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

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

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.

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.

On 3/9/12 8:01 PM, JustWait wrote:
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.


And it became your model for being the "tween-ager" you are now.

In article , says...

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.

Show me where I'm wrong. Per energy unit, propane is cheaper.

On 3/10/2012 9:58 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says...

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.

Show me where I'm wrong. Per energy unit, propane is cheaper.

You could persuade me if you proved your point.

--
O M G

In article ,
says...

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.

If you "plug in the prices" you find that LPG is indeed cheaper. Prove
me wrong.

On 3/10/2012 9:58 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

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.

If you "plug in the prices" you find that LPG is indeed cheaper. Prove
me wrong.

How much cheaper?

--
O M G

"BAR" wrote in message ...

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.


--------------------------------------
Is there an efficiency difference in the burn of LPG and gasoline in a car?