car with decent mpg, like a minivan, you get about 20 to 25 mpg. at 4 bucks a gallon (the price where I am, anyway) that comes to 20 to 16 cents per mile. so you're spending 1.5 to 20 times more for gas than you would for electricity.
If you drive a truck, SUV, or sports car, it's even bigger savings.
And the powergird is indisputably not taxed at night presently. Could it handle 300 million cars? I don't know. but the next morning it can handle 300 million coffee makers, microwaves and hairdryers, so I'm guessing it can.
Quote: whether you believe we'll run out in 50 years or 500, the more we use, the less we have, the more expensive it gets.
The price of oil isn't rising because of the finite supply in the ground, the price is rising because of the finite amount we can take out of the ground and refine. If we could take it our faster and refine it in greater quantities, the price would go down. We may run out faster but that doesn't have as much to do with the price at the pump today.
Quote: We may run out faster but that doesn't have as much to do with the price at the pump today.
Today turns into tomorrow faster than you think. Remember when gas was 2 bucks a gallon? how about less than one? wasn't that long ago.
I understand your stance about drilling more, but you can't believe that's all we should change, can you? we've got the tech now to make great changes, why not do them? we'll still need oil for lots of other things. don't worry. we'll keep drilling.
Quote: The cost of electricity will rise, perhaps, but the cost of oil, if we remain dependent, will rise without a doubt.
Perhaps?? The cost of electricity will rise without a doubt as well. Once more, my utility bill has risen faster than my gasoline bill ... and that's without 90% of the country trying to fuel their car with electricity.
Quote: Oil is a finite resource. whether you believe we'll run out in 50 years or 500, the more we use, the less we have, the more expensive it gets.
I agree ... which is why we should be looking at alternative power sources, but that majority of power in this country is produced by other non-renewable resources.
Quote: Electricity is not a finte resource. We create it. And more and more we create it with things like wind and sun. Which we won't run out of (or if we do, we've got much bigger problems than the price of electricity).
The AMOUNT of electricity we can grab from things like wind, sun and water *is* finite. As I mentioned above, most of the electricity produced in the country is made by burning fossil fuels .. be it natural gas, oil, coal, or uranium.
I read an article the other day with the headline that "Wind could supply up to 20% of the country's power in the future" ... so I read the article, and it was actually "20% ... *IF* we made major advances in the amount of power generated, spent billions of dollars of infrastructure, and basically windmilled the crap out of every possible area in the country." So in other words ... the maximum potential of wind power would only be enough to supply 20% of the country's CURRENT use ... and that would be without everyone driving electric cars.
Quote: Right now, at least the studies i've read, and i agree they are not conclusive by any means, point to the cost of electricty for your car coming to approximately 1 to 10 cents a mile. If you presently drive a car with decent mpg, like a minivan, you get about 20 to 25 mpg. at 4 bucks a gallon (the price where I am, anyway) that comes to 20 to 16 cents per mile. so you're spending 1.5 to 20 times more for gas than you would for electricity.
And that's going by TODAY'S standard, and that's what I brought up before. If I buy an electric car TODAY ... I save maybe around 6-10 cents a mile. If everyone in the country runs out and buys an electric car today ... that cost of same cost of electricity no longer applies. And like I said before, that same cost gets passed along to your utility bill, which gets passed on to just about everything else you buy as well.
Quote: And the powergird is indisputably not taxed at night presently. Could it handle 300 million cars? I don't know. but the next morning it can handle 300 million coffee makers, microwaves and hairdryers, so I'm guessing it can.
Charging a car overnight isn't comparable to running your microwave/coffee maker/hair dryer for 5 minutes.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
![[Linked Image from i87.photobucket.com]](http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k155/brownsfan4173/NFL-Football.jpg)
![[Linked Image from mypsn.eu.playstation.com]](http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Letherface.png)
