CarForum.net - Car Forums, Automotive News and Community
Home Gallery Register Calendar Members List

Go Back   CarForum.net - Car Forums, Automotive News and Community > General Car Discussion > General Automotive Discussion

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools
Unread 06-27-2009, 01:29 PM   #1
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1
Rep: 10 makecar is on a distinguished road
Default Are Electric Cars A Part Of Your Future?

It seems that not so long ago, electric cars were a very distant possibility. However, in today’s world, electric cars are becoming extremely popular and may very well be a large part of our not so distant future. Electric cars have been produced, tried, and tested by many manufacturers and consumers are excited about the prospect. Let us take a look at the many positives that can go with the future of electric cars and why we should consider it as a possibility in our own future.

Electric cars are all together cleaner and safer for our environment. By driving electric cars, our generation will virtually eliminate air pollution and make the air cleaner for future generations. Cleaner air to breathe is a necessity and electric cars can work to provide that.

Electric cars are more affordable than fuel powered cars. Studies on electric cars have shown that for a passenger vehicle it will cost less to run the electric cars, than filling your car up every week with gas. In fact, for about $30, electric cars can operate for one full month. With the price of fuel on the rise at a consistent speed, electric cars would offer our finances a nice break. Maintenance is more affordable as well; you will not have to worry about changing the oil, submitting your car for a smog check, or having a tune up performed on electric cars.

Noise pollution is something we all complain about, especially within the bigger cities. Electric cars provide a quieter environment for everyone concerned. The future of electric cars mean no more 3 AM wake up calls by our neighbor’s loud cars. Furthermore, those that live close to busy streets and highways will sleep and live easier without the extra noises from the cars driving down the streets.

One problem about electric cars is at the present time it cannot travel extremely far without needing a charge. 25 to 60 miles on one charge is about all you can expect at this point in time. However, some areas offer “charging stations”, for example those in California can stop at a charging station and charge their electric cars for longer trips. It takes about three hours to fully charge the electric cars before you are ready to go again. The technology of electric cars is still being manufactured and research; we can expect great things in the markets in the future.

In the end, we all live here on earth and are all responsible for its preservation. Everyone needs to do their part, however seemingly small that may be. Use of electric cars is only one possibility to consider in preserving quality of life on earth for ours and future generations.

makecar is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 12:51 AM   #2
New Member
 
urgrandpasdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8
Rep: 10 urgrandpasdog is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by makecar View Post
Electric cars are all together cleaner and safer for our environment. By driving electric cars, our generation will virtually eliminate air pollution and make the air cleaner for future generations. Cleaner air to breathe is a necessity and electric cars can work to provide that.
Cars account for only a very small fraction of air pollution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by makecar View Post
Noise pollution is something we all complain about, especially within the bigger cities. Electric cars provide a quieter environment for everyone concerned. The future of electric cars mean no more 3 AM wake up calls by our neighbor’s loud cars. Furthermore, those that live close to busy streets and highways will sleep and live easier without the extra noises from the cars driving down the streets.
Meh, quiet=boring.

Until Electric cars can sound and feel like a roaring V8, I'm not interested.

EDIT: dang, didn't see how old this was

urgrandpasdog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 07:44 AM   #3
Stickers add HP brah
 
TwIsTeDbOi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Arooooouuuuuunnnnnddd
Posts: 1,259
Rep: 39 TwIsTeDbOi is on a distinguished road
Default

Its ok. We have necro threads everywhere. I agree with you though, until i get the rumble and mean throatyness of a V8, ill stick with my gas guzzler
__________________
Quote:
You can't compare German cars to Japanese cars. That's like comparing apples to herpes.
Cheap. Reliable. Fast. In the car world, you can only choose two of those.
2014 Raptor Race Red 801A


TwIsTeDbOi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 07:58 AM   #4
Spah sappin' mah susp!
 
Kenny McCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth...I think
Posts: 3,271
Rep: 96 Kenny McCormick will become famous soon enough
Default

I like my manual transmission. Can't do that with an electric car.

