|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Nov 11, 2014 11:45:00 GMT -6
You guys should check this out. Costs 7 bucks for the same mileage as a 100 bucks worth of fuel. Or, if your lucky enough to be near one of Tesla's public charge ports, it's free to charge the car. This may change a few things. www.teslamotors.com/models |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 11, 2014 12:10:24 GMT -6
Whenever someone talks about electric cars, I have to speak up a bit.
It's really a big show they put on about electric being cleaner, etc.
The fact is that it's not. It's actually much more dirty, currently (pun intended).
The modern gasoline engine, when properly maintained is around 75-80% efficient. The proper stoichiometric ratio of pure gasoline and oxygen produces little hydrocarbon waste, especially through a catalytic converter. Mostly it's CO2 and water (water vapor is actually the most potent greenhouse gas, not CO2 or NH4). Older engines and those which are not running correctly will have increasing hydrocarbon output and increased CO emissions.
Anyway, you can consider the 20% inefficiency the same as emissions.
A coal or oil fired power plant is around 40-60% efficient.
High tension power lines (the main form of electric transmission) are around 30-40% efficient. Yes, they waste 60-70% of the power transmitted from the power plant.
60% of 40% is 24%
The power that charges your vehicle has a net efficiency of 24% compared to the 75% efficiency of a gasoline engine.
So yes, it may cost less in dollars, but it costs more in emissions somewhere else..
Now I'm not a global warming believer, but I do believe in being practical. Tesla, and others, are essentially allowing people to believe that they are helping the environment, when they are actually hurting it more..
What we need more is superconducting power lines first, and then better power generation, like thorium fuel.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Nov 11, 2014 13:02:59 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Nov 11, 2014 13:29:50 GMT -6
Whenever someone talks about electric cars, I have to speak up a bit. It's really a big show they put on about electric being cleaner, etc. The fact is that it's not. It's actually much more dirty, currently (pun intended). The modern gasoline engine, when properly maintained is around 75-80% efficient. The proper stoichiometric ratio of pure gasoline and oxygen produces little hydrocarbon waste, especially through a catalytic converter. Mostly it's CO2 and water (water vapor is actually the most potent greenhouse gas, not CO2 or NH4). Older engines and those which are not running correctly will have increasing hydrocarbon output and increased CO emissions. Anyway, you can consider the 20% inefficiency the same as emissions. A coal or oil fired power plant is around 40-60% efficient. High tension power lines (the main form of electric transmission) are around 30-40% efficient. Yes, they waste 60-70% of the power transmitted from the power plant. 60% of 40% is 24% The power that charges your vehicle has a net efficiency of 24% compared to the 75% efficiency of a gasoline engine. So yes, it may cost less in dollars, but it costs more in emissions somewhere else.. Now I'm not a global warming believer, but I do believe in being practical. Tesla, and others, are essentially allowing people to believe that they are helping the environment, when they are actually hurting it more.. What we need more is superconducting power lines first, and then better power generation, like thorium fuel. i don't disagree entirely, but the cost of implementing superconducting lines would raise taxes big time, we should be working toward renewables wind, solar, as well as nuclear  , and if we put the electric car in context, it's a great idea, the power is in the grid no matter what, the consumables have already been consumed and emitted, slow charging your car off the grid starting at 2:30 am is a good personal cost saving idea, and there is no after the fact emissions, it would actually have a major positive impact on the environment if everyone did it, which everyone will before long(i predict). |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Nov 11, 2014 13:53:49 GMT -6
I say we turn Alabama into a huge oil field.
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Nov 11, 2014 13:57:41 GMT -6
I say we mine more coal...
With electric machinery...
|
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 11, 2014 13:58:27 GMT -6
My son in law has a Tesla. All I can say is that it is so cool to get in a car that is completely silent, and then get pinned to the back of my seat when he kicks that sucker in. It is fast as hell.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Nov 11, 2014 14:09:02 GMT -6
I say we turn Alabama into a huge oil field. would the slick look red from an airplane? |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 11, 2014 14:09:59 GMT -6
You know, what I find fascinating is that we speak of coal and oil as be non-renewable, and we speak of solar as being renewable.
Yet, when the sun dies, it'll be gone for good.
Oil is/was made from decaying matter, so in a couple million years after we're gone, there will be more oil and coal.
So that means that solar is not renewable, and coal/oil actually are!
