Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Course there is, big businesses don't like change no matter what kind.

Melissia wrote:Course there is, big businesses don't like change no matter what kind.

Big business has no problem with change as long as it equates to more profits. What big business (and small business) hates is having to shell out a large amount of capital to establish for no additional profits.

Currently, we all have gasoline cars and there's already a gasoline infrastructure in place. So, profits are easily obtained without having to invest much.

No one is willing to buy a hydrogen car because there's no place to get it filled. There's no place to get it filled, because there's no demand, and no profits to be had from building the infrastructure. Therein lies the problem.

FITZZ wrote: Call me part of the "problem" if you like,but...until I find an "electric eco-friendly" car like this..I'll pass.

Close to what I was thinking. No electric car is gonna give me the pure aural satisfaction of a gas burning Vtwin with unbaffled pipes like my latest ride:



If it ain't fun, it ain't worth riding.

Jake

EDIT: I also doubt any electric vehicle is going to be able to haul a couple hundred hay bales or multiple horses across country like my big diesel F350 can.

Grakmar wrote:there's no demand

Taht depends on if you think there technically even can be demand for a product that doesn't exist yet. Economics is fethed up like that sometimes.

Grakmar wrote:

Melissia wrote:Course there is, big businesses don't like change no matter what kind.

Big business has no problem with change as long as it equates to more profits. What big business (and small business) hates is having to shell out a large amount of capital to establish for no additional profits.

Currently, we all have gasoline cars and there's already a gasoline infrastructure in place. So, profits are easily obtained without having to invest much.

No one is willing to buy a hydrogen car because there's no place to get it filled. There's no place to get it filled, because there's no demand, and no profits to be had from building the infrastructure. Therein lies the problem.

More importantly the same companiers making money now would not be the same ones making money under a hydrogen economy. If Exxon had interests in power companies its view would likely be substantially different.

Frazzled wrote:

Grakmar wrote:

Melissia wrote:Course there is, big businesses don't like change no matter what kind.

Big business has no problem with change as long as it equates to more profits. What big business (and small business) hates is having to shell out a large amount of capital to establish for no additional profits.

Currently, we all have gasoline cars and there's already a gasoline infrastructure in place. So, profits are easily obtained without having to invest much.

No one is willing to buy a hydrogen car because there's no place to get it filled. There's no place to get it filled, because there's no demand, and no profits to be had from building the infrastructure. Therein lies the problem.

More importantly the same companiers making money now would not be the same ones making money under a hydrogen economy. If Exxon had interests in power companies its view would likely be substantially different.

It doesn't? Exxon is a titannic company, I'm sure it owns plenty of power plants somewhere.


The fortunate thing is that the tech roadmap for electric vehicles has a lot on it's side. Battery storage is scaleable and untold billions are going into research on battery energy density given the rush towards totally portable personal electronic systems. Since the battery is the only piece of the puzzle missing for electric (instead of every piece but the road for algae bio or hydrogen) then it's likely that we will solve that puzzle far sooner then with other "competing" (fake) technologies.

CptJake wrote:

FITZZ wrote: Call me part of the "problem" if you like,but...until I find an "electric eco-friendly" car like this..I'll pass.

Close to what I was thinking. No electric car is gonna give me the pure aural satisfaction of a gas burning Vtwin with unbaffled pipes like my latest ride:



If it ain't fun, it ain't worth riding.

Jake

EDIT: I also doubt any electric vehicle is going to be able to haul a couple hundred hay bales or multiple horses across country like my big diesel F350 can.

Exactly. Let the hippies keep their pocket sized eco cars. No electric or bio will ever replace the purr of a big block chevy with 4 barrel Hawley carb with dual exhausts.

Hmm, a shame, but completely understandable - any electric cars put out right now are just a line thrown to get environmentalists off the company's back.

I would like to eventually see a true electric car with respectable range, but it's the catch-22 of no one wanting research the tech if it doesn't sell, and it won't sell because the research isn't far enough along to make it a feasible concept.