Quote:
Originally Posted by makecar View Post
Electric cars are all together cleaner and safer for our environment. By driving electric cars, our generation will virtually eliminate air pollution and make the air cleaner for future generations. Cleaner air to breathe is a necessity and electric cars can work to provide that.
No. They are worse, actually, than even my old F150. Sure they produce no air pollution, but they do produce land pollution. Their batteries are HIGHLY toxic. Every part of their manufacture causes irreperable damage to the environment. Not only that but the carbon emissions reduced at the tailpipe are never really reduced or eliminated. You just moved their source from the back of the car to a power plant and the stuff that transported your batteries all over the world. What's funny is that the pollution a healthy gasoline engine produces is nearly 0. Carbon Dioxide can be used by plants, Water is...well, water, and modern emissions equipment reduce unburned HCs and NOx emissions to a negligible level.

Quote:
Electric cars are more affordable than fuel powered cars.
Find me an EV for 500 dollars that's reliable. I DARE YOU.

You can't even find a reliable electric golf cart for that price in some areas, let alone a full car. Currently, the best EV on the road is the Tesla, and that's above most people's ability to afford a car.

Quote:
Studies on electric cars have shown that for a passenger vehicle it will cost less to run the electric cars, than filling your car up every week with gas. In fact, for about $30, electric cars can operate for one full month. With the price of fuel on the rise at a consistent speed, electric cars would offer our finances a nice break.
That savings was quickly offset by the pointless tax-funded study that proved that an electric car is cheaper to run than a gasoline one. Way to go.

Quote:
Maintenance is more affordable as well; you will not have to worry about changing the oil, submitting your car for a smog check, or having a tune up performed on electric cars.
Maybe for people that have shops do everything. But what about those of us who do our own work?

Quote:
Noise pollution is something we all complain about, especially within the bigger cities. Electric cars provide a quieter environment for everyone concerned. The future of electric cars mean no more 3 AM wake up calls by our neighbor’s loud cars. Furthermore, those that live close to busy streets and highways will sleep and live easier without the extra noises from the cars driving down the streets.
I love the sound of a good, throaty V8. And besides, I sleep with rock music blaring. You'd have to be running zoomies on a big block to wake me up with a car.

Quote:
One problem about electric cars is at the present time it cannot travel extremely far without needing a charge. 25 to 60 miles on one charge is about all you can expect at this point in time. However, some areas offer “charging stations”, for example those in California can stop at a charging station and charge their electric cars for longer trips. It takes about three hours to fully charge the electric cars before you are ready to go again. The technology of electric cars is still being manufactured and research; we can expect great things in the markets in the future.
If the average motorist can not completely refuel their car in 5 minutes or less, they don't want it. I know I sure don't.

Quote:
In the end, we all live here on earth and are all responsible for its preservation. Everyone needs to do their part, however seemingly small that may be. Use of electric cars is only one possibility to consider in preserving quality of life on earth for ours and future generations.
Electric cars are worse for the environment. You're right, we do need to care for it. That's why we should simply maintain what we have, drive it sensibly and convert it to run on Hydrogen Gas when the time comes.
__________________
Tired Iron ain't got no time to wear out...

My rigs:

1985 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci OHV inline six | 4-speed OD manual | 310K | No power brakes | Running 100% - It hasn't driven this good in 15 years!

1984 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci six | granny four | 3.55 rear end | 210K | Brakes shot. Rear drums are doing most of the work. Not fit to drive due to that.
1997 Ford Explorer XLT | 4.0L Vulcan V6 | 5-speed automatic | shift-on-the-fly 4WD | 210,000 miles | Running 95% - Needs brakes on all four corners + bald tires
1989 Ford F150 | 300cid six...again | 5-speed | 4x4 | 160K | Needs brakes done as well. Oi!

Last edited by Kenny McCormick; 05-11-2010 at 08:11 AM.

