Supertrucker, I like that one! Can't you just see it. Car driving down the street, cranks up the tunes, and comes to a screeching halt. LOL!

0

Just for the sake of discussion: Gasoline is currently running anywhere from $6.12 per gallon to $9.39 per gallon in Europe and I very well remember $4.00+ per gallon in the good ole USA just last year. 150,000 mi / 30 MPG x $3 per gal = $15,000 150,000 mi / 30 MPG x $6.12 per gal = $30,600 150,000 mi / 30 MPG x $9.39 per gal = $46,950 The price of gasoline will continue to climb, especially now that India has its Nano, a cheap mini car that sells for something like $2500 (How many people in India?) and don’t forget the newly rich in China. Here’s a quote from NBC Nightly News: “Buick’s sizzling sales have driven General Motors — even as it closes plants and lays off workers at home — to the top of the pack in China, the world’s fastest-growing automobile market. GM sold 665,000 cars and trucks in China last year. For now, only 1 in 100 Chinese own a car, compared to 9 in 10 in the United States. But the Chinese expect 130 million vehicles to be sold by 2020. In fact, GM now sells more cars overseas than it does at home.” That last sentence should tell you something. I’m not sure electric is the only answer, but I do know that in all likelihood my grand kids (maybe even my kids) will be driving something other than a traditional gasoline powered automobile. Tesla my be a bit expensive today, but 3 or 5 or 7 years down the road, I’m not so sure. MIKE http://www.skeptic.com/

0

The concept behind the move to electric dars is twofold. First is energy independence. That is a laudable goal but IMO probably never attainable. The second is the environment. Somehow the talk about electric cars never mentions where the electricity comes from. At least 80% of our electric comes from burning fossil fuels. How does that help the environment? What we should be doing is saving the fossil fuels for chemical manufacturing. In the short haul we should be generating more electricity from nuclear plants. If plant technology were standardized and made modular the safety of nuclear would go up dramatically. As far as the waste disposal issue goes IMHO it is a NON issue. The waste is placed in virtually indestructible containers. In the long haul we need to develop geothermal generation. Anywhere in the world you drill a well deep enough you can get high temperatures. In some areas you don't need to drill very deep. The big obstacle is an alloy that can withstand the temperatures and corrosive environment they would be subjected to. This is where some big time R&D should be directed. I read somewhere about 20 years ago that some scientist calculated what impact removing the amount of heat energy needed to supply the worlds total energy needs for the next 100 years and MIGHT lower the core temperature of the Earth by 1 degree C. As far as wind energy goes I think the methods being explored are not practical due to the storage issue. Using wind to lift water and subsequently using the kinetic energy stored in the raised water to generate electricity as needed. This is off topic in a way but the government is taking us down a road that is a dead end IMO.

0

Shhh othehill if you mention nukes the enviro-weenies will go beserk! Lol! We had a local up here in chenango bridge ny converted a 1/2 ton ford pickup to all electric. Cost? $10,000. The entire bed is full of batteries,he drives 30 miles to work and 30 back, his employer "smith-corona I think" agreed to install the 220v outlet so he can charge it up to go home. $40 in gas last how many days? $13 in electric is almost every night! Ill grant a full charge 25 days a month. $13 by 25 = $325 at current rates. That will buy a lot of gas! Btw I spend $1200 a week on diesel! We need a better answer for commercial trucks. WinXp Amd 64 3000 Msi Neo2 Platinuim 1 gig ddr 400

0

Btw when I say 220 I mean 220-240v. No household current true to the stated output. Imagine what would happen to the middle east if we could double the mileage of all the semis out here? 6mpg to to 12mpg? That would also help the economy by lowering costs overall! 99% of everything ships by truck. WinXp Amd 64 3000 Msi Neo2 Platinuim 1 gig ddr 400. When we cast a pebble into a pond we should look past the first ripple.

