RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/22/2008 4:38:40 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: masterBruce

we can drill of the coast of cali and fl and their are oil shale in the west and then oil in alaska just drill and drill

California coastline: all the proven reserves have been depleted. Speculation that more oil might be found is not backed up by any facts

Florida gulf coast the proven reserves are in storm prone and ecologically sensitive areas. An oil spill, from a reserve worth maybe $1 billion a year net, threatens the entire Gulf coast fishery which is worth significantly more than $1 billion a year.

Oil shale costs upwards of 100 a barrel to acquire. Oil is not anywhere near that and is unlikely to ever reach that point for a sustained period. The enviromental impact would cause loses in agricultural exports as the areas sure to contaminated are in cattle producing areas which is a major US export.

Alaskan oil. The oil companies have leases in an area of the north slope with proven reserves, called the NPR-A. They are not developing there for reasons known only to them. The area in ANWR that the oil companies want access to has less oil, in the most generous estimates, than is available in NPR-A. Let them develop the oil on land we have already leased them rather than dril;ling in an area without proven reserves that are ecological more sensitive.

Realistically if oil prices of the past several years wasn't strictly a result of market manipulation and coordinated action by teh big oil companies they would have reopened fields in west Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Pennsylvania which were capped as too expensive to pump when oil was at $20 a barrel.

(in reply to masterBruce)

Post #: 41

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/22/2008 4:44:38 PM

TheHeretic

Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

You just make this stuff up, don't you Ken? Oil will never get to $100 a barrel???

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 42

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/22/2008 4:58:02 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

You just make this stuff up, don't you Ken? Oil will never get to $100 a barrel???

Sustained at $100 in present day dollars? It won't happen. Even with the oil companies ecure in not getting prosecuted for price fixing they couldn't keep it there as consumption plummeted.

You're basically claiming that gas could reach $4 a gallon in 2008 dollars and remain there for years. Which we all saw this spring resulted in drastic declines in consumption which would mean the price would decline as supply outpaced demand.

It's this little thing called supply and demand.

(in reply to TheHeretic)

Post #: 43

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/22/2008 5:41:42 PM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KYsissy

At this stage of the technology, we would be exchanging one dependence for another.

NiMH batteries are yesterdays technology already. Lithium ion batteries are now it.

The problem with any of these batteries is the ingredients which we have to import. Cobalt is a critical component for Lithium batteries, Most of the cobalt is in war torn regions of Africa. Most of the Lithium comes from China near Tibet. We would still be dependent on unstable parts of the world.

Lithium Cobalt batteries are dangerous and unnecessary...Lithium Phosphate batteries will do just fine and can be recycled. However any lithium battery will not work over the long term because of limited resources…But there are other technologies out there such as Sodium Nickel Chloride batteries as well as the Zinc Air battery and Fuel Cell...both of these options are sustainable verses Oil…. At least from what I have been able to find on the net.

Butch

(in reply to KYsissy)

Post #: 44

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/22/2008 6:17:54 PM

masterBruce

Posts: 133
Joined: 3/30/2004
Status: offline

yes their stroms in fl but yet the last two hurcaines nothing happend and while we set around looking up our ass for oil the cubans are drilling off or coast so you better get with the program

(in reply to DomKen)

Post #: 45

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/22/2008 6:22:42 PM

MasterG2kTR

Posts: 6677
Joined: 8/7/2004
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

Repeating my post earlier in this thread and adding a supporting links (last one is a video)
http://www.tfcbooks.com/articles/tws8c.htm
http://www.tfcbooks.com/mall/more/443tfg.htm
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Tesla:+Wireless+Power+Transmission&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#

We've got to start thinking outside the box a lot more than we do

=====================================================
I don't remember when exactly, but, within the last week or so, I saw a program on Discovery that was talking about Nikola Tesla and a vision he had for wireless power distribution.

DISCLAIMER: Keep in mind that the following is purely my speculation at the moment....

But now consider the possibilities of electric cars that could be constantly powered thru wireless power transmission. No need to wait hours for the car to recharge, long trips are not a problem, no pollution from the cars, no need for fuel stations.

