|
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/7/2012 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. Union operatives like Krause are forbidden to own stock in their enemy's corporations. -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/8/2012 7:49 AM, X ` Man wrote:
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. How else will they know that a union operative objects to the way they do business? -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:49:56 -0500, X ` Man
wrote: 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. === Well for one thing it might help teach you something about how the world of economics and taxation *really* work. The propaganda that you ingest and regurgitate is just as one sided as the Rush Limbaugh garbage on the other side of the political fence. Corporations have no interest in "bleeding the country dry". That's ridiculous. Who would buy their products? Likewise corporations have no interest in moving huge amounts of cash offshore. They'd rather have it here. The problem is that when corporations earn money offshore they can't bring it back without being taxed a second time (first in the country where earned). |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/8/12 10:25 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:49:56 -0500, X ` Man wrote: 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. === Well for one thing it might help teach you something about how the world of economics and taxation *really* work. The propaganda that you ingest and regurgitate is just as one sided as the Rush Limbaugh garbage on the other side of the political fence. Corporations have no interest in "bleeding the country dry". That's ridiculous. Who would buy their products? Likewise corporations have no interest in moving huge amounts of cash offshore. They'd rather have it here. The problem is that when corporations earn money offshore they can't bring it back without being taxed a second time (first in the country where earned). Save your arrogance for someone who cares about your opinions, Wayne. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
|
Told you the Volt was dead...
On Thursday, March 8, 2012 10:25:39 AM UTC-5, Wayne. B wrote:
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:49:56 -0500, X ` Man wrote: 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. === Well for one thing it might help teach you something about how the world of economics and taxation *really* work. The propaganda that you ingest and regurgitate is just as one sided as the Rush Limbaugh garbage on the other side of the political fence. Corporations have no interest in "bleeding the country dry". That's ridiculous. Who would buy their products? Likewise corporations have no interest in moving huge amounts of cash offshore. They'd rather have it here. The problem is that when corporations earn money offshore they can't bring it back without being taxed a second time (first in the country where earned). Well said, Wayne. And spot on. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
|
Told you the Volt was dead...
|
Told you the Volt was dead...
|
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Since you are something of a smart fella, maybe you can provide us some comparative data on the cost per unit of energy available from gasoline vs propane (LPG). Leave aside the additives the greenies/Govt. stick in the gas to lower its energy and ruin gasoline engines. I'm looking forward to an interesting and informative response from you -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:27:02 -0500, X ` Man
wrote: Save your arrogance for someone who cares about your opinions, Wayne. === You asked me a question. I answered it. Save *your* arrogance for someone who appreciates it. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:20 -0500, Oscar wrote: On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the gallon. http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered by the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it doesn't have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight. Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more. Yep, agreed. Where I buy mine, they do just exactly that. By the way, if you go to someplace where you exchange your 20# empty for a "filled" one, you are getting ripped off. They fill those to 18# claiming it's for safety. I go to Ace where I get a real 20# refill. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/8/2012 11:54 AM, wrote:
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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the gallon. http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered by the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it doesn't have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight. Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more. Since you are something of a smart fella, maybe you can provide us some comparative data on the cost per unit of energy available from gasoline vs propane (LPG). Leave aside the additives the greenies/Govt. stick in the gas to lower its energy and ruin gasoline engines. http://www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_13...cience_01.html This explains the matter from a number of positions and clearly states that "you get more bang for your buck with propane when compared with gasoline." Maybe you will have time to review the conspiracy of using molar chemistry. Clear as mud. -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/8/2012 12:07 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:20 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the gallon. http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered by the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it doesn't have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight. Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more. Yep, agreed. Where I buy mine, they do just exactly that. By the way, if you go to someplace where you exchange your 20# empty for a "filled" one, you are getting ripped off. They fill those to 18# claiming it's for safety. I go to Ace where I get a real 20# refill. Look up OPD. then go discuss what you find with your nitwit friend. I'll leave you two to jerk each other off. -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:23:07 -0500, Oscar wrote: On 3/8/2012 12:07 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:20 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the gallon. http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered by the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it doesn't have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight. Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more. Yep, agreed. Where I buy mine, they do just exactly that. By the way, if you go to someplace where you exchange your 20# empty for a "filled" one, you are getting ripped off. They fill those to 18# claiming it's for safety. I go to Ace where I get a real 20# refill. Look up OPD. then go discuss what you find with your nitwit friend. I'll leave you two to jerk each other off. What part of "According to statements appearing on the two companies? websites, in 2008 both reduced the amount of propane in their ?full? tanks sold consumers ..." didn't you get? OPDs have been required since 2002, so it has nothing to do with short fills. A 20# LPG tank is made to HOLD 20#, that is why it has a tare weight stamped on it. There is a void space in excess of the 20# amount to account for the 80% fill. OPDs became necessary because people were filling 20# tanks IN EXCESS of 20#. Wow, I see old Oscar is getting all shook up! |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/8/2012 3:54 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:23:07 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 12:07 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:20 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the gallon. http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered by the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it doesn't have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight. Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more. Yep, agreed. Where I buy mine, they do just exactly that. By the way, if you go to someplace where you exchange your 20# empty for a "filled" one, you are getting ripped off. They fill those to 18# claiming it's for safety. I go to Ace where I get a real 20# refill. Look up OPD. then go discuss what you find with your nitwit friend. I'll leave you two to jerk each other off. What part of "According to statements appearing on the two companies? websites, in 2008 both reduced the amount of propane in their ?full? tanks sold consumers ..." didn't you get? OPDs have been required since 2002, so it has nothing to do with short fills. A 20# LPG tank is made to HOLD 20#, that is why it has a tare weight stamped on it. There is a void space in excess of the 20# amount to account for the 80% fill. OPDs became necessary because people were filling 20# tanks IN EXCESS of 20#. Wow, I see old Oscar is getting all shook up! Your task was to show that lpg is cheaper to use than gasoline. You haven't proved your point. I guess I was expecting too much of you. -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article m,
says... On 3/8/2012 3:54 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:23:07 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 12:07 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:20 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the gallon. http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered by the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it doesn't have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight. Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more. Yep, agreed. Where I buy mine, they do just exactly that. By the way, if you go to someplace where you exchange your 20# empty for a "filled" one, you are getting ripped off. They fill those to 18# claiming it's for safety. I go to Ace where I get a real 20# refill. Look up OPD. then go discuss what you find with your nitwit friend. I'll leave you two to jerk each other off. What part of "According to statements appearing on the two companies? websites, in 2008 both reduced the amount of propane in their ?full? tanks sold consumers ..." didn't you get? OPDs have been required since 2002, so it has nothing to do with short fills. A 20# LPG tank is made to HOLD 20#, that is why it has a tare weight stamped on it. There is a void space in excess of the 20# amount to account for the 80% fill. OPDs became necessary because people were filling 20# tanks IN EXCESS of 20#. Wow, I see old Oscar is getting all shook up! Your task was to show that lpg is cheaper to use than gasoline. You haven't proved your point. I guess I was expecting too much of you. I don't think he understands the concept. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
|
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:25:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:49:56 -0500, X ` Man wrote: 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. === Well for one thing it might help teach you something about how the world of economics and taxation *really* work. The propaganda that you ingest and regurgitate is just as one sided as the Rush Limbaugh garbage on the other side of the political fence. Corporations have no interest in "bleeding the country dry". That's ridiculous. Who would buy their products? Likewise corporations have no interest in moving huge amounts of cash offshore. They'd rather have it here. The problem is that when corporations earn money offshore they can't bring it back without being taxed a second time (first in the country where earned). On the second count. As you have phrased the situation, you are correct, but that isn't what corporations actually do. They essentially "launder" the money and then elect to bring it back to the US, or not. This bit of corporate welfare is costing the US taxpayer over $40B per year. I suspect this it is also costing a LOT of jobs, but I don't have a figure. http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...te_031611.html You are whining about $40B a year? The federal budget is $3.5T a year. $40B falls out of the Congress' pockets on their way in and out of their chambers each year. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
wrote in message ...