0

P.s. Hope everyone has a fun,safe Memorial Day and thank a Vet. WinXp Amd 64 3000 Msi Neo2 Platinuim 1 gig ddr 400. When we cast a pebble into a pond we should look past the first ripple.

0

You are welcome.

0

The 120v charging has already been done. the technology is there and has been there a long time. This idea that a 220v system is required is a joke to scare people I guess. I worked on electric race cars back in the 80's and we saw a lot more than 60 miles per charge and we are talking speeds over 100mph. Oh by the way our charging system was 120v and took 6 hours from dead to full charge. Granted this was over 20 years ago but charging several times over a 3 1/2 month period only cost like $65. Yes I know we still burn fossil fuel to make electricity. Yes I know if I plug my car in it will raise my electric bill. Yes I know it will be years before one of the big three actually try to mass market a truly electric car in the states and it will take some changing to get used to. Maybe it's just me but past experience tells me that driving an electric car is cheaper unless you are carrying heavy loads or driving really long distances. Also solar cells can be used to aid in the charging. We used them at the track to help take the load off our generator. I agree electric cars are not the only answer but until we take our heads out of the sand or a personal orifis I see it as viable. There are other things we can do. Did you know if you air condition your air intake you can raise your milage by as much as 46%. That has been shown by a dealer here on a gas vehicle. They say it only cost about $600.00 for the modifications. I know it isn't saving the world but it would save bucks. I am puting together the parts to do it mytself. I don't see it as feasable for say a coast to coast road trip but for the thousands that are just driving around town each day I think it would work. Also how about natural gas vehicles? I understand it costs a little more to convert but the fuel savings is decent. How many natural gas pumps you see on the way to work though? The water company in pittsburgh pa used natural gas for all it's vehicles and claimed it saw a drop in operating costs of 63%. Practice makes perfect but only if you practice perfectly!

0

I see a lot of those electric race cars today lol. Popsci come quick! Btw "air conditioning your intake" is called intercooling and all big trucks have used simular designs since the early 90s! And it helps but r/w test show increased mileage in the 15-20% range. As far as natural gas? The industry has been testing various designs for years with decent results but only as an addon not as a primary fuel source because of its low hp capibilities. Check out volvos commercial truck site. Oh btw when you get away from city gas the nozzle and air flow have to be recalibrated because city gas is natural gas and the stuff at the gas station is propane "2 different fuels". Most major metros have had lng powered local vehichles for years. Ever drive behind 1 of thes lng bus's after they get some miles on them? Gag! Ask the maintenance dept which 1 cost less not the politician or the administrator appointed by the politician. Or better yet go to any decent truck dealer and ask them. R/w matters not theory. WinXp Amd 64 3000 Msi Neo2 Platinuim 1 gig ddr 400. When we cast a pebble into a pond we should look past the first ripple.

0

Ever see 1 of those metro vehicles fuel up at your local gas station? Nope because they can't because lng requires special fueling systems that are very costly. I guess everyone could go to the local lng distro ie air liquide,air co or what ever but I don't see the local gas station thousands of dollars to put in a special lng system. WinXp Amd 64 3000 Msi Neo2 Platinuim 1 gig ddr 400. When we cast a pebble into a pond we should look past the first ripple.

0

The gov't agency I work for has been using CNG (compressed natural gas) vehicles for years. If you didn't know you were driving one, you'd think you were driving a standard gasoline vehicle. The drawbacks include the size of the CNG tank (it takes up approx 1/3 of a P/U truck bed or 3/4 of the trunk space of a car), the mileage (approx 200 mi per fillup) & the lack of filling stations. And it's a little scary filling one...it uses a huge fitting similar to an air coupling & fills at 3600PSI. EDIT: I was just thinking...what if you were to run out of CNG while driving, as occasionally happens with gasoline vehicles? Lack of filling stations aside, I doubt you could walk to the nearest station & get a 100PSI "can" to get you home...lol