FITZZ wrote: Call me part of the "problem" if you like,but...until I find an "electric eco-friendly" car like this..I'll pass.

How about the Tesla Roadster, a high end sports car that goes from a dead stop to sixty miles per hour in under four seconds, gets the equivalent of 120 miles per gallon, and manages a range of more than 200 miles? Sure, I hear they're dead silent (comparatively), but to me that's much better than something that sounds like it's falling apart. Only downside is it costs more than $100,000, with the batteries clocking in at more than a third of the total price...

Really, the only problem facing electric cars are the batteries. The engines are extremely powerful and efficient, but batteries are expensive, low capacity (the Tesla Roadster's total capacity is effectively smaller than what a jerrycan can hold, if I'm reading right), and short lived (although, admittedly, seven years is more than many people keep their cars in the first place, and electric cars have much less wear and tear and so require much less maintenance than internal combustion engines). Hydrogen is even worse on all those fronts, though. Fuel cells are ridiculously expensive, hydrogen is ridiculously expensive to produce compared to what you can get back out of it, and it's physically impossible to store a meaningful amount of hydrogen in a car.

Hydrogen is a pipe dream/smokescreen, combustion is outdated and finally running into the problems of a limited fuel source, while electric cars need only a few small improvements to batteries before they become widely viable, with the added benefit of continuing to function perfectly no matter what you have producing the electricity in the first place.

The Tesla Roadster seems to be similar in size to the Lotus...which for me would be a problem,I've worked on Lotus before and practically have to break my legs just to get inside.



Don't get me wrong,the Roadster appears to be a nice car,but between the diminutive size and rather large price tag...again I'd have to pass.

'A few small improvements'?

The fundamental problem with electric cars is that it take time to recharge them. You could get 3000 miles a charge and it wouldn't be enough if you forgot to plug it in and need a refuel right away.

Assuming you actually solve that problem (it's not impossible) you then need massive infrastructure upgrades, (on the order of ripping out the entire electrical grid and putting in a new one), in order to actually deliver that power.

Next up you've got to deal with the fact that huge number of Americans' don't have the luxury of personal garages that they can add an electrical outlet too, so you have to have something for all those people who live in gakky apartments (probably about half the country).

Electric is a luxury item, for those that have the time and money for it, and it won't ever be anything else.

Requia wrote:'A few small improvements'?

The fundamental problem with electric cars is that it take time to recharge them. You could get 3000 miles a charge and it wouldn't be enough if you forgot to plug it in and need a refuel right away.

Assuming you actually solve that problem (it's not impossible) you then need massive infrastructure upgrades, (on the order of ripping out the entire electrical grid and putting in a new one), in order to actually deliver that power.

Next up you've got to deal with the fact that huge number of Americans' don't have the luxury of personal garages that they can add an electrical outlet too, so you have to have something for all those people who live in gakky apartments (probably about half the country).

Electric is a luxury item, for those that have the time and money for it, and it won't ever be anything else.

I agree with most of your statement with the exception of the very last line.
While electric cars are currently a more "luxury/green" item, I for one won't be surprised to see them on a much broader scale in the future.

Requia wrote:'A few small improvements'?

The fundamental problem with electric cars is that it take time to recharge them. You could get 3000 miles a charge and it wouldn't be enough if you forgot to plug it in and need a refuel right away.

Assuming you actually solve that problem (it's not impossible) you then need massive infrastructure upgrades, (on the order of ripping out the entire electrical grid and putting in a new one), in order to actually deliver that power.

There are already batteries that can be rapidly charged. They're not ready for commercial production, but they're out there. You're also going to need to increase the capacity of the electrical grid anyways, merely to deal with increased use from other things. It's not outrageous to assume that adding the capacity for ubiquitous charging stations over a decade or so would not be so much as difficult, let alone impossible.