All this would be provided thru a HUGE Tesla coil which scientists are planning to build in the very near future (should actually be underway now from statements in the show). They had already built and tested a 1/4 scale Tesla coil, though it did not produce the results they had hoped for, it showed great promise, and they are confident the full scale unit will produce the desired results.

This vision could potentially eclipse anything else being considered should this concept come to fruition.

(in reply to MasterG2kTR)

Post #: 46

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/22/2008 6:48:40 PM

masterBruce

Posts: 133
Joined: 3/30/2004
Status: offline

let the force be the power

(in reply to MasterG2kTR)

Post #: 47

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/22/2008 11:03:07 PM

masterBruce

Posts: 133
Joined: 3/30/2004
Status: offline

i am so tired of libs and the gov telling me what kinda fucking car i should drive its called freedom to drive any thing i want

(in reply to TheHeretic)

Post #: 48

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/23/2008 2:33:21 AM

deliciousmorsel

Posts: 153
Joined: 9/22/2007
Status: offline

I have no clue where you get your information from brucie- oh, wait- Karl Rove?- but the last FOUR major storms all, every one, sheared major platforms in the Gulf off their pipelines. And you need to distinguish campaign BS from truth. Even if there was oil worth drilling for in new offshore regions it would take ten years and be prohibitively expensive.

As for 30 years of oil left in the Middle East? The place that math comes from usually includes an explanation that countries set published reserves pretty arbitrarily; how much they want to pump that year determines what they publish. Reserve numbers in the Middle east haven't changed in decades but they keep pumping out millions of barrels?
But there's no 30 years worth left. The Saudi's paid an absolutely horrendous amount to outbid for a bunch of jack up rigs to start drilling offshore; The onshore wells are slowing. I get this from the same Pet Engineer who flew over after Katrina and saw major platforms sheared off and lying on their sides in deeper water than one would like to have to fish them out of. Offshore drilling is an expensive pain in the tush- and we are waaay past peak oil people.

Jimmy Carter was right 30 years ago and deserves an apology for the awful things we've called him.

Plug ins aren't really very viable yet. May I suggest your grandmothers green transport, the electric trolley. We kept ours in New Orleans. You all think they're quaint. We think they're major public transportation. Mr Obama's New Deal needs to build light rail all over so we can, HORRORS!- have no cars at all. Why do you need the horrific expense? Why do you deserve such luxury? Take the train. Get a bike.

Think past the car!

(in reply to Vendaval)

Post #: 49

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/23/2008 3:24:55 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: masterBruce

i am so tired of libs and the gov telling me what kinda fucking car i should drive its called freedom to drive any thing i want

You're quite happy having car companies telling you what you can drive and they are telling you you will drive dirty 19 century technology that requires a whole military-industrial complex to ensure supply of the necessary ingredient.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to masterBruce)

Post #: 50

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/23/2008 9:26:19 AM

Lordandmaster

Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

And how much oil we gonna git?

Oh...since a-writin' this I done seen dat other Collarme postahs have a-pointed out that jes' drillin' fo' oil ain't the poke chops and sauerkraut it's cracked up to be.

< Message edited by Lordandmaster -- 11/23/2008 9:29:16 AM >

(in reply to masterBruce)

Post #: 51

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 11/23/2008 2:55:52 PM

MistresseLotus

Posts: 443
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: (aka LotusSong)
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: masterBruce

yes lets all get ele cars then we wont have the elce to run them because the libs dont want to bulid more power plnts i SAY DRILL FOR MORE OIL NOW

You have something against seeking renewble energy sources instead of raping the earth into extinction? SOMEBODY has to do it.. you can thank us later :)

(in reply to masterBruce)

Post #: 52

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 12/7/2008 5:33:15 PM

KAZVorpal

Posts: 31
Joined: 8/31/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69

One of the benefits of electric cars is that it is easier to clean the emissions of a single power plant than the exhaust of 10,000 cars. I think the phrase they use is point-source, or something like that. While battries are just a storeage medium, the electricity can be produced in a lot of ways. Personally, I'm a fan of nuke plants. Only, I would charge the Navy with the design and operation of them. Oh wait, that sounds like nationalizing the electric grid. Hmmm... Couldn't be any worse than Enron.