Kenny McCormick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 10:50 AM   #5
Jack of all Trades
 
tofunater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Batavia, IL
Posts: 1,398
Rep: 77 tofunater will become famous soon enough
Default

@ Teste: Battery technology, though toxic at this point, is steadily advancing and heading towards a cleaner future. Hydrogen on the other hand will never make sense. It has to be harvested, compressed, shipped, and stored. Not only does this require massive amounts of energy to accomplish, it is also a dangerous process. A truck full of pressurized hydrogen is a bomb. Electricity however already has a distribution medium and can be harvested in ways that are low impact. Battery swapping stations are already being tested in Israel as well to avoid the whole, wait three hours to charge thing.
They will never sound like a v-8 unfortunately, but they do have a much higher performance potential than any gasser does. Instantaneous torque is awesome too
__________________
My rides:
--2012 Chevy Sonic LT hatch back w/1.4 liter turbo w/100k
--2005 Chrysler Pacifica w/175k - SOLD!
--1987 Chevy R10 Pickup w/80k
--1997 4.3L Chevy Blazer w/193k- SOLD!
--1998 Oldsmobile Aurora w/190k - SOLD!

tofunater is offline tofunater's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 10:59 AM   #6
Spah sappin' mah susp!
 
Kenny McCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth...I think
Posts: 3,271
Rep: 96 Kenny McCormick will become famous soon enough
Default

lol so is the tank of gasoline we've been rolling around with for over a century. Just look at Ford Pinto recalls.

H2 gas is not hard to get. Apply DC current to H20 and you get H2 gas! Put a hydrogen fuel cell under the gas station and you're producing the stuff on demand. No need for transport, extraction facilities or any of that.

Chemical batteries will never be clean. The mining of the metals and creation of the acids used in them is a nasty business. They're shipped all over the world when built in a car-sized package. Their disposal is also a pretty nasty affair. And then there's the obvious safety issue of sitting on top of a big laptop battery. Get T-boned by a Suburban, then flip over, and you're going to be killed by battery acid when the battery breaks open. Even if you don't flip, you're still going to leak highly corrosive and toxic battery acid all over the place. It's just as likely as a gasoline tank rupture, because while the batteries may be stronger, they must be very large and this makes them easy targets.

Yeah, you can cleanly harvest electricity. My power is hydroelectric or nuclear, as in 0 carbon emissions(And that's all the hippies care about). But that doesn't mean everyone's power is clean. The US still uses a staggering amount of coal and oil fired power plants. TVA in particular runs a few of them, seeing as coal mines are frequent in some areas where the TVA operates.


The funny thing is that EVs have been tried before, way back in the early 1900's when cars were just being invented. They didn't work then. They were tried again in the 90's and 2000's, and yet again they didn't work. They're never going to work. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, here. We just need to fuel it with a better fuel. Hydrogen gas is one such fuel. Synthetic gasoline is also a good choice to use in the mean time, because unlike crude, we have an infinite supply of the stuff and the technology required to make it has been around for decades. The engine, as it stands today, will burn Hydrogen gas quite happily, and it won't even notice if the gasoline is synthetic, so no significant changes there must be made. All you need to do is replace the fuel system with an H2-compatible one and you're motoring.
__________________
Tired Iron ain't got no time to wear out...

My rigs:

1985 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci OHV inline six | 4-speed OD manual | 310K | No power brakes | Running 100% - It hasn't driven this good in 15 years!

1984 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci six | granny four | 3.55 rear end | 210K | Brakes shot. Rear drums are doing most of the work. Not fit to drive due to that.
1997 Ford Explorer XLT | 4.0L Vulcan V6 | 5-speed automatic | shift-on-the-fly 4WD | 210,000 miles | Running 95% - Needs brakes on all four corners + bald tires
1989 Ford F150 | 300cid six...again | 5-speed | 4x4 | 160K | Needs brakes done as well. Oi!

Kenny McCormick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 11:25 AM   #7
Jack of all Trades
 
tofunater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Batavia, IL
Posts: 1,398
Rep: 77 tofunater will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TestECull View Post
lol so is the tank of gasoline we've been rolling around with for over a century. Just look at Ford Pinto recalls.

H2 gas is not hard to get. Apply DC current to H20 and you get H2 gas! Put a hydrogen fuel cell under the gas station and you're producing the stuff on demand. No need for transport, extraction facilities or any of that.

