Another Way of Looking At It... - Page 2 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 05-03-2007, 12:08 PM   #11
Registered Member
 
omgwtfbyobbq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,516
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03 View Post
Imagine what happens tomorrow if just half of the nation switched over to electric cars... We'd be having a power consumption crisis until the infrastructure is beefed up considerably :/ This is one reason why I think MorningGaser's scenario could be rather realistic
It depends on how it's implemented. If all we use are really, really high voltage quick charging stations, then yeah, the grid would peak even more during the day. But if we kept costs down and simply used the home grid hook-up for most charging, likely on a timer, so that the vast majority of EVs would be sucking down juice when the rest of the grid is mostly idle, we could convert ~80% of our fleet to plug-ins or even EVs. There's also the potential for shallow cycling of a plugged in EV fleet during peaks, such as CA heat waves. Electricity is so damn expensive, that it'd probably be worthwhile for the PHEV/EV owner and the state.
__________________

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaTwo
I think if i could get that type of FE i would have no problem driving a dildo shaped car.
omgwtfbyobbq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 12:24 PM   #12
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 682
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by MorningGaser View Post
Nope, this is not a good solution....the power plants that generate the electricty for charging those batteries burn fossil fuels...so you see, this solution is not complete....in order for this to work, to get us off fossil fuels, the electricity generated by the plants that power the electrical recipticals used to charge the batteries must not burn oil, and coal.

...so even if ALL cars today were electric, this will not be a complete solution unless the power plants use some other means to gen electricity.
Well, DUH! Why didn't I think of that? Maybe perpetual motion generators in each car would power the batteries.

Not to be TOO sacastic, but of course the electric power needs to come from somewhere. Society gets to choose which source. The only reasonable non carbon source is nuclear. Are you pro-nuclear?
__________________

__________________
Capitalism: The cream rises. Socialism: The scum rises.
Sludgy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 01:08 PM   #13
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 125
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sludgy View Post
Well, DUH! Why didn't I think of that? Maybe perpetual motion generators in each car would power the batteries.

Not to be TOO sacastic, but of course the electric power needs to come from somewhere. Society gets to choose which source. The only reasonable non carbon source is nuclear. Are you pro-nuclear?
I'm pro safe-Nuclear, if it is even possible....I think in the end, Nuclear is an unavoidable solution.
MorningGaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 01:47 PM   #14
Registered Member
 
rvanengen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 230
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sludgy View Post
Well, DUH! Why didn't I think of that? Maybe perpetual motion generators in each car would power the batteries.

Not to be TOO sacastic, but of course the electric power needs to come from somewhere. Society gets to choose which source. The only reasonable non carbon source is nuclear. Are you pro-nuclear?
Absolutely...let's go nuclear...get some good plans and designs going and catch back up with the rest of the industrialized world for electricity generation! :-)
__________________
-- Randall


McIntyre's First Law: "Under the right circumstances, anything I tell you may be wrong."

O'Brien's First Corollary to McIntyre's First Law: "I don't know what the right circumstances are, either."



rvanengen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 01:53 PM   #15
Supporting Member
 
cfg83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,779
Country: United States
MorningGaser -

Quote:
Originally Posted by MorningGaser View Post
I'm pro safe-Nuclear, if it is even possible....I think in the end, Nuclear is an unavoidable solution.
If you can solve the waste problem, then I'll back you up, but I haven't seen a any real solution yet. It can be argued that nuclear waste is the ultimate crime against future generations.

CarloSW2
__________________
Old School SW2 EPA ... New School Civic EPA :

What's your EPA MPG? http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp
cfg83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 04:52 PM   #16
Registered Member
 
trebuchet03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 812
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to trebuchet03
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sludgy View Post
Not to be TOO sacastic, but of course the electric power needs to come from somewhere. Society gets to choose which source. The only reasonable non carbon source is nuclear. Are you pro-nuclear?
I absolutely am Which drink do you want? The labeled one or one that's a bit hazy on what's in it. Drink the labeled one - poison control can manage and treat -- drink the unlabeled one, lots of pain and guessing until a solution comes around.

Nuclear waste is manageable and there's a lot less... FF waste is manageable too, but it's much more costly and still isn't completely contained. If we catch up to France, there will be even less waste as WE don't even recycle nuclear fuel - they do.
__________________
Time is the best teacher. Unfortunately it kills all its students.


Bike Miles (Begin Aug. 20 - '07): ~433.2 miles

11/12
trebuchet03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2007, 06:44 PM   #17
Team OPEC Busters!
 
GasSavers_Brock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 196
Country: United States
Just so everyone knows the oil refineries, processing plants and fuel transportation is the single largest consumer of electricity in the US. Darell said he could drive about 30 miles on the electricity it takes to make one gallon of gas in is stock Toyota Rav 4 RV.
GasSavers_Brock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2007, 05:49 AM   #18
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 290
Country: United States
trebuchet03: Yeah, that is one thing that worries me. Hospitals can not run at all without technology. Even having the temperatures fluctuate 3-5 degrees can make a doctor cancel a surgery; and trust me, I have seen it happen many times.

zpiloto: I would say that list is just a bit lacking in content. To widen the problem we are looking at (things made from oil) to something broader... think of all the things that technology had a hand in making. Guaranteed you can't think of a single thing in the world that isn't in some way altered or produced by some sort of technology. If there is any input along the way that even somewhat relies on technology then that item is technology dependent.

Sludgy: You are missing the whole picture I believe. While these cars may well in fact be 100% operable on electricity alone, their production IS NOT! They require many oil-based products while they are in the assembly and production phase. All automobiles have a "barrels required per unit" (or something along those lines) that are required to produce them.

cfg83: Thank you very much. These damned fools with absolutely no foresight keep cheering for nuclear. I can't remember what the halflife of that **** is, but it is long enough that NO ONE COULD EVER EVEN COME CLOSE to estimating the future impact that it will have. It is a ridiculous solution that could never be researched enough to possibly weigh the pros and cons and come to a decent solution. A statistical impossibility.
Erdrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2007, 06:25 AM   #19
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 682
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erdrick View Post
Sludgy: You are missing the whole picture I believe. While these cars may well in fact be 100% operable on electricity alone, their production IS NOT! They require many oil-based products while they are in the assembly and production phase. All automobiles have a "barrels required per unit" (or something along those lines) that are required to produce them.
At one time, cars were made without significant petroleum input.

Manufacturers, until about the 1930's, used coal for smelting iron ore and making steel (same as today), wood and leather. Today manufacturers use oil principally to make plastic parts. But even old Henry Ford himself tried soybeans to make plastics. Even today the electricity used in the Midwest car factories comes from coal, not oil.

Oil is not necessary to make cars, but it is cheap and convenient, and that is why manufacturers use it. When it becomes scarce, substitutes will be found.
__________________
Capitalism: The cream rises. Socialism: The scum rises.
Sludgy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2007, 06:26 AM   #20
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,138
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock View Post
Darell said he could drive about 30 miles on the electricity it takes to make one gallon of gas in is stock Toyota Rav 4 RV.
Do the math and I think that you will see that that cannot be correct. How many kWh would it take to go 30 miles?
__________________

__________________
Bill in Houston is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

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


Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.