Electric cars a bad idea?

[Marlin]

Jack, you know me oh so well...lol. I doubt the difference between 3200 and 3800 really matters for well built roads.

Those batteries have ridiculous hazardous materials and require highly specialized facilities to process.

Did you know electric vehicles were in full production in 1939? (learned that from Forza motorsports on Xbox360)

I had the great pleasure of going with my father to work on a huge solar farm in Germany in the spring. The owner came out and talked to us. This was state of the art stuff. Azimuth and horizon tracking, computer controlled for optimal efficiency. Sticker cost would take at least 20 years at current electricity rates to recoup costs. That did not include repairs, maintenance, and so on. I was flabbergasted, yes, I just used the word flabbergasted on this forum. He said it had nothing to do with environment or profit, but rather prestige. kind of like buying a 200K car. Just so you can say you have one.
As for not using coal, what does your state use? You have natural gas, coal or nuke. Nuke being magnitudes cleaner and safer for the environment. For all you anti nuke folks, FYI, the US navy has hundreds of nuclear powered ships, tooling around the world, dynamic situations, never had an accident that resulted in a civilian exceeding the federal exposure limits. As a matter of fact, my lifetime exposure is just a bit over 1 REM in 13.5 years, the federal limit was 1 REM a year until recently. I have more exposure than anyone I work with since I was involved with the USS San Francisco running aground a few years ago. Most of my exposure came from that job putting up lead shielding for x-rays of the piping.

I digress, electric cars are silly, just like smart cars and mini coopers. There are old hondas and Riff's super rare fiesta that get far better mileage, at a teeny tiny fraction of the cost. Those cars are 15-20 years old, we had the technology with conventional engines 2 decades ago!!!

My entire point to this thread was to allow people to recognize that we are angry at Big oil, yet we are going to replace it with someone else. More smoke and mirrors for liberal douche hippie environmentalists. There will always be some Big 'xxxx' to be angry at for as long as we need to transport ourselves quickly over long distances. The government cramming hybrids and electrics down our throat is going to result in horrible repercussions. Remember that 10 years from now that I called it This is all smoke and mirrors to keep the masses happy that the government is actually doing something. (president on red phone...sorry, it was the best I could do.)

[Grif]

My entire point to this thread was to allow people to recognize that we are angry at Big oil, yet we are going to replace it with someone else.

We don't need to be allowed to think by you or anyone else. We can do that ourselves, thanks.

More smoke and mirrors for liberal douche hippie environmentalists. There will always be some Big 'xxxx' to be angry at for as long as we need to transport ourselves quickly over long distances.

Yes, but it doesn't take a liberal douchebag hippie to realize that.

The government cramming hybrids and electrics down our throat is going to result in horrible repercussions.

Thank you for your considered opinion. Care for any facts to back that up? Research? Even any ideas at all? Spew accusations all you want, but without any ideas to fix the situation, you are just bitching to hear yourself bitch. Or has a teabag got stuck in your throat?

Remember that 10 years from now that I called it This is all smoke and mirrors to keep the masses happy that the government is actually doing something. (president on red phone...sorry, it was the best I could do.)

Thank you Nostradamus. But I prefer criticism to be constructive. I do not dismiss alternatives as easily as you as you seem to. Any research to keep us from suckling the tit of foreign oil is fine by me personally, but your agenda seems to be to discredit all progressive thought on the matter in lieu of the status quo, which I think we all know is not sustainable over the next few decades.

[Marlin]

We don't need to be allowed to think by you or anyone else. We can do that ourselves, thanks.

Your damn right, God bless America.

Yes, but it doesn't take a liberal douchebag hippie to realize that.

Sure, but liberal douche hippies got one of the largest solar panel fields in America shutdown because of some stupid tortoise. This was not a photovoltaic field, but rather a mirror, boiling water type facility which is far more efficient. There is so much coddling of the specialist minority, that I thought I should give em a shout out and make em feel specialer.

If I offended any liberal douche hippies with my post, get over it, you drive a VX; A very environmentally unfriendly vehicle. Burns lots of oil, horrible mpg...I would put this akin to making fun of vegans on a hunting forum. Take your seemingly self righteousness to a forum that makes sense.

Thank you for your considered opinion. Care for any facts to back that up? Research? Even any ideas at all? Spew accusations all you want, but without any ideas to fix the situation, you are just bitching to hear yourself bitch. Or has a teabag got stuck in your throat?

Ideas, lets stick to technologies we know that work. There are lots of vehicles decades old (see Brian and Jack's posts about their old cars getting incredible mileage) We don't need to dump billions on new technology just for the sake of creating something new.

Thank you Nostradamus. But I prefer criticism to be constructive. I do not dismiss alternatives as easily as you as you seem to. Any research to keep us from suckling the tit of foreign oil is fine by me personally, but your agenda seems to be to discredit all progressive thought on the matter in lieu of the status quo, which I think we all know is not sustainable over the next few decades.

