Electric Propulsion Reality Check

philh wrote:

pianotuna wrote:
The biggest reason to not burn oil is once it is gone it is gone. It is far to valuable to be being burned.

Rare earth material used to produce electric motors and batteries has a limited known amount.

What rare earth material goes into a battery. Don’t know actually. Never heard of that. I thought they were mostly aluminum, lithium and a little cobalt.

pianotuna wrote:
The biggest reason to not burn oil is once it is gone it is gone. It is far to valuable to be being burned.

Rare earth material used to produce electric motors and batteries has a limited known amount.

It's fun watching these threads as the electric naysayers are always there.

The future is electric. One of the biggest upheavals coming is the cheap commuter electric car. Elio Motors (scam) and Ampere Motors are the cusp of this sort of thing. Most people are going to have some kind of "armored electric golf cart" for commuting. It will have a range of 100 miles and cost less than $10K.

The biggest hindrance to such vehicles right now is that the major auto makers cannot afford to sell cars for less than about $25K. This is what is required for them to cover the costs of building cars and a slim profit. This is why Ford is now bailing out of the car business, except for the Mustang, which can demand a premium. Ford simply can't make any money selling Focuses and Fiestas.

But if the Elios and Amperes succeed, I predict they will take off like hot cakes for commuting. People will not pay new car prices for electric performance. But they will pay golf cart prices for it.

And cost will drive people there. I'd buy an Ampere today if they were available. Pennies per mile in cost to drive. 150 mile range.

I predict most people will have a small electric commuter car for commuting and if they are able they will have a traditional vehicle for play or trips to grandma's house or utility work.

Mex are you suggesting that coal fired or "anything generating power" have no maintenance costs? It is a heck of a lot cheaper to maintain solar than most other generating plants. Sheep doing require any training to eat the weeds/grasses.

So you think the gasoline appears by "magic" at the gas station, or that it is "efficient" to get it there?

Hmmmmm drilling a shale oil well is 143 per foot. Or at the lowest estimated average price about 6,600,000.00 to "bring in" a well.

Only about 10% of the gasoline we prefer to use "occurs" naturally. The rest has to be "cracked" or "extracted" from the crude oil. That is energy intensive.

The biggest reason to not burn oil is once it is gone it is gone. It is far to valuable to be being burned.

Why do you believe that solar generated power has to include hundreds of miles of transmission lines?

Bobbo wrote:

The EV Social Warriors who actually believe that EV is more efficient do not understand physics. It is impossible to be more efficient. It takes a certain amount of energy to move your car from here to there. An ICE generates that energy right there, with no losses. An EV has to use electricity. That electricity is generated far, far away, then sent to your location. That sending has power losses that the EV Social Warriors ignore. That power loss is called voltage drop from resistance. Then that energy has to be stored again, this time in the EV's battery. As everyone knows, there is power loss in the charging of the battery. Ever felt a battery getting charged? It is hot. That is loss of power. Again, EV Social Warriors ignore that power loss. I have played with a few numbers and estimate that an electrical power plant has to provide about 125% of the power needed to move the car from here to there that an ICE car has to use, because of those losses. But, the EV Social Warriors don't consider that the extra 25% power generated exists.

free radical wrote:
ice vehicles will die,give it 10 years at the most..

Remember when they said that computers would create a paperless office? We use more paper now than ever because computers generate it faster. This prediction is just as wrong. EV's will never replace the ICE. They will reduce them, but there are things that an EV will never be able to accomplish.

If governments were effective a rewards system would be created.

Invent a system where carbon would be extracted from CO2. One billion dollars hard, cold cash reward after examination by an accreditation committee made up of top scientists.

Yet another billion-dollar reward for a revolutionary process to convert raw carbon to a structural fabric. Steel requires an insane amount of energy and aluminum is four times as bad.

How much pollution is created to manufacture a ton of steel? Answer? Lots.

