| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#82
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
"iBoaterer" wrote in message
... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... http://www.sfgate.com/business/artic...Smooth-silent- fast-3706414.php ----------------------------------------------------------------- The fiscal conservatives are saying why is the government throwing money at a car only the rich can afford? If you want to crank up the electric car market, look at subsidies for ZAP and other cheap around town cars. Not one where the average purchaser has a $250,000 Adjusted Gross Income. Again, as with all new technology, at first, it's expensive. ------------------------------------ New Technology? there were about 20 electric car companies in 1920. Got 30-50 miles on a charge then. How about supporting a $2000 electric car? Yes, new technology. Compare the Tesla to those built in 1920 and get back with me. -------------------------------------------------- comparison. Still costs 3x a gasoline car. Gets a few more miles per charge. Still uses fossil fuel to get charged. Better looking, more comfortable. 1920, did not get taxpayer subsidy. Nastier stuff for the battery. Lots more fossil fuel to build the fluff that makes the car look so cool. Still good for around town. Want to go on a 300 mile trip? Plug in a fossil fuel powered internal combustion engine. Again, and again, you fail to understand that new technology is expensive at first, but then gets cheaper and cheaper. That's just the way it is. As crude as the model T was, it would cost $14,000 in today's dollars. That isn't cheap for something that crude. ----------------------------------------------- That $14k was not that crude, and was fairly reasonable in the time. Just like a $14k car would be reasonable now. We are not against Technology. Hell I live in a very nice neighborhood and have a very comfortable retirement because of Technology. But the government tossing $30,000 of taxpayer money at Tesla per car is not investing in Tech, that is paying off campaign donors. How many other electric vehicles could the 90% buy if you give a $10,000 subsidy to a Tango or other electric town car. You are going to need a Hybrid for any extended trips. |
|
#83
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
"iBoaterer" wrote in message
... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article m, says... On 7/15/2012 9:19 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article om, says... On 7/15/2012 8:29 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 11:13:03 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: http://www.sfgate.com/business/artic...Smooth-silent- fast-3706414.php "Model S prices range all the way from $57,400 to $105,400 before state and federal incentives. The silver sedan I tried would cost about $70,000." Yeah this is a car for the masses. Make sure you read up on the "bricking" problem that Tesla's have. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/04/au...tery-Failures- Make-Bricking-a-Buzzword.html?pagewanted=all And no gasoline cars have problems right? You do realize don't you, that this is new technology, R&D is ongoing. What sort of new technology have you invested in? Actually quite a bit. Most of my stocks are in technology. YOU NEED TO DIVERSIFY Um, I never said that all of my investable money is in stocks..... What I said, and you failed to comprehend is that most of my STOCKS are in technology. Look at NENE for one. -------------------------------------- IMO You are a fool to have most of your stocks in tech. Why? Most "fools" are too stupid to understand that oil is a very finite resource and we MUST find energy somewhere else. OH, and I suppose someone that has tech stocks like Apple, HP, NENE, etc. are fools???? ------------------------------------------------- Nope, to have most of your stocks in tech is bad. Just go back to the Tech Bubble. |
|
#84
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
"iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... "iBoaterer" wrote in message ... In article , says... In article om, says... On 7/14/2012 12:55 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article m, says... On 7/14/2012 11:13 AM, iBoaterer wrote: http://www.sfgate.com/business/artic...Smooth-silent- fast-3706414.php How much is it? I want one. But it doesn't use fossil fuel, how could you possibly drive one? Also, it's new technology, and in conservative's minds, that's a bad thing. Way ahead of you Bozo. I have 2 electric vehicles already. Where does the electricity come from? 45% of the electricity generated in the US comes from fossil fuels. Yes, but the point you hard core righties fail to understand is that the equivalent fuel mileage is around 100 miles per gallon. If we get off of our asses and build more non fossil fuel electric infrastructure that number will go down. But stupid people are just too afraid of getting off of fossil fuel. ------------------------------------------------- Probably a lot less than 100 mpg. There is loss in the lines getting the power to your house. About 8% now. Loss in the charging equipment (heat) and loss in the battery itself in charging. Probably maybe 70% tops efficiency in charging the car. And then loss in the car discharging the battery. How many KWH at the power plant required for the car to go 50 miles? No, it's 100 mpg. --------------------------------- That's an "equivalent" rating based on the average cost of electricity as it produced today for current usages. There are over 250 million cars on the road in the USA. If a quarter to half of them were replaced with electrics that require electricity generation for charging, what do think will happen to the cost of electricity and to it's "equivalent" rating in terms of mpg? |
|
#85
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
On Jul 15, 8:22*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"iBoaterer" *wrote in message ... In article , says... "iBoaterer" *wrote in message ... In article , says... In article om, says... On 7/14/2012 12:55 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In article m, says... On 7/14/2012 11:13 AM, iBoaterer wrote: http://www.sfgate.com/business/artic...Smooth-silent- fast-3706414.php How much is it? I want one. But it doesn't use fossil fuel, how could you possibly drive one? Also, it's new technology, and in conservative's minds, that's a bad thing. Way ahead of you Bozo. I have 2 electric vehicles already. Where does the electricity come from? 45% of the electricity generated in the US comes from fossil fuels. Yes, but the point you hard core righties fail to understand is that the equivalent fuel mileage is around 100 miles per gallon. If we get off of our asses and build more non fossil fuel electric infrastructure that number will go down. But stupid people are just too afraid of getting off of fossil fuel. ------------------------------------------------- Probably a lot less than 100 mpg. *There is loss in the lines getting the power to your house. *About 8% now. *Loss in the charging equipment (heat) and loss in the battery itself in charging. *Probably maybe 70% tops efficiency in charging the car. *And then loss in the car discharging the battery. *How many KWH at the power plant required for the car to go 50 miles? No, it's 100 mpg. --------------------------------- That's an "equivalent" rating based on the average cost of electricity as it produced today for current usages. * *There are over 250 million cars on the road in the USA. * If a quarter to half of them were replaced with electrics that require electricity generation for charging, what do think will happen to the cost of electricity and to it's "equivalent" rating in terms of mpg? Most don't think of that, Richard. Electric power stations are fairly maxing as it is to keep up with today's electrical demands, especially for this boiling hot summers air conditioning. Honestly with people trying to stay cool, I'm surprised there hasn't been power outages in my area, and we have very reliable service. |
|
#86
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
wrote in message ...