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 11, 2014 14:12:11 GMT -6
Whenever someone talks about electric cars, I have to speak up a bit. It's really a big show they put on about electric being cleaner, etc. The fact is that it's not. It's actually much more dirty, currently (pun intended). The modern gasoline engine, when properly maintained is around 75-80% efficient. The proper stoichiometric ratio of pure gasoline and oxygen produces little hydrocarbon waste, especially through a catalytic converter. Mostly it's CO2 and water (water vapor is actually the most potent greenhouse gas, not CO2 or NH4). Older engines and those which are not running correctly will have increasing hydrocarbon output and increased CO emissions. Anyway, you can consider the 20% inefficiency the same as emissions. A coal or oil fired power plant is around 40-60% efficient. High tension power lines (the main form of electric transmission) are around 30-40% efficient. Yes, they waste 60-70% of the power transmitted from the power plant. 60% of 40% is 24% The power that charges your vehicle has a net efficiency of 24% compared to the 75% efficiency of a gasoline engine. So yes, it may cost less in dollars, but it costs more in emissions somewhere else.. Now I'm not a global warming believer, but I do believe in being practical. Tesla, and others, are essentially allowing people to believe that they are helping the environment, when they are actually hurting it more.. What we need more is superconducting power lines first, and then better power generation, like thorium fuel. i don't disagree entirely, but the cost of implementing superconducting lines would raise taxes big time, we should be working toward renewables wind, solar, as well as nuclear , and if we put the electric car in context, it's a great idea, the power is in the grid no matter what, the consumables have already been consumed and emitted, slow charging your car off the grid starting at 2:30 am is a good personal cost saving idea, and there is no after the fact emissions, it would actually have a major positive impact on the environment if everyone did it, which everyone will before long(i predict). Since most power transmission lines are privately owned, no taxes will be hurt. However, the bill you receive will reflect it. But.. If they build more power plants, they already charge you extra to pay for them, so if they simply exchange some lines instead of building more plants, then the net effect is zero for all involved.. But that's beside the point. We don't have anything even remotely close to being superconducting enough to use yet. Maybe in another 50 years.. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 11, 2014 14:13:12 GMT -6
I say we turn Alabama into a huge oil field. Since I live in Georgia, I am not opposed to this. |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Nov 11, 2014 14:18:12 GMT -6
Whenever someone talks about electric cars, I have to speak up a bit. It's really a big show they put on about electric being cleaner, etc. The fact is that it's not. It's actually much more dirty, currently (pun intended). The modern gasoline engine, when properly maintained is around 75-80% efficient. The proper stoichiometric ratio of pure gasoline and oxygen produces little hydrocarbon waste, especially through a catalytic converter. Mostly it's CO2 and water (water vapor is actually the most potent greenhouse gas, not CO2 or NH4). Older engines and those which are not running correctly will have increasing hydrocarbon output and increased CO emissions. Anyway, you can consider the 20% inefficiency the same as emissions. A coal or oil fired power plant is around 40-60% efficient. High tension power lines (the main form of electric transmission) are around 30-40% efficient. Yes, they waste 60-70% of the power transmitted from the power plant. 60% of 40% is 24% The power that charges your vehicle has a net efficiency of 24% compared to the 75% efficiency of a gasoline engine. So yes, it may cost less in dollars, but it costs more in emissions somewhere else.. Now I'm not a global warming believer, but I do believe in being practical. Tesla, and others, are essentially allowing people to believe that they are helping the environment, when they are actually hurting it more.. What we need more is superconducting power lines first, and then better power generation, like thorium fuel. Definitely WAY off topic, but something of great interest to me also. See This: www.irwaonline.org/EWEB/upload/may_web_SuperConductor.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Nov 11, 2014 14:22:23 GMT -6
You know, what I find fascinating is that we speak of coal and oil as be non-renewable, and we speak of solar as being renewable. Yet, when the sun dies, it'll be gone for good. Oil is/was made from decaying matter, so in a couple million years after we're gone, there will be more oil and coal. So that means that solar is not renewable, and coal/oil actually are! dude, you should be a politician with that one! |
|
|
|
Post by odyssey76 on Nov 11, 2014 14:35:01 GMT -6