Healthy tax credits for intelligent insulation "R" improvements. Can you imagine the reduction in energy needed for a Delta T increase of 50F? Freezers in the tropics are forced to add METERS thick insulation to freezers. Why not improve the strength of plastic so it would withstand damage when used in building construction? I've seen how well vacuum panel insulation works in cruising sailboats. It replaces more than 6" thick insulation. How much air conditioning needed if it was incorporated in new vehicle construction? Microns thick gold repulses enormous passages of UV and infrared rays through the glass. Simply incorporate laws that demand laminated glass in homes and motor vehicles. The insulation works in both directions.

Lowbrow government cannot conceive of rewarding industry with tax cuts. inconceivable. Mention tax cuts to the four horsewomen of the apocalypse and an utterly insane response is guaranteed to be forthcoming.

This is why I have zero confidence in any existing government platform to genuinely affect emissions.

Bobbo wrote:

free radical wrote:
No matter EV are more eficient

The EV Social Warriors who actually believe that EV is more efficient do not understand physics. It is impossible to be more efficient. It takes a certain amount of energy to move your car from here to there. An ICE generates that energy right there, with no losses. An EV has to use electricity. That electricity is generated far, far away, then sent to your location. That sending has power losses that the EV Social Warriors ignore. That power loss is called voltage drop from resistance. Then that energy has to be stored again, this time in the EV's battery. As everyone knows, there is power loss in the charging of the battery. Ever felt a battery getting charged? It is hot. That is loss of power. Again, EV Social Warriors ignore that power loss. I have played with a few numbers and estimate that an electrical power plant has to provide about 125% of the power needed to move the car from here to there that an ICE car has to use, because of those losses. But, the EV Social Warriors don't consider that the extra 25% power generated exists.

“An ICE generates that energy right there, with no losses.”

Too funny. Where would you even start. Oh and the fuel just magically appears in the tank right. Lol.

free radical wrote:
No matter EV are more eficient

The EV Social Warriors who actually believe that EV is more efficient do not understand physics. It is impossible to be more efficient. It takes a certain amount of energy to move your car from here to there. An ICE generates that energy right there, with no losses. An EV has to use electricity. That electricity is generated far, far away, then sent to your location. That sending has power losses that the EV Social Warriors ignore. That power loss is called voltage drop from resistance. Then that energy has to be stored again, this time in the EV's battery. As everyone knows, there is power loss in the charging of the battery. Ever felt a battery getting charged? It is hot. That is loss of power. Again, EV Social Warriors ignore that power loss. I have played with a few numbers and estimate that an electrical power plant has to provide about 125% of the power needed to move the car from here to there that an ICE car has to use, because of those losses. But, the EV Social Warriors don't consider that the extra 25% power generated exists.

free radical wrote:
ice vehicles will die,give it 10 years at the most..

Remember when they said that computers would create a paperless office? We use more paper now than ever because computers generate it faster. This prediction is just as wrong. EV's will never replace the ICE. They will reduce them, but there are things that an EV will never be able to accomplish.

There are so many reasons solar and wind shouldn’t work, and yet it is becoming a bigger component of the power mix every day all over the world. There are those who believed coal was the only solution. They and coal are dying off. Gas will go the same way over the next couple generations.

free radical wrote:

BillyBob Jim wrote:

free radical wrote:


No solar in that area..makes you wonder why not since its sunny pretty much all the time.
Put up solar panels and battery storage and you can drive on free energy even in the outback.

Free energy? Now that's a concept everyone should be on the bandwagon for. Like free money, free food, free cell phones, free housing.

Sunshine isnt free in your neck o the woods?
Better move then

Sure it's free on the 162 days of 365 we have it, but land, acres of panels, large battery storage facilities, connections to the grid, and the maintenance of all of it doesn't happen to be free.

It may be on Fantasy Island however, after you smoke a big fattie.

Perhaps you should move. A wanna, and a tooa, and a threea...........

For those who come to San Francisco
Be sure to wear some flowers in your hair
If you come to San Francisco
Summertime will be a love-in there.

Do Kumbaya for an oncore lol, then smoke another joint. Book a seat on the Aurora maybe.


Just went Online, 4 others under construction, another 18 going through permitting, solar my ass.