How ironic, that the same silly environmentalists usually oppose nuclear power, which indeed would have made the US safer and cleaner, and less dependent upon fossil fuel and foreign oil.

(in reply to ThatDaveGuy69)

Post #: 53

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 12/7/2008 5:37:42 PM

KAZVorpal

Posts: 31
Joined: 8/31/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MmeGigs

quote:

Too many Green solutions are actually harmful for the environment.

I think you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater here. When it comes to large scale and commercial stuff, we're really just starting to move from development into application where green technology is concerned. It's going to take us some time to figure out which technologies and applications are a good fit and which aren't.

A heck of a lot of green solutions - I'd go so far as to say most of them - have been around for a long time and are pretty completely win-win. Most of them are things that I can do personally that save me money as well as save energy and resources and cut down on waste and polution.

BZZZ....no, in fact any time you are going out of your way to be "green", rather than simply doing something because it is cheaper and more efficient for you, the odds are that it's lose/lose.

For example, here is the list from Going Green is Bad for the Environment:

* Government-mandated RECYCLING
--------------------------------------------
... (not the for-profit kind) is usually so inefficient that it produces more pollution than making new paper, glass, and plastic! 13 of the top Superfund hazardous waste sites were once recycling centers!

[1] http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE1DF1339F933A05755C0A960958260

[2] http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1444391672891013193

[3]http://www.ecoworld.com/home/articles2.cfm?tid=340

[4] http://pc.blogspot.com/2006/05/recycling.html

_______________________________

* BIOFUELS
--------------
...actually have a bigger carbon footprint than simply using fossil fuel, because they require the clearing of land for agriculture, AND the farmers use fossil fuels to run their farm equipment.

[5] http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12496-forget-biofuels--burn-oil-and-plant-forests-instead.html

[6] http://greenerpastures.responsiblepersonalfinance.com/2008/03/24/how-big-is-the-biofuel-footprint/

[7] http://www.ehponline.org/members/2008/116-6/focus.html

[8] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2507851.ece
_______________________________

* HYBRID CARS
-------------------
...have batteries are so bad for the environment that you probably can't drive one long enough to make up for the damage, before the battery goes bad and you need a new one, causing the problem all over again

[9] http://clubs.ccsu.edu/recorder/editorial/print_item.asp?NewsID=188
_________________________________________
* Laws preventing the clearing of wood from "wild" areas, combined with efforts to prevent small forest fires, set up "tinderbox" situations, and are the reason the gigantic wildfires end up engulfing large areas

[10] http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/10/the_environmentalist_fires.html
_______________________________

* It requires more energy to make food wrappers out of recycled paper than it does to make them out of styrofoam...so people who have pushed companies into doing so are creating a LARGER carbon footprint, and wasting more energy
_______________________________

* The laws in California that attempted to force people to build and buy electric cars, a few years back, ignored that most of California's electricity comes from COAL power plants, that have a bigger carbon footprint than a gasoline automobile.

[11] http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/figes1.html
_______________________________

* Indeed, coal fire power plants put more uranium into the atmosphere (it's a trace element in coal) than nuclear power plants (which crazy Greens oppose) produce nuclear waste
_______________________________

* The CFC replacements that were forced on people when the holders of their patents funded the anti-CFC movement happen to be powerful greenhouse gasses
_______________________________

* Laws imposing "WETLANDS" on private property owners ignore that wetlands are a huge source of methane, a greenhouse gas thirty times more powerful than carbon dioxide

[12] http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14219312.600-science-beavers-rotten-ponds-fuel-global-warming-.html
[13] http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/acid_rain.html
_______________________________

* The laws forcing REFORESTATION in Europe have been creating millions of the very type of deciduous trees that produce more Nitrous Oxide, a greenhouse gas THREE HUNDRED times more powerful than CO2.

