kd5xb 1 #26 October 1, 2012 I don't know much about the range of today's electric vehicles, perhaps one would work OK for my 25-mile each way commute. But I live out in the sticks, what about when I need to run the hundred miles over to Lubbock, or the hundred miles over to Amarillo, or the 220 miles over to Albuquerque? Or the 230 miles over to Belen to Skydive New Mexico? Those are all one-way distances, BTW. Maybe one day.I'm a jumper. Even though I don't always have money for jumps, and may not ever own a rig again, I'll always be a jumper. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #27 October 1, 2012 >I don't know much about the range of today's electric vehicles, perhaps >one would work OK for my 25-mile each way commute. Pretty much every EV out there will work for that. You can guarantee a 50 mile range with the Ford Focus EV, the Leaf EV etc. >But I live out in the sticks, what about when I need to run the hundred >miles over to Lubbock, or the hundred miles over to Amarillo, or the 220 >miles over to Albuquerque? Or the 230 miles over to Belen to Skydive New >Mexico? Those are all one-way distances, BTW. Your choices there if you want to go electric: A Tesla model S if you want a pure electric. You'd need a bit of a charge while you were there, but outlets are generally available at DZ's. A Volt. That would let you get to and from work via electric power and then burn gas when you want to go longer distances. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #28 October 1, 2012 QuoteI don't know much about the range of today's electric vehicles, perhaps one would work OK for my 25-mile each way commute. But I live out in the sticks, what about when I need to run the hundred miles over to Lubbock, or the hundred miles over to Amarillo, or the 220 miles over to Albuquerque? Or the 230 miles over to Belen to Skydive New Mexico? Those are all one-way distances, BTW. So yes, that's a different story. But you asked about 25x2 mile commutes. At this point in time, it would only be practical to adopt a two car method - use the new EV for the commute, and use the old vehicle (or rent) for a long haul. Or stick to the Volt or the well established hybrids. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #29 October 3, 2012 A flurry of articles on electric cars! "The sales overall have not met our expectations, but we're working hard to keep pushing," Reuter said." ‘The approximate 1,850 September Volt leases will cost taxpayers about $14,000,000 in federal tax subsidies. It is hard to argue that the money is well-spent, given the limited benefits to gas consumption’. The Rheinpfalz daily writes: "Because of skimpy demand, the French PSA concern is stopping both of its electric models: the Citroen C-Zero and Peugeot iOn. For the same reason, production lines will be stopped for the Ampera sister model the Chevrolet Volt at the end of the month.” “Uchiyamada, announced something pretty startling last week. I'd say shocking, but it was exactly the opposite. He announced that, after two years of work, Toyota was shelving plans for the widespread sale of its newest electric car. The reason? Electric cars don't work very well and no one will buy them” http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/10/01/nissan-offers-leaf-discounts-to-spur-sales/?intcmp=features[url]. [url]http://nlpc.org/stories/2012/10/02/chevy-volt-leases-costing-taxpayers-10-gallon-gas-saved[url] [url]http://notrickszone.com/2012/09/29/no-future-in-sight-for-electric-cars-says-toyota-german-auto-economics-professor/ http://www.theprovince.com/opinion/Toyota+thinks+electric+cars+suck+politicians/7324103/story Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billeisele 130 #30 October 9, 2012 Reported today in EnergyBiz: "Just as the electric car market prepares to hit the pedal, professors at a Norwegian university are providing evidence they should apply the brakes. They are saying that the life-cycle production process is responsible for creating more greenhouse gas emissions than a conventional auto factory." "...the researchers are concluding that the “global warming potential” of current electric vehicles is twice that of those in prevailing automotive markets." "The analysis, penned by academics at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology and presented in the Journal of Industrial Ecology, expounds by saying that the toxic materials employed to build such cars exceeds traditional ones. Furthermore, they are adding that the fuels used to create the electricity are also important considerations, noting that if is coal then it may not be worth the environmental and economic costs." “The production phase of electric vehicles proved substantially more environmentally intensive,” says the report ... “It is counterproductive to promote electric vehicles in regions where electricity is primarily produced from lignite, coal or even heavy oil combustion.” "The researchers say that such toxic materials as aluminum, copper