Chemical batteries will never be clean. The mining of the metals and creation of the acids used in them is a nasty business. They're shipped all over the world when built in a car-sized package. Their disposal is also a pretty nasty affair. And then there's the obvious safety issue of sitting on top of a big laptop battery. Get T-boned by a Suburban, then flip over, and you're going to be killed by battery acid when the battery breaks open. Even if you don't flip, you're still going to leak highly corrosive and toxic battery acid all over the place. It's just as likely as a gasoline tank rupture, because while the batteries may be stronger, they must be very large and this makes them easy targets.

Yeah, you can cleanly harvest electricity. My power is hydroelectric or nuclear, as in 0 carbon emissions(And that's all the hippies care about). But that doesn't mean everyone's power is clean. The US still uses a staggering amount of coal and oil fired power plants. TVA in particular runs a few of them, seeing as coal mines are frequent in some areas where the TVA operates.


The funny thing is that EVs have been tried before, way back in the early 1900's when cars were just being invented. They didn't work then. They were tried again in the 90's and 2000's, and yet again they didn't work. They're never going to work. We don't need to reinvent the wheel, here. We just need to fuel it with a better fuel. Hydrogen gas is one such fuel. Synthetic gasoline is also a good choice to use in the mean time, because unlike crude, we have an infinite supply of the stuff and the technology required to make it has been around for decades. The engine, as it stands today, will burn Hydrogen gas quite happily, and it won't even notice if the gasoline is synthetic, so no significant changes there must be made. All you need to do is replace the fuel system with an H2-compatible one and you're motoring.
1. What do you do with the oxygen(A highly toxic gas in concentrated amounts) and where does the water come from? If you think there is enough city water to supply hydrogen fuel you haven't thought it through properly.

2.)Driving is hazardous, I would rather risk chemical burns than an explosion. I mean, which one are you more likely to survive?

2.1)You just created an absolute that you can not prove. Battery research is ongoing and ever advancing.

3.)Power Generation is slowly moving in a more positive direction. Coal will probably be used until it is no longer profitable to use, then they will switch. This is a side issue though. Btw, where's your DC electricity gonna come from to form your hydrogen? It takes a lot of power to get a small amount of hydrogen.

4.)EV's were tried and were SUCCESSFUL. Ask Jay Leno, his 1900's era EV is still operational using the original lead acid battery.
GM's EV 1 recall is still highly scrutinized to this day, and Toyota's Rav4 conversions are some of the most sought after production EV's out there.


And a personal aside: I agree with some of what you are saying, but the reason why I push electricity is because I can produce it. Safely, efficiently, and I don't have to pay a middleman. True freedom comes from energy independence. Not just from the middle east, but from corporate structure and price manipulation.
__________________
My rides:
--2012 Chevy Sonic LT hatch back w/1.4 liter turbo w/100k
--2005 Chrysler Pacifica w/175k - SOLD!
--1987 Chevy R10 Pickup w/80k
--1997 4.3L Chevy Blazer w/193k- SOLD!
--1998 Oldsmobile Aurora w/190k - SOLD!

Last edited by tofunater; 05-11-2010 at 11:33 AM.

tofunater is offline tofunater's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 01:25 PM   #8
Spah sappin' mah susp!
 
Kenny McCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth...I think
Posts: 3,271
Rep: 96 Kenny McCormick will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tofunater View Post
1. What do you do with the oxygen(A highly toxic gas in concentrated amounts) and where does the water come from? If you think there is enough city water to supply hydrogen fuel you haven't thought it through properly.

2.)Driving is hazardous, I would rather risk chemical burns than an explosion. I mean, which one are you more likely to survive?
I'd rather die in a split second mushroom cloud than be painfully eroded by acids kthnxbai.

As for the O2 gas produced...well, NASA needs a fair bit of that stuff. So we sell it to them. Hospitals also like to buy that stuff. What they don't buy we can sell to people who need oxygen for their torches, as oxy/acetylene torches are quite commonplace and use this gas.

For the water supply, just put a pipe leading into the fuel cell/electrolyzer that taps into the water main. Anywhere you get city water you get plenty of water for H2 production. To augment that you can just collect rainwater.