0

As to the 120 vs 240 issue. the 240 system is for "fast charging". And the "big 3" issue? I don't see any major car manufacturers posting 100+ miles on a charge. We can research many techs but we need a tech that does most of what everybody wants or needs as a main "fuel". Not just what you or I think. A broad base system or it will not work. I support all electric vehichles,specially for those who metro commute. When ever happened to ride sharing? As I see it 90% of people driving to work drive solo. Look at yor hov lanes. Empty even in Three Rivers. I was ride sharing in the late 70's. Not because big gov or the enviro-wackos told me too. No because it saved me money. And yes I had a car then to. The gov can not make the market for an item "when it trys it always fails". The market has to. Oh look at corn ethanol "gov subsidised" the great fuel blend cost more to make than it puts out,lowers your mpg and is more prone to gelling "proven". Is damaging big truck fuel systems "proven" by deteriorating the fuel lines from the inside out. Yep that works! Lol. Oh and most diesel on the market is using up to a 13% blend because they don't have to post that low of an amount and its mandated by the gov for production. I know this because I had a feul issue lately and nobody found it until they blew compressed air backwards thru my fuel system. Umm black chuncks of hose in my tanks lol. And I won't even go to the mandated low sulfer fuel and the hundreds of millions that cost the trucking industry! No keep the gov out of my fuel tanks! WinXp Amd 64 3000 Msi Neo2 Platinuim 1 gig ddr 400. When we cast a pebble into a pond we should look past the first ripple.

0

The fact that this topic is being excogitated here, on a computing forum no less, even if at an overly simplistic level, implies the energy issue is an elephant in the room that can't be avoided forever. While there is a big debate over what to do in the short-term, one thing the experts -- on the issue -- seem to agree on is that we need to cut our insatiable dependence on foreign oil & if possible fossil fuel in the long-term. Thankfully, not as many now scoff at such initiatives as was the case during the Carter years when opponents of the administration's energy policy successfully argued that insofar as gas was cheap & energy bills are low ... we (Americans) really don't give a flying fcuk about energy independence -- well, energy-wise, who's smarter now - eh ;-) Even though it isn't the '70s anymore & to make matters worse, we are increasingly consuming more energy than we produce; the sooner we draft a comprehensive energy policy -- partisan/non-partisan -- the better. While this might require changing or at least adjusting our way of life, which we don't like to do since we are big on attitude, recent events have demonstrated that we actually can; as was the case with the economic slump coupled with gas price spikes last year & the corresponding drop in driving resulting from that situation. I will say though: regardless of what we do, I am not naive as to not imagine the potential reality of whatever we do being offset by the BRICs energy consumption & policies, but it's still much better to do something as individuals even if our gov't mandates nothing IMO. Jabbering Idiots: Everywhere You Look!

0

A couple of side notes: 1. The gov't relies heavily on income from fuel taxes. Not surprisingly, CA is the highest in the country. I live in NY which collects approx 60 cents per gal on gas, 65 cents per gal on diesel. If/when we begin driving more fuel efficient cars, the gov't is gonna have to make up for the fuel tax income by taxing us some other way. Either that or jack the fuel taxes up even higher. http://www.newyorkgasprices.com/tax... 2. The US may be the largest oil consumer on the planet, but they only account for roughly 25% of worldwide consumption. And while arguably the US is trying to cut back on the enviromental impact/greenhouse gases caused by the burning of fossil fuels, what's the other 75% of the world doing? Pumping out the 75% of the world's greenhouse gases, of course. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:W... http://weber.ucsd.edu/~jkohara/Curr...

0

We all agree that we need to get off oil asap. That transition won't be easy or short. But I believe we can use the resources we have here ie wind"watch the bats tho we need them" solar,hydro,shale oil,clean coal,hydrogen and many others can come into play. I love the ideas and concepts of many of these. My concern in the ebd is for those (many in my family) who can't afford $1000 for a car let alone $15000. They are the ones who will benefit most in the long run but will surely suffer most in the short term ie higher energy prices (cap and trade is estimated to increase between 100 and 300%). Ok I'm done ranting ! Sorry all ;). As americans WE THE PEOPLE will find a way. WinXp Amd 64 3000 Msi Neo2 Platinuim 1 gig ddr 400. When we cast a pebble into a pond we should look past the first ripple.