[14] http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19125695.000-nitrous-oxide--no-laughing-matter-for-forests.html
[15] http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/cl3018
_______________________________

* Pushes to "save paper to save the planet" ignore that 87% of paper is produced by TREE FARMING. Tree farming locks up more carbon than any other human activity...the more paper you buy and "waste", the more trees are grown to lock up carbon dioxide! Saving paper actually INCREASES your carbon footprint.
_______________________________

* "Recycling E-Waste" (including government-mandated refurbished electronics) causes even more harm and pollution than conventional recycling.

[16] http://www.cio.com.au/index.php/id;1010443355

(in reply to MmeGigs)

Post #: 54

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 12/7/2008 6:36:25 PM

thornhappy

Posts: 8596
Joined: 12/16/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

And how much oil we gonna git?

Oh...since a-writin' this I done seen dat other Collarme postahs have a-pointed out that jes' drillin' fo' oil ain't the poke chops and sauerkraut it's cracked up to be.

I thought applesauce went with pork chops?

( but I hate sauerkraut, so maybe I'm biased....)

thornhappy

< Message edited by thornhappy -- 12/7/2008 6:39:35 PM >

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

Post #: 55

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 12/7/2008 6:38:42 PM

blacksword404

Posts: 2068
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Enjoy.

Remember the city car from many years past. Some higher-ups in business and government quietly choked it.

_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 56

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 12/7/2008 8:03:45 PM

Hippiekinkster

Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

I saw several on my last visit to London and there are a couple that pass by my favourite cafe every morning here in Berlin.

Berlin has an excellent public transport system, VBB IIRC. München has an outstanding system as well. I want to see public transport systems of that caliber here in the US, including ICE-type maglev rail intercity. http://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/suppes.htm

(Off-topic) Offenbach-Stuben, on Stubenkammerstrasse in Prenzlauer-Berg, is a favorite restaurant of mine.

_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 57

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 12/7/2008 8:06:02 PM

snappykappy

Posts: 616
Joined: 3/5/2005
Status: offline

rock chalk jayhawk suppes teaches at ku

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)

Post #: 58

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 12/7/2008 8:35:50 PM

Lordandmaster

Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

Now thet thar's a catawamptiously good idear!

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

I thought applesauce went with pork chops?

(in reply to thornhappy)

Post #: 59

RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think? - 12/7/2008 9:27:50 PM

jlf1961

Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

Actually, to build the infrastructure needed to support the electric car, with fast charging capability 24/7 is actually available now.

Let me explain.

First, two sustainable power sources can actually replace the existing power stations for every major city in the US, actually the world.

For example, if every roofed structure in the LA metro basin was roofed with solar cells, the amount of power generated would be more than enough to power the ENTIRE LA metro area, from the pacific ocean to the Cajon Pass.

Supplementing the solar cells with aesthetically pleasing wind turbines on every roof would further generate power and allow for nonstop power generation.

Carry that program to every home and building in the US, our power grid would be easily maintained at peak strength.

Secondly, the problem that the Oxford physicists working with the only WORKING fusion reactor have at this point is how much hydrogen to inject into the system prior to starting the fusion reaction so that it is self sustaining.

Now fusion power has its own inherent flaws, but I will address those later.

Now, since a fusion explosion requires a fission explosion to start it, and fusion reactors only need enough juice feed to the system to cause hydrogen to fuse into helium atoms, there is no chance for an explosion or meltdown.

A meltdown requires solid nuclear fuel, fusion reactors use hydrogen gas.

Secondly, the only way a fusion reactor can stop is if the magnetic bubble fails, and the only way the bubble can fail is if the fusion reaction stops, so, unless turned off by the techs, it runs continuously.

Now for the flaws in fusion power....

1. Using fusion power gives us the ability to manufacture needed resources from scratch.
Example, need a few million tons of raw iron, make it in the reactor and then send it to the foundry.

In other words, no more digging up the ground looking for minerals.... which would also make every precious metal absolutely worthless, and the entire planets economy would have to be rebuilt to accommodate the new technology.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: U.S. Electric Cars---closer than we think?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109