Quote:
2.1)You just created an absolute that you can not prove. Battery research is ongoing and ever advancing.
I have yet to see any successful batteries strong enough to power a car that don't use toxic and/or dangerous acids to function. I'd love to be proved wrong on this one, but looking at past technology and progression to today, we have yet to come up with a reliable, rechargable, high-capacity eco-friendly battery scheme. Lithium-based batteries are the best we have right now. I'm simply drawing my conclusion based on what I have to draw it on, and that's battery tech up to today.

You really have two choices for an EV. Neither is good on the planet. You have lead-acid batteries, which although are highly recyclable, they're still pretty nasty on the environment. Then you have lithium-ion batteries, which are what most things use these days. And they still have the same issue any battery powered car has: Limited range and extensive charge times. Oh, and they'll both explode if handled wrong.

Quote:
3.)Power Generation is slowly moving in a more positive direction. Coal will probably be used until it is no longer profitable to use, then they will switch. This is a side issue though.
They'll do that regardless of what powers cars of the future. Moot point. It's a good thing, I'd love to see America's grid powered solely by nuclear and hydroelectric solutions(Ideally fusion, but until then clean fission reactors will have to do) and get rid of the toxin-belching combustion plants. It would likely render any global warming arguments from Americans moot, as I think our carbon emissions would plummet to well below places like China and India.

Quote:
Btw, where's your DC electricity gonna come from to form your hydrogen?
Same place all other electricity comes from: The power grid. Though, fuel cells seem much less dependent on electricity, which is why people are pursuing them for cars. Why not enlarge them, bury them and feed the resulting H2 gas to cars?

Quote:
It takes a lot of power to get a small amount of hydrogen.
Yup. But it takes a lot of power to build batteries, too.

Quote:
4.)EV's were tried and were SUCCESSFUL. Ask Jay Leno, his 1900's era EV is still operational using the original lead acid battery.
Yes, they function. They just don't work. What I mean by 'work' in this context is being a feasible option. Gasoline didn't win the battle for fuel-of-choice just because it's a fun word to say, after all. It had plenty of competition from things like Leno's 1900's EV, diesel, CNG, hell they even tried the odd steam powered car(Leno has one of these as well, and yes it does drive around).

The largest EV that worked in this context would be the typical electric golf cart, and even those don't have a complete penetration because there's some people who prefer the ease of refueling and extended range a gasoline or diesel cart provides. Electric push mowers and weed eaters have popped up and continue to hold market share but I don't see those usurping their gasoline counterparts anytime soon, again because of the convenience of pouring fuel into a tank.


Quote:
GM's EV 1 recall is still highly scrutinized to this day, and Toyota's Rav4 conversions are some of the most sought after production EV's out there.
They still have the same failings as every other EV ever made. That is abysmal range and very lengthy refuels.


Quote:
And a personal aside: I agree with some of what you are saying, but the reason why I push electricity is because I can produce it. Safely, efficiently, and I don't have to pay a middleman. True freedom comes from energy independence. Not just from the middle east, but from corporate structure and price manipulation.

IF you can produce electricity, you can produce H2 gas.

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% for a more eco-responsible fuel for our cars. But I don't want people to try to reinvent the wheel when we only have to feed it a different fuel that, as it sits, it will readily burn. VERY little modification is required to propel a traditional car on Hydrogen gas. All you need is H2 injectors and a storage tank or three and you're motoring. The engine itself will run quite happily with no internal changes. It may even be cleaner inside, as water injection is frequently used to clean out combustion chambers and water is a key byproduct of burning hydrogen. The only naughty gases coming out the back will have been sucked in to begin with unless the engine is so worn that it is burning significant amounts of oil.
__________________
Tired Iron ain't got no time to wear out...

My rigs:

1985 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci OHV inline six | 4-speed OD manual | 310K | No power brakes | Running 100% - It hasn't driven this good in 15 years!