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 18:10:56 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: ----------------------------------------------- That $14k was not that crude, and was fairly reasonable in the time. Just like a $14k car would be reasonable now. We are not against Technology. Hell I live in a very nice neighborhood and have a very comfortable retirement because of Technology. But the government tossing $30,000 of taxpayer money at Tesla per car is not investing in Tech, that is paying off campaign donors. How many other electric vehicles could the 90% buy if you give a $10,000 subsidy to a Tango or other electric town car. You are going to need a Hybrid for any extended trips. I have been interested in an electric car for 15 years, since I retired and I don't need a long distance car. I still can't get the numbers even close and that was getting a kit to convert a car I already own. It is the battery. (also the "li-ion"s share of the cost of the Tesla) Even using a very mature technology like lead acid, you can't get close to the price of gasoline, even at $5 a gallon. When Car and driver ran the numbers on a Volt, they figured out you do a lot better with a Cruze. They really need to get the battery cost down before this will make sense. Until then, electric cars will be a rich man's toy that the tax payer is subsidizing, much like all of these alternate energy schemes. -------------------------------------------------- In Europe the small cars of choice are diesel. Both because of the tax differential on fuel and the fact they get 60-80 miles per gallon in say VW Jetta TDI. Even the Smart Car in the US is required to be gas and only gets about 40 mpg. http://green.autoblog.com/2012/02/21...s-teslas-elon/ It is now the $300-500 range. Probably cheaper in Flooded lead acid batteries, but lots more weight and displacement. |
|
#87
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
wrote in message ...
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 18:02:43 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: NENE would not be an investment. Would either be a gamble or something to possible play with on a lark. Is a penny stock basically. Not enough to put much real money in to it. If you sold it in December it was a nice trade. If you bought it in December "Farewell and adieu to you spanish ladies...." ------------------------------------------------------------ It too small of a market stock. I have most of my stocks in the 3%+ dividend range. I do own High tech, as I have both purchased it and got it via stock purchase plans of High Tech companies I was an engineer for. Most has not done anywhere as well as the Altria and Healthcare and oil stocks I own. And I am interested in Electric cars a lot. both from being a car guy and also my degree major is Electro-mechanical engineering. Did not design a lot of motors but did do controls for them over the years. Until we get Fusion Power going or decide that we are going to have build modern Fission plants, there will not be enough generating capacity to charge that many electric cars. Plus the premium for higher usage of electricity. If you put in a large home PV power system, you are going to have $20k+ tied up with with tax credits. And you do not want so big of a system as to have zero electric bills as then you have excess generating with very high cost per watt. If you build a PV system, you want enough capacity to get you in to the cheapest tier of power rates. |
|
#88
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
On 7/15/2012 7:18 PM, Tim wrote:
On Jul 15, 8:22 pm, "Eisboch" wrote: That's an "equivalent" rating based on the average cost of electricity as it produced today for current usages. There are over 250 million cars on the road in the USA. If a quarter to half of them were replaced with electrics that require electricity generation for charging, what do think will happen to the cost of electricity and to it's "equivalent" rating in terms of mpg? Most don't think of that, Richard. Electric power stations are fairly maxing as it is to keep up with today's electrical demands, especially for this boiling hot summers air conditioning. Honestly with people trying to stay cool, I'm surprised there hasn't been power outages in my area, and we have very reliable service. Most charging would occur overnight during off-peak hours. |
|
#89
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
|
|
#90
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nope, the right wing says this won't work.
On 7/16/12 8:23 AM, BAR wrote:
In article , says... On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:18:19 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote: Most don't think of that, Richard. Electric power stations are fairly maxing as it is to keep up with today's electrical demands, especially for this boiling hot summers air conditioning. Honestly with people trying to stay cool, I'm surprised there hasn't been power outages in my area, and we have very reliable service. They make the projections based on people charging their car overnight but they also start talking about a charging station in front of every parking place at work ... oops. Talk about paying for parking. Those charging stations all cost money regardless of where they are located. If you pay with your credit card you are going to incur a 4% additional cost. Bertie Robbins...official newsgroup luddite. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Daniels: 'Nope' | General | |||
| Undoubtedly the work of a right wing loon | General | |||
| Right Wing loses, Left Wing Wins Big | General | |||
| temerature gauge won't work. | General | |||
| Nope, it just ain't gonna work Djirkie. | ASA | |||
Linear Mode