Next up you've got to deal with the fact that huge number of Americans' don't have the luxury of personal garages that they can add an electrical outlet too, so you have to have something for all those people who live in gakky apartments (probably about half the country).

That's nothing compared to the number of Americans that don't have a gas station in their house...

Increase capacity and solve the charge time issue, and there's no problem so long as charging stations end up as ubiquitous as gas stations.

Electric is a luxury item, for those that have the time and money for it, and it won't ever be anything else.

Sure, so long as a bank of batteries that's the equivalent of a two gallon gas tank that takes three hours to fill costs $36,000. Give it a few more years, and it will only get better and cheaper. Like I said, all the problems lie in the batteries, which are almost resolved.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

FITZZ wrote: The Tesla Roadster seems to be similar in size to the Lotus...which for me would be a problem,I've worked on Lotus before and practically have to break my legs just to get inside.



Don't get me wrong,the Roadster appears to be a nice car,but between the diminutive size and rather large price tag...again I'd have to pass.

I've never actually seen one in person, so I don't the size. That would be a problem though. Still, it's an example of a powerful, stylish, electric sports car, thus proving that electrics can be powerful, stylish cars, even in this day and age.

There is a simple solution to the battery problem.

Don't charge the battery, change the battery.

When you pull into the equivalent of a petrol station, there'll be a machine to replace the battery with a fresh one, and put the old one on charge. You'll pay for the difference in charge.

You'll be able to "fill up" just as fast as with a petrol pump.

Kilkrazy wrote:There is a simple solution to the battery problem.

Don't charge the battery, change the battery.

When you pull into the equivalent of a petrol station, there'll be a machine to replace the battery with a fresh one, and put the old one on charge. You'll pay for the difference in charge.

You'll be able to "fill up" just as fast as with a petrol pump.

Now see...that would make perfect sense.

Requia wrote:The fundamental problem with electric cars is that it take time to recharge them. You could get 3000 miles a charge and it wouldn't be enough if you forgot to plug it in and need a refuel right away.

Most people don't drive 3000 miles a day.

Stormrider wrote:Any alcohol based fuel is very corrosive to the conventional engine. Hence why alcohol dragsters in the NHRA have their engines basically replaced after every run.

I've not heard anything to say alcohol is corrosive - every high performance engine gets rebuilt often, simply because the components are put under so much strain - it's not limited to dragsters. Refer to F1, MotoGP, even Superbikes and Supersport classes. I've got a few friends who race at club level who run supersport levels of tune, and the engines need a full refresh every thousand miles or so. Motox and enduro bikes sometimes need new pistons every couple of races.

FITZZ wrote: The Tesla Roadster seems to be similar in size to the Lotus...which for me would be a problem,I've worked on Lotus before and practically have to break my legs just to get inside.



Don't get me wrong,the Roadster appears to be a nice car,but between the diminutive size and rather large price tag...again I'd have to pass.

It is a Lotus as far as I know, it's an Exige with the IC engine removed. I think you'd have the same problem fitting in that as a real Lotus. Sometimes I like being short

Kilkrazy wrote:There is a simple solution to the battery problem.

Don't charge the battery, change the battery.

When you pull into the equivalent of a petrol station, there'll be a machine to replace the battery with a fresh one, and put the old one on charge. You'll pay for the difference in charge.

You'll be able to "fill up" just as fast as with a petrol pump.

That sounds like a great solution, but don't the batteries make up a substantial proportion of the weight of the car? It's going to need a workshop crane to get the thing out.

As technology improves the energy density of batteries increases which will give longer ranges and lighter vehicles; charging technology received a major breakthrough recently in terms of speed and reduced energy loss (no time to find a source at the mo though) so batteries may well become feasible. Manufacture and disposal may still cause as many environmental issues as the batteries claim to solve, but I don't know on that score.

Melissia wrote:Hybrids are the current future.