1984 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci six | granny four | 3.55 rear end | 210K | Brakes shot. Rear drums are doing most of the work. Not fit to drive due to that.
1997 Ford Explorer XLT | 4.0L Vulcan V6 | 5-speed automatic | shift-on-the-fly 4WD | 210,000 miles | Running 95% - Needs brakes on all four corners + bald tires
1989 Ford F150 | 300cid six...again | 5-speed | 4x4 | 160K | Needs brakes done as well. Oi!

Kenny McCormick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 02:57 PM   #9
Jack of all Trades
 
tofunater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Batavia, IL
Posts: 1,398
Rep: 77 tofunater will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
I'd rather die in a split second mushroom cloud than be painfully eroded by acids kthnxbai.
A debatable statement

Quote:
As for the O2 gas produced...well, NASA needs a fair bit of that stuff. So we sell it to them. Hospitals also like to buy that stuff. What they don't buy we can sell to people who need oxygen for their torches, as oxy/acetylene torches are quite commonplace and use this gas.
And once again you have a dangerous, combustible gas being shipped on public road ways.
Quote:
For the water supply, just put a pipe leading into the fuel cell/electrolyzer that taps into the water main. Anywhere you get city water you get plenty of water for H2 production. To augment that you can just collect rainwater.
This will not be enough to power our driving habits, along with everything else we use water for.

Quote:
I have yet to see any successful batteries strong enough to power a car that don't use toxic and/or dangerous acids to function. I'd love to be proved wrong on this one, but looking at past technology and progression to today, we have yet to come up with a reliable, rechargable, high-capacity eco-friendly battery scheme. Lithium-based batteries are the best we have right now. I'm simply drawing my conclusion based on what I have to draw it on, and that's battery tech up to today.

You really have two choices for an EV. Neither is good on the planet. You have lead-acid batteries, which although are highly recyclable, they're still pretty nasty on the environment. Then you have lithium-ion batteries, which are what most things use these days. And they still have the same issue any battery powered car has: Limited range and extensive charge times. Oh, and they'll both explode if handled wrong.
Swappable, standardized battery packs virtually eliminate the charging factor if the infrastructure is put in place. Is 240 miles (tesla's new coupe, and the toyota rav4 conversion) really that short to you? my car barely makes it 300 on a tank.

Quote:
They'll do that regardless of what powers cars of the future. Moot point. It's a good thing, I'd love to see America's grid powered solely by nuclear and hydroelectric solutions(Ideally fusion, but until then clean fission reactors will have to do) and get rid of the toxin-belching combustion plants. It would likely render any global warming arguments from Americans moot, as I think our carbon emissions would plummet to well below places like China and India.
I hope they stop it sooner rather than later. Check out this company though --> http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/
modular nuclear energy is looking more promising these days.

Quote:
Same place all other electricity comes from: The power grid. Though, fuel cells seem much less dependent on electricity, which is why people are pursuing them for cars. Why not enlarge them, bury them and feed the resulting H2 gas to cars?
That's AC power.
AC-->DC conversion approximately 95% efficient
Hydrogen Fuel Cell--> approximately 10% efficient

Quote:
Yup. But it takes a lot of power to build batteries, too.
Pressure tanks must be inspected and kept in top operating condition, on top of all the usual maintenance with a mechanical motor. An electric motor has only brushes, a magnetic coil, and an output shaft. Do you see where I'm going with that?

Quote:
Yes, they function. They just don't work. What I mean by 'work' in this context is being a feasible option. Gasoline didn't win the battle for fuel-of-choice just because it's a fun word to say, after all. It had plenty of competition from things like Leno's 1900's EV, diesel, CNG, hell they even tried the odd steam powered car(Leno has one of these as well, and yes it does drive around).
Nope, it won because it can be controlled. Its available, its easy, and it can be manipulated. There was money to be made, and they seized upon it

Quote:
The largest EV that worked in this context would be the typical electric golf cart, and even those don't have a complete penetration because there's some people who prefer the ease of refueling and extended range a gasoline or diesel cart provides. Electric push mowers and weed eaters have popped up and continue to hold market share but I don't see those usurping their gasoline counterparts anytime soon, again because of the convenience of pouring fuel into a tank.

