|
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/7/2012 3:14 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote: On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In web.com, says... On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... In , says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote: In , says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500, wrote: In , says... http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/ Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to look at the world with an open mind... Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with the sales. It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho. Basically the problem is battery cost vs price. These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your objective, buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas. I understand the government will subsidize your electric car purchase to make that price delta look more attractive but that does not reduce the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to buy one. ----------------------------------- Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average income of a Tesla buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got 30 miles to the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of technology improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery technology. Plus where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no pollution. What about that coal or oil fired generating plant? Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd probably bitch about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no gasoline backup. It appears that the same problems they were having 100 years ago with electric vehicles are the same problems they have today. http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm The initiation of mass production of internal combustion engine vehicles by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and affordable in the $500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In 1912, an electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car sold for $650. I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright Brothers were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison should have invented the halogen bulb, first. You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the same fuel that today's 747 runs on. I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation, but it is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your assertions.) The response you'll type to this will be possible because of all of the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which a lot of people said was idiotic and useless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the same path as the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century. The fueling station will not change for another 50 years. You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and cars in the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to follow. It will be a small leap to add electrical power. http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research- library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp The drawbacks of LPG include: In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting could be a problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low temperatures. One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of gasoline. The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower than a comparable gasoline-powered vehicle. LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such as CNG and gasoline. There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more than all of the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations, however, are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This is one of the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles, which burn LPG and gasoline. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0. The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just around the corner. They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with anything better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not ready for prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to manufacture. LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline. By what measure? Cost. Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be precise and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good. Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is cheaper. At this time it is cheaper per gallon. doesn't matter At this time it is cheaper per pound. doesn't matter At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered. matters if true At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed. matters if true It is cheaper to use as a fuel. ambiguous statement -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
|
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, Oscar wrote: On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In web.com, says... On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... In , says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote: In , says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500, wrote: In , says... http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/ Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to look at the world with an open mind... Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with the sales. It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho. Basically the problem is battery cost vs price. These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your objective, buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas. I understand the government will subsidize your electric car purchase to make that price delta look more attractive but that does not reduce the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to buy one. ----------------------------------- Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average income of a Tesla buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got 30 miles to the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of technology improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery technology. Plus where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no pollution. What about that coal or oil fired generating plant? Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd probably bitch about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no gasoline backup. It appears that the same problems they were having 100 years ago with electric vehicles are the same problems they have today. http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm The initiation of mass production of internal combustion engine vehicles by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and affordable in the $500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In 1912, an electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car sold for $650. I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright Brothers were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison should have invented the halogen bulb, first. You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the same fuel that today's 747 runs on. I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation, but it is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your assertions.) The response you'll type to this will be possible because of all of the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which a lot of people said was idiotic and useless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the same path as the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century. The fueling station will not change for another 50 years. You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and cars in the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to follow. It will be a small leap to add electrical power. http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research- library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp The drawbacks of LPG include: In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting could be a problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low temperatures. One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of gasoline. The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower than a comparable gasoline-powered vehicle. LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such as CNG and gasoline. There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more than all of the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations, however, are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This is one of the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles, which burn LPG and gasoline. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0. The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just around the corner. They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with anything better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not ready for prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to manufacture. LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline. By what measure? Cost. Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be precise and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good. Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is cheaper. At this time it is cheaper per gallon. At this time it is cheaper per pound. At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered. At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed. It is cheaper to use as a fuel. You haven't provided any proof. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:39:04 -0500, X ` Man
wrote: I see no reason to help corporations achieve their goal of bleeding this country dry. === You should buy stock in some of these evil corporations. It would give you a voice at the annual meeting, the election of directors, and a piece of the dividend pie. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
wrote in message ...