0

I want 1 of these! http://media.origin.popularmechanic... kool! WinXp Amd 64 3000 Msi Neo2 Platinuim 1 gig ddr 400. When we cast a pebble into a pond we should look past the first ripple.

0

"what's the other 75% of the world doing? Pumping out the 75% of the world's greenhouse gases, of course."... no Jam the rest of the world is not pumping out 75% of the worlds greenhouse gas... China and India are! Unhappily if you are relying on Wikipedia for your statistics you could not have chosen a greener left wing source. http://ewen.uuuq.com/

0

Hydrogen cars in my opinion are the only way to go. The production of lithium battery's for full electric cars pollutes more than if the car ran on regular fuel for 20 years. Hydrogen cars produce enough electricity to run your house on. And since Hydrogen is one of the most abundant elements its a viable source. Battery powered cars are a waste of time and cant really stand up to most peoples lifestyles. While I was going to TAFE I was doing about 100KM a day and spending about $70(Australian) a week on petrol, and this is driving a 1.6litre 4 cylinder. If I was driving an electric car and had to charge up twice a day it would be a massive waste of time and the batteries would hardly last more than 3 years, then there is the problem of disposal and getting a new battery. I just dont think battery powered cars will ever be a good permanent option unless HUUUUUUGE leaps are made in battery technology. Mattwizz3 Gigabyte P35-DS3R 4GB DDR2 800 9800GT E4500

0

re: Somehow the talk about electric cars never mentions where the electricity comes from. At least 80% of our electric comes from burning fossil fuels. I agree, but there's another point that can be made regarding that. I would rather see an increased use of electric vehicles running in parallel with the increased development in alternative technologies for generating electricity. As the use of electric vehicles increases, bugs will be worked out and the technology will improve. As with all new technologies, advances come quickly once the technology begins to see wider use. The after-market folks hop on the bandwagon, the support infrastructure begins to take shape and advances come quickly. At the same time, alternative means of generating electricity are being developed and, hopefully, at some point in the near furture, affordable, reliable electric vehicles will match up with an affordable, reliable (and convenient) means of keeping them charged. The other choice is to develop the alternative means of generating electricity first and then begin the wide spread use of electric vehicles that now have to catch up in order to become popular. I wish I could be one of the "early implementers" in the electric vehicle space - if only to help the technology advance - but my finances just won't allow it.

0

I am with Mattwiz3 in #24. Electric cars are just shifting the pollution to different places. Boone Pickens points out that natural gas as an alternate fuel is an easy conversion. The technology is there already and it is cheap to convert most cars. The problem is the distribution infrastructure. Pickens goes on to point out what I have known for years. Ethanol is a net energy loser. He grudgingly states that at least it is home grown. Until we get some politicians that have a little scientific background our policies on many issues will be made on faulty premises. Think about this. Until about 50 years ago, when the Interstate highway system was for the most part in place, most of our goods were moved long distances by rail. Now most go by truck. Moving goods by truck is much less efficient than by rail. Matter of fact, the only mode that is more efficient is by ship. Yet the Federal policies have worked against both rail and ship. Referring back to Derby Dads post above the policies of the Federal government concerning alternative energy are another example of faulty reasoning. Wind turbines are fine if you don't need to store the energy. However, we can't make the wind blow when we want it to. Mankind has known for thousands of years how to convert and store energy. Instead of building on known technology we are pushing cars that, in order to be practical, would require exotic storage methods that have yet to be conceived, let alone perfected. I am totally disillusioned by the current state of affairs. Every time we are at a fork in the road we take the wrong path.

0