They still have the same failings as every other EV ever made. That is abysmal range and very lengthy refuels.
Actually trains are the biggest, but thats a technicality. And yes, people are lazy, which is what has held back technological innovation in this country for the last 75 years.







Quote:
IF you can produce electricity, you can produce H2 gas.
with tens of thousands of dollars in extra equipment, extra complexity, additional upkeep, and danger.
Quote:
Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% for a more eco-responsible fuel for our cars. But I don't want people to try to reinvent the wheel when we only have to feed it a different fuel that, as it sits, it will readily burn. VERY little modification is required to propel a traditional car on Hydrogen gas. All you need is H2 injectors and a storage tank or three and you're motoring. The engine itself will run quite happily with no internal changes. It may even be cleaner inside, as water injection is frequently used to clean out combustion chambers and water is a key byproduct of burning hydrogen. The only naughty gases coming out the back will have been sucked in to begin with unless the engine is so worn that it is burning significant amounts of oil.
We're not reinventing anything though. The technology already exists on both fronts. We just need a new fuel.
__________________
My rides:
--2012 Chevy Sonic LT hatch back w/1.4 liter turbo w/100k
--2005 Chrysler Pacifica w/175k - SOLD!
--1987 Chevy R10 Pickup w/80k
--1997 4.3L Chevy Blazer w/193k- SOLD!
--1998 Oldsmobile Aurora w/190k - SOLD!

tofunater is offline tofunater's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2010, 03:28 PM   #10
Spah sappin' mah susp!
 
Kenny McCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Earth...I think
Posts: 3,271
Rep: 96 Kenny McCormick will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tofunater View Post
A debatable statement
Split-second mushroom cloud is painless and tends to make a good YT video.


Quote:
And once again you have a dangerous, combustible gas being shipped on public road ways.
They already ship staggering amounts of both gases on public highways. You don't think Nasa cooks up the half-a-million galls of LO2 and another half a mil of LH2 in the basement at Kennedy, do ya? And what about all the people that do metalworking for a living and use OxyAcetylene torches? They use tanks of Oxygen gas.

Dude you're being overly paranoid. We already ship staggering amounts of oxygen gas down the road. You won't even notice. And when was the last time a truck containing oxygen gas exploded going down the road, anyways?

Quote:
This will not be enough to power our driving habits, along with everything else we use water for.
Better than nothing at all. Not only that, but a good chunk of this country lives next to the two biggest chunks of water on this planet, that being the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Now you're telling me that, between city water supplies and trucking H2 made on the coastlines, we can't feasibly use H2 gas in place of gasoline?


Quote:
Swappable, standardized battery packs virtually eliminate the charging factor if the infrastructure is put in place.
I don't know about you, but I don't want some random yahoo screwing around with the bowels of my fuel system every few days. I also don't want someone driving towards my car with a fork lift every two or three days, because those batteries are heavy. Just imagine if his brakes fail.

Quote:
Is 240 miles (tesla's new coupe, and the toyota rav4 conversion) really that short to you? my car barely makes it 300 on a tank.
You honestly believe EVs get anywhere near their advertised range? The Tesla is lucky to get 60 miles out of a charge. The Rav4 isn't going to do much better in the real world, either. Advertised claims can only go so far, you need to look at the real world range to decide if an EV is even remotely feasible. Anyone who's watched Top Gear's review of the Tesla knows exactly why those advertised claims are a load of crock.

If EV's didn't have the range issue, we'd all be using them. There's a damn good reason they lost to ICE power. Hell, there's a big flame war in any hobby-grade RC community on this very matter, fuel V electric power. With RC, for decades the standard was a 7.2V 6-cell NiCD battery. You got about 5-10 minutes. Then in the 90's, nitro started to make HUGE strides in engine tech. They got to the point where they slaughtered electric RCs in every performance figure you had, and could be refuelled in a matter of seconds without even shutting them down. Even today, with brushless technology making huge strides for electric, people still prefer the convenience and ease of refueling that nitro power brings to the table.

Quote:
I hope they stop it sooner rather than later. Check out this company though --> http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/
modular nuclear energy is looking more promising these days.
Ford Nucleon? Fallout 3's cars?