Did you even read my post?! There is nothing progressive about overpriced hybrid/electric cars. They were in mass production in the 30s. We are just trading one tit for another. I am happy with my current tit, no reason for me to throw down a fortune for an inferior tit that will put me in the same situation I am in now in twenty years. Take all the hybrid/electric money and throw it at something such as hydrogen or bio fuels that actually work rather than postponing the inevitable. (some promising fuels are being researched using algae, but if that stuff gets loose into the natural environment...) An electric/hybrid car is like wrapping electrical tape around an exposed conductor. Its just a temporary fix, we are better off taking the time and money and doing it right.

WTF man, where did all this anger come from? Too much tequila? It tends to make some people angry.
This chart is cut and pasted from 2010 data presented by the US geological survey group of the top 17 oil producers in the world, the years representation is for the respective country at current usage rates per country and located in land the respective country owns. Add all these together, it is many decades of oil use...

Country Reserve life in years

Saudi Arabia 66
Iraq 142
Canada 188
Iran 95
Kuwait 110
Venezuela 100
United Arab Emirates 93
Russia 17
Kazakhstan 93
Libya 66
Nigeria 41
United States 8
China 11
Qatar 46
Algeria 15
Brazil 14
Mexico 9

For the total of these 17 nations for the world, it is a worst case scenario of 54 years. This is based on only a 50% successful recovery of the known contents. Generally, they are closer to 70-80% but for the reserves,they use a standard 50%.
This is also based on known oil fields, does not include prospective oil fields that have not been surveyed and quantified.
This is just the reserve fields, not being actively pumped. So we have a long while before gas goes away out of necessity.

[Stephen Biko]

I digress, electric cars are silly, just like smart cars and mini coopers. There are old hondas and Riff's super rare fiesta that get far better mileage, at a teeny tiny fraction of the cost. Those cars are 15-20 years old, we had the technology with conventional engines 2 decades ago!!!

No we did not. You are comparing apples to oranges. 15-20 years ago cars were 500lbs+ lighter because they didn't have all of the safety engineering that is part of modern vehicles. For example:

Curb Weights
1990 Nissan Sentra Base Model: 2156 lbs 29/36MPG
2010 Nissan Sentra Base Model w/ CVT: 2972 lbs 26/34MPG

You put one of those 1990 engines in a modern car and you won't see anything like the MPG that it got in one of those light-weight chassis of 1990.

[Marlin]

No we did not. You are comparing apples to oranges. 15-20 years ago cars were 500lbs+ lighter because they didn't have all of the safety engineering that is part of modern vehicles. For example:

Curb Weights
1990 Nissan Sentra Base Model: 2156 lbs 29/36MPG
2010 Nissan Sentra Base Model w/ CVT: 2972 lbs 26/34MPG

You put one of those 1990 engines in a modern car and you won't see anything like the MPG that it got in one of those light-weight chassis of 1990.

I think you are also missing some data. Sentras only came in a manual tranny up until about 8 years ago, the base model had no AC, power windows power locks, power trunk release and so on, things that are all standard even in the base model now. You can't compare the weight of a base model from 19 years ago to now and say its only because of safety stuff. With today's modern materials, there is no reason we can't get it down to that weight if you strip all the amenities out of it actually compare model to model.

Strange, I looked at the traffic fatalities numbers, from 94 (thats as far back as it went) to 2006, traffic deaths went up almost 10%!!! Went from 36,200 to 39,200! I wonder if that is due to speed limits going to 70mph?
Just wondering, since our vehicles got safer, yet fatalities went up.

[circmand]

I think you are also missing some data. Sentras only came in a manual tranny up until about 8 years ago, the base model had no AC, power windows power locks, power trunk release and so on, .

Why do we need all these friggin extras. I prefer rolling down the window by hand to replacing a motor for $800. Anyone think our windows would have the issues they do if they were perfected manual roll downs? Power locks hell I never locked myself outr of a car til cars started locking the damn doors for me. power trunk release how lazy are some people. How about the 20 speaker stereo systems. Friggin 10 pounds of speaker wire plus the speaker and stereo. How about these 22 inch rims and tirems weighing 50 or more pounds a piece.

And they do all this crap and then the one good option that used to be standarded a full sized spare is dropped for weight.


ARRRGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!

[RickOKC]

Strange, I looked at the traffic fatalities numbers, from 94 (thats as far back as it went) to 2006, traffic deaths went up almost 10%!!! Went from 36,200 to 39,200!

I wonder how that compares to the population increase.

I wonder if that is due to speed limits going to 70mph?

BITE. YOUR. TONGUE. No really, right now. We'll wait.

[Marlin]

I wonder how that compares to the population increase.


BITE. YOUR. TONGUE. No really, right now. We'll wait.

LMFAO, my tongue hurts now, thanks. As for the population increase(9% from 2000 to 2010), all those kids haven't started driving yet, so unless you are referring to illegals without driver's licenses or insurance, I doubt it

I rarely drive the VX over 50 mph, even on the freeway I am in the right lane.