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. ----------------------------- You seemed to be Math challenged. $3 a gallon is not $3 a pound. Around here the tank exchange is about $18 and they are not full fill. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
wrote in message ...
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, Oscar wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. ---------------------------- I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... In article m, says... On 3/8/2012 3:54 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:23:07 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 12:07 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:20 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the gallon. http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered by the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it doesn't have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight. Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more. Yep, agreed. Where I buy mine, they do just exactly that. By the way, if you go to someplace where you exchange your 20# empty for a "filled" one, you are getting ripped off. They fill those to 18# claiming it's for safety. I go to Ace where I get a real 20# refill. Look up OPD. then go discuss what you find with your nitwit friend. I'll leave you two to jerk each other off. What part of "According to statements appearing on the two companies? websites, in 2008 both reduced the amount of propane in their ?full? tanks sold consumers ..." didn't you get? OPDs have been required since 2002, so it has nothing to do with short fills. A 20# LPG tank is made to HOLD 20#, that is why it has a tare weight stamped on it. There is a void space in excess of the 20# amount to account for the 80% fill. OPDs became necessary because people were filling 20# tanks IN EXCESS of 20#. Wow, I see old Oscar is getting all shook up! Your task was to show that lpg is cheaper to use than gasoline. You haven't proved your point. I guess I was expecting too much of you. I don't think he understands the concept. Sure I do, it's very easy to see that LPG is cheaper per energy unit than gasoline. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... In article , says... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 19:06:23 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 06:35:14 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 18:36:58 -0500, BAR wrote: LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such as CNG and gasoline. Wrong. I buy 33# forklift tanks for just over $14.00. That is about $2.23/gallon at an 80% fill. Don't argue with me, argue with the website where I got the information, asshole. I don't need to argue with you or any website. I know what I pay, because I get the bills. Difference is, I know what I am talking about and you are googling your ass off trying to prove me wrong. All I did was post some information and showed you the source. You started to argue with me about the information. Go argue with the author. Thus far, you have posted nothing but a string of incorrect foolishness, from the fuel used by the Wrights through the cost of LPG. Maybe you need an accuracy filter on that google account. I have posted information that is different from your experience. You have taken that as a challenge to your manhood. You are either stupid or insecure and possibly both. You posted links to "The History of the Internet" and a bunch of other nutty stuff. You never posted anything at all that addressed your assertion that gasoline was a cheaper fuel than LPG. This apparently has a lot less to do with my manhood than your apparent inebriation or the obvious creeping onset of senility. I never asserted that gasoline was cheaper than LPG. I just posted some information from a website that disagreed with you point. If you want to argue with the website that I got my info from, please feel free to contact them and argue to your hearts content. It needs to be peer reviewed to be relevant, remember? |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... In article , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:25:39 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:49:56 -0500, X ` Man wrote: 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. === Well for one thing it might help teach you something about how the world of economics and taxation *really* work. The propaganda that you ingest and regurgitate is just as one sided as the Rush Limbaugh garbage on the other side of the political fence. Corporations have no interest in "bleeding the country dry". That's ridiculous. Who would buy their products? Likewise corporations have no interest in moving huge amounts of cash offshore. They'd rather have it here. The problem is that when corporations earn money offshore they can't bring it back without being taxed a second time (first in the country where earned). On the second count. As you have phrased the situation, you are correct, but that isn't what corporations actually do. They essentially "launder" the money and then elect to bring it back to the US, or not. This bit of corporate welfare is costing the US taxpayer over $40B per year. I suspect this it is also costing a LOT of jobs, but I don't have a figure. http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...te_031611.html You are whining about $40B a year? The federal budget is $3.5T a year. $40B falls out of the Congress' pockets on their way in and out of their chambers each year. Apples and oranges. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, Oscar wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. ---------------------------- I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill. It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what LPG does. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/8/2012 11:15 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. ----------------------------- You seemed to be Math challenged. $3 a gallon is not $3 a pound. Around here the tank exchange is about $18 and they are not full fill. Where is the benefit of tank exchange when propane stations seem to be everywhere? -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/2012 7:57 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 20:15:39 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. ----------------------------- You seemed to be Math challenged. $3 a gallon is not $3 a pound. Around here the tank exchange is about $18 and they are not full fill. If you noted, I posted that it wasn't clear to me whether you meant $3/# or $3/gal. As for MY math: if you are paying $18/fill and a gallon costs $3, you are accomplishing the impossible. You are getting a 25# (6 gal.) fill in a 20# (4.7 gal.) tank! My guess is you are paying closer to $4/gal. Prices in CA appear to be from under $3 to almost $10 per gallon. http://www.altfuelprices.com/ Maybe its not your math but your ability to read and reason. -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/2012 8:30 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... In , says... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 19:06:23 -0500, wrote: In , says... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 06:35:14 -0500, wrote: In , says... On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 18:36:58 -0500, wrote: LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such as CNG and gasoline. Wrong. I buy 33# forklift tanks for just over $14.00. That is about $2.23/gallon at an 80% fill. Don't argue with me, argue with the website where I got the information, asshole. I don't need to argue with you or any website. I know what I pay, because I get the bills. Difference is, I know what I am talking about and you are googling your ass off trying to prove me wrong. All I did was post some information and showed you the source. You started to argue with me about the information. Go argue with the author. Thus far, you have posted nothing but a string of incorrect foolishness, from the fuel used by the Wrights through the cost of LPG. Maybe you need an accuracy filter on that google account. I have posted information that is different from your experience. You have taken that as a challenge to your manhood. You are either stupid or insecure and possibly both. You posted links to "The History of the Internet" and a bunch of other nutty stuff. You never posted anything at all that addressed your assertion that gasoline was a cheaper fuel than LPG. This apparently has a lot less to do with my manhood than your apparent inebriation or the obvious creeping onset of senility. I never asserted that gasoline was cheaper than LPG. I just posted some information from a website that disagreed with you point. If you want to argue with the website that I got my info from, please feel free to contact them and argue to your hearts content. It needs to be peer reviewed to be relevant, remember? The reviews are in. Your peers are calling you an asshat/idiot. -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/2012 8:29 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... In aweb.com, says... On 3/8/2012 3:54 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:23:07 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 12:07 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:20 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet. Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank. Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at lower per unit prices than smaller packages. Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the gallon. http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered by the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it doesn't have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight. Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more. Yep, agreed. Where I buy mine, they do just exactly that. By the way, if you go to someplace where you exchange your 20# empty for a "filled" one, you are getting ripped off. They fill those to 18# claiming it's for safety. I go to Ace where I get a real 20# refill. Look up OPD. then go discuss what you find with your nitwit friend. I'll leave you two to jerk each other off. What part of "According to statements appearing on the two companies? websites, in 2008 both reduced the amount of propane in their ?full? tanks sold consumers ..." didn't you get? OPDs have been required since 2002, so it has nothing to do with short fills. A 20# LPG tank is made to HOLD 20#, that is why it has a tare weight stamped on it. There is a void space in excess of the 20# amount to account for the 80% fill. OPDs became necessary because people were filling 20# tanks IN EXCESS of 20#. Wow, I see old Oscar is getting all shook up! Your task was to show that lpg is cheaper to use than gasoline. You haven't proved your point. I guess I was expecting too much of you. I don't think he understands the concept. Sure I do, it's very easy to see that LPG is cheaper per energy unit than gasoline. Are you figureing that 1 gal of propane has about 76% energy compared to 1 gal of gasoline? If propane is $3 gas would have to be over $3.72 to be more expensive to use. -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com, says... wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. ---------------------------- I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill. It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what LPG does. What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion? Here's some numbers for you Propane 91690 btu/gal Gasoline 120000 btu/gal Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/12 9:34 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 19:23:09 -0500, wrote: In , says... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 19:06:23 -0500, wrote: In , says... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 06:35:14 -0500, wrote: In , says... On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 18:36:58 -0500, wrote: LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such as CNG and gasoline. Wrong. I buy 33# forklift tanks for just over $14.00. That is about $2.23/gallon at an 80% fill. Don't argue with me, argue with the website where I got the information, asshole. I don't need to argue with you or any website. I know what I pay, because I get the bills. Difference is, I know what I am talking about and you are googling your ass off trying to prove me wrong. All I did was post some information and showed you the source. You started to argue with me about the information. Go argue with the author. Thus far, you have posted nothing but a string of incorrect foolishness, from the fuel used by the Wrights through the cost of LPG. Maybe you need an accuracy filter on that google account. I have posted information that is different from your experience. You have taken that as a challenge to your manhood. You are either stupid or insecure and possibly both. You posted links to "The History of the Internet" and a bunch of other nutty stuff. You never posted anything at all that addressed your assertion that gasoline was a cheaper fuel than LPG. This apparently has a lot less to do with my manhood than your apparent inebriation or the obvious creeping onset of senility. I never asserted that gasoline was cheaper than LPG. I just posted some information from a website that disagreed with you point. Why would you knowingly post information as factual that you knew was not? Oh, my gosh, are you trolling again? With his every post, of course. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/2012 7:38 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 20:17:49 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. ---------------------------- I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill. I've always thought that was a bit of crooked sleight of hand because I've never known what an LPG "gallon" was. If the "gallon" was established at a relatively low temperature, then in warmer temperatures, a pound would ring up more gallons (dollars) that at a lower temperature. Gasoline (and other liquid fuels) are purchased by stations at a particular API specific gravity and an ASTM chart is used to charge for MASS not volume. 1000 gallons of gasoline bought at lower temperatures will sell as more than 1000 gallons at higher temperatures, since the motorist buys by volume, not weight. The station realizes a blue sky profit. I've never seen the chart for LPG. If ambient temp lowers 10 degrees f then you gain 1.5% in propane weight per gallon. -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com, says... wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. ---------------------------- I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill. It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what LPG does. What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion? Here's some numbers for you Propane 91690 btu/gal Gasoline 120000 btu/gal Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer? -- O M G |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article ,
says... On 3/8/2012 11:15 PM, Califbill wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. ----------------------------- You seemed to be Math challenged. $3 a gallon is not $3 a pound. Around here the tank exchange is about $18 and they are not full fill. Where is the benefit of tank exchange when propane stations seem to be everywhere? When you need to grill a steak at 2:30 AM and you have no gas you can trade your tank in for a "full" one at your local 24 hour convenience store. Or, you can swap tanks with your neighbor and hope he is asleep. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
|
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article m,
says... On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote: On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com, says... wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. ---------------------------- I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill. It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what LPG does. What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion? Here's some numbers for you Propane 91690 btu/gal Gasoline 120000 btu/gal Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer? The fact that gasoline has 1/3 more energy than propane per gallon has him baffled. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/2012 5:30 PM, BAR wrote:
In web.com, says... On 3/8/2012 11:15 PM, Califbill wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. ----------------------------- You seemed to be Math challenged. $3 a gallon is not $3 a pound. Around here the tank exchange is about $18 and they are not full fill. Where is the benefit of tank exchange when propane stations seem to be everywhere? When you need to grill a steak at 2:30 AM and you have no gas you can trade your tank in for a "full" one at your local 24 hour convenience store. Or, you can swap tanks with your neighbor and hope he is asleep. Are you arguing with someone who can't see the benefit of trucking in filled tanks as opposed to running a filling station? LOL!!! |
Told you the Volt was dead...
On 3/9/2012 5:33 PM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com, says... On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote: On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com, says... wrote in message ... On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote: On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill" wrote: wrote in message ... 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. 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. $3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax. I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really costs? And what the markup is. Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50 Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00 per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without control of density, is pretty lame. In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities. ---------------------------- I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill. It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what LPG does. What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion? Here's some numbers for you Propane 91690 btu/gal Gasoline 120000 btu/gal Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer? The fact that gasoline has 1/3 more energy than propane per gallon has him baffled. No it doesn't. Some folks are not happy unless they are fighting... I saw a lot of that with young drunk couples when I was a kid. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:34 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com