First off, that's the best phrase I've seen for ages, love it Second, I think you could well be right http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/news/default.asp?storyId=22927

Beautiful, practical and has the balls to compete. It's going to cost the same as the UK's current deficit, but small details like that? Pfft.

Because they are heavy, the batteries are placed low in the chassis. I envisage that you will drive the car over a pit and get out to go for a pee. While you’re emptying your tank, a robot in the pit takes out the drained batteries from underneath the car and puts in fresh ones.

Obviously this system will need car manufacturers to use a fairly standardised system of batteries, however some flexibility will be possible because each car will transmit its precise configuration to the pit robot. A small car might have two or four battery packs, and a van or lorry would have more, according to size.

Billions of batteries will be needed, so mass production will bring the price right down.

Of course, actually producing the chemicals for the batteries unless the composition changes will probably be bad for the environment, but eh.

Almost everything humans do is bad for the environment.

The advantage of battery power is that the electricity can be produced from any source, and the batteries can be recycled when they die.

I expect electric cars will have solar panels on the roof, to help charge for free.

Right, so when the guy that gets pissed at you at work takes a dump on your car he's not just making a statement, he's also decreasing your car's efficiency in gathering power!

Ah, griefing.

Frazzled wrote:http://green.autoblog.com/2011/03/01/gm-sells-281-chevy-volts-february-nissan-67-leafs/

I could see Government Motors not selling any, but Nissan? I am saddened by this.

GM sells just 281 Chevy Volts in February, Nissan only moves 67 Leafs
by Sebastian Blanco (RSS feed) on Mar 1st 2011 at 7:47PM



Peruse Chevrolet's February sales release, and you'll notice one number that's blatantly missing: the number of Chevy Volts sold. The number – a very modest 281 – is available in the company's detailed data (PDF), but it certainly isn't something that GM wants to highlight, apparently. Keeping the number quiet is a bit understandable, since it's lower than the 321 that Chevy sold in January.

Nissan doesn't have anything to brag about here, either (and it didn't avoiding any mention of the Leaf sales in its press release). Why? Well, back in January, the company sold 87 Leafs. In February? Just 67. Where does that leave us? Well, here's the big scorecard for all sales of these vehicles thus far:

Volt: 928
Leaf: 173
Ouch. The big questions, of course, revolve around one word: "Why?" Is ramping up production and deliveries still a problem? Is demand weak? Are unscrupulous dealers to blame? When will sales start to climb? And what are these numbers doing to plug-in vehicle work at other automakers? We don't know all the answers, but for more on February auto sales, click here.

[Sources: General Motors, Nissan]
Filed under: EV/Plug-in, Hybrid, Chevrolet, GM, Nissan, AutoblogGreen Exclusive

Tags: auto sales, breaking, electric vehicle, leaf, leaf sales, plug-in hybrid, volt, volt sales

The Prius sure is selling. 2010 sales topped a 1/4 million by the end of the 3rd quarter of 2010.

Frazzled wrote:Whats the rang eon the things? If the electric grid were powered by unicorns or maybe nuclear I'd proffer it'd be a better deal.

The same range as gasoline engines. A series hybrid an electric car with a purely electric drive train that has a back up electric generator fueled by gasoline or diesel, and they still get good gas millage when the batteries are dead.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The 2 proven technologies that vastly improve MPG without major changes to our infrastructure are diesel and a series hybrid.

2008 Ford Fiesta Diesel version gets 65 MPG



Yep 65 MPG and it's not even a hybrid. It's also not available to sale in the USA because US environmental laws say it pollutes more than a Hummer H1 because we measure pollution by the amount of exhaust emitted per gallon of fuel burned instead of by the amount of exhaust emitted per mile traveled.