and nickel are used to make batteries and electric motors. They add that anyone contemplating the purchase of an electric vehicle should first ask about the underlying fuel that would supply the electricity. Presumably, such buyers are environmentally aware, the authors note, and should thus be concerned about increasing harmful emissions." "Whether plug-in electric cars turn out to be an environmental bonus or hazard depends on the math: They can emit less carbon dioxide than their counterparts in the conventional world. However, after the emissions at generating stations that supply their electrical power are figured in, they are unable to sustain that advantage, says a report issued in 2009 by the National Research Council." The greenies hate these reports. One reason is it's another indicator that nuclear energy production is good. Electric cars charged from a nuclear source look better. Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #31 October 9, 2012 Quote Reported today in EnergyBiz: "Just as the electric car market prepares to hit the pedal, professors at a Norwegian university are providing evidence they should apply the brakes. They are saying that the life-cycle production process is responsible for creating more greenhouse gas emissions than a conventional auto factory." "...the researchers are concluding that the “global warming potential” of current electric vehicles is twice that of those in prevailing automotive markets." "The analysis, penned by academics at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology and presented in the Journal of Industrial Ecology, expounds by saying that the toxic materials employed to build such cars exceeds traditional ones. Furthermore, they are adding that the fuels used to create the electricity are also important considerations, noting that if is coal then it may not be worth the environmental and economic costs." “The production phase of electric vehicles proved substantially more environmentally intensive,” says the report ... “It is counterproductive to promote electric vehicles in regions where electricity is primarily produced from lignite, coal or even heavy oil combustion.” "The researchers say that such toxic materials as aluminum, copper and nickel are used to make batteries and electric motors. They add that anyone contemplating the purchase of an electric vehicle should first ask about the underlying fuel that would supply the electricity. Presumably, such buyers are environmentally aware, the authors note, and should thus be concerned about increasing harmful emissions." "Whether plug-in electric cars turn out to be an environmental bonus or hazard depends on the math: They can emit less carbon dioxide than their counterparts in the conventional world. However, after the emissions at generating stations that supply their electrical power are figured in, they are unable to sustain that advantage, says a report issued in 2009 by the National Research Council." The greenies hate these reports. One reason is it's another indicator that nuclear energy production is good. Electric cars charged from a nuclear source look better. I made this point years ago, but now that it has been "peer reviewed" our SC lefties might believe it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #32 October 9, 2012 >The researchers say that such toxic materials as aluminum, copper and nickel >are used to make batteries and electric motors. Interesting that he thinks that internal combustion cars have no aluminum, copper or nickel in them. I suspect he has never seen the inside of an engine bay if he really thinks that. >One reason is it's another indicator that nuclear energy production is >good. Electric cars charged from a nuclear source look better. I charge my EV from solar panels on my roof. Those panels are currently generating more power than the San Onofre nuclear power station, interestingly enough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #33 October 9, 2012 Quote I charge my EV from solar panels on my roof. Those panels are currently generating more power than the San Onofre nuclear power station, interestingly enough. A hamster wheel could do that.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billeisele 130 #34 October 9, 2012 Quote>The researchers say that such toxic materials as aluminum, copper and nickel >are used to make batteries and electric motors. Interesting that he thinks that internal combustion cars have no aluminum, copper or nickel in them. I suspect he has never seen the inside of an engine bay if he really thinks that. accurate to a point, the implication was that there are more pounds of toxic materials in the electric vehicle than a comparable gas vehicleGive one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #35 October 9, 2012 QuoteQuote>The researchers say that such toxic materials as aluminum, copper and nickel >are used to make batteries and electric motors. Interesting that he thinks that internal combustion cars have no aluminum, copper or nickel in them. I suspect he has never seen the inside of an engine bay if he really thinks that. accurate to a point, the implication was that there are more pounds of toxic materials in the electric vehicle than a comparable gas vehicle perhaps, but the nickel in the battery pack will be reused. And when, btw, did al, one of the most common elements on earth, become toxic? Or copper...the stuff people are stealing out of the walls? Stuff like that make you think the writer is pulling shit out of thin air. OMG - it emits dihydrogen monoxide!! Run for your lives! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #36 October 9, 2012 Gee - the gas tank of my car contains about 100 pounds of one of the principal ingredients of NAPALM! ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #37 October 10, 2012 Quote[ perhaps, but the nickel in the battery pack will be reused. And when, btw, did al, one of the most common elements on earth, become toxic? Or copper...the stuff people are stealing out of the walls? ! Don't know about toxic but al is extremely difficult and energy intensive to refine and use."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #38 October 10, 2012 Quote Don't know about toxic but al is extremely difficult and energy intensive to refine and use. ?? aluminum can recycling is one of the easiest out there. Much more so than plastic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #39 October 10, 2012 QuoteQuote Don't know about toxic but al is extremely difficult and energy intensive to refine and use. ?? aluminum can recycling is one of the easiest out there. Much more so than plastic. Yes, and about 31% of the aluminum produced in the US is from recycled sources. The rest is still produced from bauxite. Still tremendously expensive in terms of energy usage and with some deleterious environmental effects."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 444 #40 October 15, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W9bOBwPuRU Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #41 April 8, 2013 > . . . . announced something pretty startling last week. I'd say shocking, but it was >exactly the opposite. He announced that, after two years of work, Toyota was shelving >plans for the widespread sale of its newest electric car. The reason? Electric cars don't >work very well and no one will buy them ============================== March 2013 sets several records for EV Sales Posted on April 6, 2013 Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV) set several sales records in March 2013. March was the best sales month ever for the Nissan LEAF which recorded 2236 sales. March was also the best month for the Tesla S electric vehicle with an estimated 1950 deliveries last month (Tesla do not report monthly sales figures). The Toyota Rav4 EV also saw record sales last month thanks to $10,000 pricing discounts by Toyota. This resulted in the highest number of Battery Electric vehicles sold in one month. More people are driving electric than ever before As one can see in the chart, the cumulative number of electric vehicles placed into service since December 2010 is increasing at an aggressive pace. Both Tesla and Nissan US based plants are now producing vehicles domestically for the US market allowing them to meet demand for their vehicles. The introduction of the Plug in Prius and Ford Energi plug-in hybrids has provided a boost of Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles (PHEV) vehicles brought to market. Ford have announced they will increase the number of dealers selling their plug-in vehicles which will make their vehicles more generally available to consumers. We can anticipate much higher EV sales month-to-month the rest of this year. Despite more BEV’s being sold in March than PHEV’s (4553 vs 3079) the number of new PHEV models coming to market suggests that PHEV is the EV car of choice for US consumers. There are over 20,000 more PHEV’s on the road than BEV’s and I believe the gap will continue to widen as we go through 2013. ================================= Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base698 20 #42 April 8, 2013 QuoteInteresting that he thinks that internal combustion cars have no aluminum, copper or nickel in them. I suspect he has never seen the inside of an engine bay if he really thinks that. Not to mention the motor in the Model S is the size of a medium sized watermelon, giving you TWO internal combustion-engine sized spaces for storage. Two trunks, how is that not awesome? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #43 April 8, 2013 QuoteTwo trunks, how is that not awesome? More bodies. Totally awesome. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #44 April 8, 2013 >More bodies. Totally awesome. Especially if you're an Italian politician: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/fords-ad-firm-fires-executives-431511 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