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, Oscar wrote: On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In web.com, says... On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... In , says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote: In , says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500, wrote: In , says... http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/ Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to look at the world with an open mind... Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with the sales. It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho. Basically the problem is battery cost vs price. These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your objective, buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas. I understand the government will subsidize your electric car purchase to make that price delta look more attractive but that does not reduce the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to buy one. ----------------------------------- Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average income of a Tesla buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got 30 miles to the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of technology improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery technology. Plus where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no pollution. What about that coal or oil fired generating plant? Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd probably bitch about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no gasoline backup. It appears that the same problems they were having 100 years ago with electric vehicles are the same problems they have today. http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm The initiation of mass production of internal combustion engine vehicles by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and affordable in the $500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In 1912, an electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car sold for $650. I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright Brothers were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison should have invented the halogen bulb, first. You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the same fuel that today's 747 runs on. I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation, but it is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your assertions.) The response you'll type to this will be possible because of all of the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which a lot of people said was idiotic and useless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the same path as the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century. The fueling station will not change for another 50 years. You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and cars in the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to follow. It will be a small leap to add electrical power. http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research- library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp The drawbacks of LPG include: In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting could be a problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low temperatures. One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of gasoline. The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower than a comparable gasoline-powered vehicle. LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such as CNG and gasoline. There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more than all of the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations, however, are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This is one of the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles, which burn LPG and gasoline. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0. The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just around the corner. They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with anything better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not ready for prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to manufacture. LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline. By what measure? Cost. Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be precise and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good. Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is cheaper. At this time it is cheaper per gallon. At this time it is cheaper per pound. At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered. At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed. It is cheaper to use as a fuel. ---------------------------------------- Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here. |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
wrote in message ...
On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 19:08:00 -0500, BAR wrote: I have a 11 year old vehicle that costs me $200 a year in insurance Where can you get liability only for just $200 a year? (even at a minimum level) ----------------------------- Actually you only have to look at the comprehensive / collision portion. Liability insurance cost will be pretty close no matter what vehicle you insure. |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
"oscar" wrote in message
om... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 23:10:15 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: "oscar" wrote in message om... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 13:37:27 -0500, wrote: In article , says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 09:35:24 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , says... http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...g-the-plug-on- a-government-funded-electric-lemon/ Told you, and you laughed... snerk Sometimes it pays to look at the world with an open mind... Jeffrey Immelt, the CEO of GE who doesn't pay taxes, will have to find another vehicle to force his people who have company cars to purchase and drive. http://gas2.org/2012/02/20/ge-forcin...o-chevy-volts/ If my employer "forced" me to drive a company car, I wouldn't bitch about who made it. But maybe you feel entitled to force your employer to chose the car of YOUR choice? I have never had a job where my employer provided me with a car or a car allowance. I have. It's a pretty nice perk. --------------------------------- Yes it is a nice perk. But if it is a car allowance and not a company provided car, it has to meet your own requirements also, as that vehicle will be your daily driver as well as weekend vehicle in most cases. since I also towed my boat, I picked an Expedition in 1999 as that was the closest to meeting all my requirements. That car allowance is taxable but you get to write most of it off to the car, if you drive the car enough percentage on company business, and the commute to work does not count in the company miles for tax purposes. I've had it both ways. I prefer getting the car with expenses, including gas. ------------------------------------------------------ Difference between a company car and a car allowance, is if you leave the company and you have a company car, you turn in the keys and walk away. With a car allowance, you drive away. |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
"iBoaterer" wrote in message
... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 09:35:24 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , says... http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/ Told you, and you laughed... snerk Sometimes it pays to look at the world with an open mind... Jeffrey Immelt, the CEO of GE who doesn't pay taxes, will have to find another vehicle to force his people who have company cars to purchase and drive. http://gas2.org/2012/02/20/ge-forcin...o-chevy-volts/ === With all due respect Bert, that sounds like a regurgitation from a Rush Limbaugh rant. The republican party needs to put a muzzle on that dude before he alienates every swing voter in the country. I think the jury is still out on electric cars but any program at all which encourages energy independence is a good thing in my opinion. Exactly! I don't know why so many far right wingers are against getting us off of oil. The alternatives are not cost effective and you cannot turn the wind on when you need more power nor can you turn the Sun on when it is night time. And there is a finite quantity of oil. The amount of oil in North America makes Arabia look like an oil can compared to a tanker truck. Or so says FOX. So you think we should go to any length to get it, like the oil sands of Canada? Isn't this a lovely sight: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...nd-landscapes/ Our whole country could look like that! ______________________________ So it is OK to drill and pollute the Middle East and South America, but not here? Looks about like an open pit mine for most any mineral in the world. US included. Most of the Electricity is oil or coal fired plants. So you get to mine that or drill for that. Electric cars are burning fossil fuel also, just not at the vehicle. A well is a pipe in the ground, oil sands are gotten from stripping the landscape, two entirely different things. -------------------------------------------- A coal mine most likely anymore is a strip mine operation. Just like a gravel quarry or a copper mine. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/7/12 11:52 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:39:04 -0500, X ` wrote: I see no reason to help corporations achieve their goal of bleeding this country dry. === You should buy stock in some of these evil corporations. It would give you a voice at the annual meeting, the election of directors, and a piece of the dividend pie. And just how is my participation or presence going to stop corporations from bleeding this country dry and shipping cash and jobs overseas? It isn't. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:31 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com