A series hybrid is basically an all electric vehicle with a fossil fuel electric generator added onto the vehicle. IMO it's the best of both worlds. Also as a technical fact diesel makes a much more efficient fuel for a fossil fuel powered electric generator than gasoline, but a few douchebag environmentalists won't ever let hat happen when it comes to a series hybrid.

http://www.reghardware.com/2009/08/14/review_e_car_mitsubishi_imiev/

http://www.reghardware.com/2011/02/24/electric_cars_co2_emissions/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/18/bbc_tesla_edinburgh_e_car_shenanigans/

Kilkrazy wrote:http://www.reghardware.com/2009/08/14/review_e_car_mitsubishi_imiev/

http://www.reghardware.com/2011/02/24/electric_cars_co2_emissions/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/18/bbc_tesla_edinburgh_e_car_shenanigans/

Well seeing as how most US electricity is generated by coal thanks to environmentalists killing the construction of nuclear power plants those articles do have a point.

I will freely admit I'm what SUV drivers would call "a MPG nazi", but it's not for environmental reasons. We (Americans that is) import 2/3 of our oil, and our entire economy is completely dependent on it. We should get off foreign oil as much as possible, but we absolutely must get completely middle east oil. The main reason our DoD budged needs to stay so bloated is so we can protect our oil interests, especially in the middle east.

Somehow over the years we have gone from this.



To this.

@Ulver AFAIK methanol is pretty corrosive to metal parts compared to any other fuel. Obviously it aint gonna be like sulphuric acid or something but is certainly acidic enough. Oh and again AFAIK, part of the 'Formula' of F1 is that the cars run on regular petrol.

Unfortunately Killkrazy though your 'Clarksonesque' idea is a good one standardisation in something as incredibly incrementaly progressive as battery tech is just never going to happen, unless we all get those 'ZPM' crystal things from Stargate. Compare an iphone 4 to one that is bought 3 months down the line chances are it's got a different kind of battery.

The batteries on hybrids and electric cars will pretty much always be recycled. Many of our nation's homeless earn their beer money by picking up aluminum cans for their recycling value. The battery for an electric car battery is easily worth hundreds of dollars if not a 4 digit figure. They are worth so much money no junkyard in the world will fail to recycle them. On undeniable fact about hybrid car batteries is that they make junk yard owners happy when a hybrid comes into the junkyard.

Perkustin wrote:@Ulver AFAIK methanol is pretty corrosive to metal parts compared to any other fuel. Obviously it aint gonna be like sulphuric acid or something but is certainly acidic enough. Oh and again AFAIK, part of the 'Formula' of F1 is that the cars run on regular petrol.

Unfortunately Killkrazy though your 'Clarksonesque' idea is a good one standardisation in something as incredibly incrementaly progressive as battery tech is just never going to happen, unless we all get those 'ZPM' crystal things from Stargate. Compare an iphone 4 to one that is bought 3 months down the line chances are it's got a different kind of battery.

We've managed to standardise a lot of car parts, for example, practically all spark plugs are the same fitting, as are the hoses and pumps for fuel of different types, there are only a few types of tyres and wheels for the great majority of vehicles. That's because a lot of those kind of items are made by second tier suppliers, such as Bosch, and it is beneficial to everyone for that type of component to be standardised.

I think standardisation within a range of adapters is possible for hi-tech batteries.

Perkustin wrote:Oh and again AFAIK, part of the 'Formula' of F1 is that the cars run on regular petrol.

That was my point :-/

Kilkrazy wrote:

The advantage of battery power is that the electricity can be produced from any source, and the batteries can be recycled when they die.

Hate to burst your bubble, but batteries can only be recharged so many times before the metal (usually lithium) is permanently spent. Recycling the metal is fruitless at that point since its been changed molecularly, thus making a very useful paperweight.

Not to mention the mining involved with finding lithium, nickel, cadmium etc...

I would also like to know how electric vehicles heat the interior of the car without being a huge drain on the battery. Heating elements are monstrous power drains.

Stormrider wrote:
I would also like to know how electric vehicles heat the interior of the car without being a huge drain on the battery. Heating elements are monstrous power drains.

Electric motors produce plenty of waste heat. There are variety of ways this could be stored for periods when they aren't running.