Quote:
That's AC power.
AC-->DC conversion approximately 95% efficient
Hydrogen Fuel Cell--> approximately 10% efficient
Hurr durr. You honestly think I'm dumb enough to not know there has to be a DC converter in the circuit? I may not be an expert but I'm not stupid.


Quote:
Pressure tanks must be inspected and kept in top operating condition, on top of all the usual maintenance with a mechanical motor. An electric motor has only brushes, a magnetic coil, and an output shaft. Do you see where I'm going with that?
Auto maintenance is more than periodic oil changes and tuneups. You still have the transmission to look after, as well as the suspension and brakes. And then there's the staggering cost of the speed controllers and the fact that they're highly dangerous to work with due to the current and voltage present in a typical EV. Not only that, but a well-built engine(See: American Smallblock V8 of any make, some domestic six cylinders and most import engines excluding rotaries) needs little more than common oil changes and the odd plug/wire/cap/rotor set every 10 years or so to live a VERY long life. They're not as hard to care for as people make them out to be.

Quote:
Nope, it won because it can be controlled. Its available, its easy, and it can be manipulated. There was money to be made, and they seized upon it
It won because it A: Fueled our needs, B: was convenient, quick and easy to dispense and C: gave us plenty of range. Need more range? No problem, just stop for two or three minutes and you're good.


Quote:
Actually trains are the biggest, but thats a technicality.
Trains aren't electric vehicles. They rely on a diesel engine spinning a generator to move. Yes, they use electricity to move, but they don't store it locally, they generate it on the fly with absolutely massive diesel engines. Subway trains have an electrified third rail where they pull power straight from the grid, so they are as close as you can come to what we would say is an electric car, but they still lack the batteries to be a true EV in the context we're using it as.

Quote:
And yes, people are lazy, which is what has held back technological innovation in this country for the last 75 years.
They didn't hold it back. It just went to creating ways for the car to do their job for them. Also, technology sped along faster in the past 20 years than it had in the 80 before it. People's laziness did not in any way hold back innovation.

Hell, if it wasn't for laziness, we would still change the channel with a knob on the TV.


Quote:
with tens of thousands of dollars in extra equipment, extra complexity, additional upkeep, and danger.
Not really. A 250 gallon tank of water, some plumbing bits, two old car flywheels and a somewhat cheap AC-DC converter won't run you more than 500 bucks and you're set for electrolysis.

Quote:
We're not reinventing anything though. The technology already exists on both fronts. We just need a new fuel.
We are. Look at the Honda fuel cell prototype. Looks normal on the outside, but pop the hood and you'll be sitting their scratching your nuts like a cave man. You won't recognize anything under there. They're reinventing what doesn't need to be reinvented. You're right, we need a new fuel, we don't need an entirely new powertrain.

EV's have had a good chance at succeeding and every time they've tried they've fallen on the same exact sword. EVs simply stand no chance of usurping ICE vehicles as long as they have the same two failings: Very long fillup times and very short ranges. Yes, we need a new fuel, but electricity just ain't gonna do it. We've tried it enough to know it won't work, time to move on to something else.
__________________
Tired Iron ain't got no time to wear out...

My rigs:

1985 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci OHV inline six | 4-speed OD manual | 310K | No power brakes | Running 100% - It hasn't driven this good in 15 years!

1984 Ford F150 | 4x2 | 300ci six | granny four | 3.55 rear end | 210K | Brakes shot. Rear drums are doing most of the work. Not fit to drive due to that.
1997 Ford Explorer XLT | 4.0L Vulcan V6 | 5-speed automatic | shift-on-the-fly 4WD | 210,000 miles | Running 95% - Needs brakes on all four corners + bald tires
1989 Ford F150 | 300cid six...again | 5-speed | 4x4 | 160K | Needs brakes done as well. Oi!

Last edited by Kenny McCormick; 05-11-2010 at 03:35 PM.

Kenny McCormick is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:18 PM.

Shogun Interactive Development Copyright © 2015 Shogun Interactive Development. All rights reserved.