The F250 on the other hand....it just rides so nice at 80mph and it still gets better mpg than the VX does at 45 or 50!!! I love my big diesel truck, gets better mpg than a mini cooper and I can haul a house with it. Definitely could haul some gold bars in the bed
Oh, I am on this mini cooper kick cause one of the guys at work bought one for his wife. She is only getting around 24mpg around town. They are pissed.
She says she takes it easy, but for some reason, I doubt that

[newthings]

Root problem -- Like Scott said, ”Too many people”. To political to tackle that one. Mother nature will fix, in her own good time.

Current battery technology is not suitable for competing with oil based gas as a car fuel.
Trying to justify electric power in a subsidized environment is like trying to quantify farts.

(Year old data) Honda has a program in SoCal, offering natural gas powered conventional cars for sale at normal unsubsidized prices. A low pressure house gas line is used with a compressor to give a partial fill up overnight. The cost of the compressor unit is about $2000.00. No one mentioned -- How about buying two compressors?”

Natural gas is the only thing that makes sense right now and for the next 10 years. We have a lot of natural gas. If the cracking extraction process does not get greedy and pollute the water tables and ruin the reputation of the product, we can get and distribute natural gas now. The natural gas stock market is slow and boring. The politicians do not champion natural gas. Politicians do subsidies and pay offs. They are not working for us.

Methane hydrate lays thick on the bottom of vast deepwater sea beds. That is natural gas and water under pressure. Rejecting that the human race will continue to breed infinitely, there is a near infinite supply of methane hydrate there for the picking. Technology is needed, but it is conventional not magical, like an unobtainable ideal battery. Sorry, the chemistry and physics just are not there.

Look at all of the quickly improving technologies we are use to. Batteries have only improved in small increments. Even high temp batteries with lots of risky side effects, are not capable of the power densities and long life, need in cars. Pull the subsidies and you could not make enough 10 foot poles for the Volts and Leafs. Soon the Priususes will be needing to be re-batteried. Who will pay and how much? Top Gear drove a Prius hard and got about 6 mpg.

But don’t get me started.

Roy

[circmand]

Root problem -- Like Scott said, ”Too many people”. To political to tackle that one. Mother nature will fix, in her own good time.

Roy

Too many people driving but on the other hand not enough paying into social security.

Think about it. That is the main problem about solving problems. One only looks at one issue and how to solve it. That translates into causing other problems usually just as bad or worse than the initial problem. Frankly it isnt too many people it is too many stupid people. There should be a law that limits who can breed.

And for those who say that would be wrong or violate their rights I say who cares. What about my right not too be unduly burdened by morons.

[Stephen Biko]

And for those who say that would be wrong or violate their rights I say who cares. What about my right not too be unduly burdened by morons.

Nothing wrong with it all! I vote you and your gene pool to be the first.

[Stephen Biko]

You can't compare the weight of a base model from 19 years ago to now and say its only because of safety stuff.

It really doesn't matter where all the weight comes from - focusing on that is a red herring. The point is that cars weigh a helluva lot more and yet mpg is roughly the same because engine technology has come a long way. You put a modern engine in a 1990 chassis and you are looking at way better efficiency than we had before. What we had back then does not compare to what we have today.

Strange, I looked at the traffic fatalities numbers, from 94 (thats as far back as it went) to 2006, traffic deaths went up almost 10%!!! Went from 36,200 to 39,200! I wonder if that is due to speed limits going to 70mph?
Just wondering, since our vehicles got safer, yet fatalities went up.

US population in 1994: ~260M Fatalities: 40,716
US population in 2006: ~300M Fatalities: 42,642
US population in 2009: ~306M Fatalities: 33,808

That's a population increase of 15% but really only a %5 increase in fatalities by 2006 and a 17.5% decrease in fatalities by 2009. That drastic drop over the last ~5 years is due to increased safety requirements starting early in the decade.

[Marlin]

It really doesn't matter where all the weight comes from - focusing on that is a red herring. The point is that cars weigh a helluva lot more and yet mpg is roughly the same because engine technology has come a long way. You put a modern engine in a 1990 chassis and you are looking at way better efficiency than we had before. What we had back then does not compare to what we have today.

So we need to put new engines in old cars!!! I wonder if fuel prices affect accidents as well. When the prices go up, people drive a bit more conservatively, drive less and so on.
I couldn't find a fatalities per gallon of fuel sold or something like that. We couldn't really use miles, since we have no idea how many miles folks are driving. But gallons of gas, we could use an average mpg to get a ballpark, and then using the fatalities from each year come up with some accidents/mile figure. Say 2% of gas is not used in vehicles (lawn mowers, generators and so on, I have no real idea, just guessing. Its probably much lower than 2%)

[Stephen Biko]

I couldn't find a fatalities per gallon of fuel sold or something like that. We couldn't really use miles, since we have no idea how many miles folks are driving.

Try clicking on the links I include. You might learn something.

[circmand]

Try clicking on the links I include. You might learn something.

and you might spend the rest of your life reading a ton of links too. Lets remember some people here have more to do than reading a llong winded post with 3-4 attachments to them that are just as long.