Whenever someone talks about electric cars, I have to speak up a bit. It's really a big show they put on about electric being cleaner, etc. The fact is that it's not. It's actually much more dirty, currently (pun intended). The modern gasoline engine, when properly maintained is around 75-80% efficient. The proper stoichiometric ratio of pure gasoline and oxygen produces little hydrocarbon waste, especially through a catalytic converter. Mostly it's CO2 and water (water vapor is actually the most potent greenhouse gas, not CO2 or NH4). Older engines and those which are not running correctly will have increasing hydrocarbon output and increased CO emissions. Anyway, you can consider the 20% inefficiency the same as emissions. A coal or oil fired power plant is around 40-60% efficient. High tension power lines (the main form of electric transmission) are around 30-40% efficient. Yes, they waste 60-70% of the power transmitted from the power plant. 60% of 40% is 24% The power that charges your vehicle has a net efficiency of 24% compared to the 75% efficiency of a gasoline engine. So yes, it may cost less in dollars, but it costs more in emissions somewhere else.. Now I'm not a global warming believer, but I do believe in being practical. Tesla, and others, are essentially allowing people to believe that they are helping the environment, when they are actually hurting it more.. What we need more is superconducting power lines first, and then better power generation, like thorium fuel. i don't disagree entirely, but the cost of implementing superconducting lines would raise taxes big time, we should be working toward renewables wind, solar, as well as nuclear , and if we put the electric car in context, it's a great idea, the power is in the grid no matter what, the consumables have already been consumed and emitted, slow charging your car off the grid starting at 2:30 am is a good personal cost saving idea, and there is no after the fact emissions, it would actually have a major positive impact on the environment if everyone did it, which everyone will before long(i predict). Tony, you're right on with the renewable energy solution. I do a lot of solar panel (electricity and hot water) installations and more and more customers are asking for receptacles in their garages for their electric powered cars. Some people who don't have electric powered cars have even asked us to put in charging stations just to provision for the future. The flip side is these PV installations are very expensive. At this point your basically putting in PV not because it will save you money (unless your entirely off the grid) but because you have the money and you're trying to be environmentally conscientious. My dream is to have a little solar powered studio out here in the woods. Some day...... |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 11, 2014 14:37:43 GMT -6
Whenever someone talks about electric cars, I have to speak up a bit. It's really a big show they put on about electric being cleaner, etc. The fact is that it's not. It's actually much more dirty, currently (pun intended). The modern gasoline engine, when properly maintained is around 75-80% efficient. The proper stoichiometric ratio of pure gasoline and oxygen produces little hydrocarbon waste, especially through a catalytic converter. Mostly it's CO2 and water (water vapor is actually the most potent greenhouse gas, not CO2 or NH4). Older engines and those which are not running correctly will have increasing hydrocarbon output and increased CO emissions. Anyway, you can consider the 20% inefficiency the same as emissions. A coal or oil fired power plant is around 40-60% efficient. High tension power lines (the main form of electric transmission) are around 30-40% efficient. Yes, they waste 60-70% of the power transmitted from the power plant. 60% of 40% is 24% The power that charges your vehicle has a net efficiency of 24% compared to the 75% efficiency of a gasoline engine. So yes, it may cost less in dollars, but it costs more in emissions somewhere else.. Now I'm not a global warming believer, but I do believe in being practical. Tesla, and others, are essentially allowing people to believe that they are helping the environment, when they are actually hurting it more.. What we need more is superconducting power lines first, and then better power generation, like thorium fuel. Definitely WAY off topic, but something of great interest to me also. See This: www.irwaonline.org/EWEB/upload/may_web_SuperConductor.pdf That's pretty cool. There are some interesting caveats I can think of though. I've read a bit that says that high-temp superconductors are starting to be realized, so maybe in a few years we'll see better options. |
|
|
|
Post by unit7 on Nov 11, 2014 14:42:08 GMT -6
I say we turn Alabama into a huge oil field. Since I live in Georgia, I am not opposed to this. Sweden says OK too. |
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Nov 11, 2014 15:01:45 GMT -6
You know, what I find fascinating is that we speak of coal and oil as be non-renewable, and we speak of solar as being renewable. Yet, when the sun dies, it'll be gone for good. Oil is/was made from decaying matter, so in a couple million years after we're gone, there will be more oil and coal. So that means that solar is not renewable, and coal/oil actually are! You should run for president svart! You'd get every vote in coal country that's for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Nov 11, 2014 15:22:41 GMT -6
i don't disagree entirely, but the cost of implementing superconducting lines would raise taxes big time, we should be working toward renewables wind, solar, as well as nuclear , and if we put the electric car in context, it's a great idea, the power is in the grid no matter what, the consumables have already been consumed and emitted, slow charging your car off the grid starting at 2:30 am is a good personal cost saving idea, and there is no after the fact emissions, it would actually have a major positive impact on the environment if everyone did it, which everyone will before long(i predict). Tony, you're right on with the renewable energy solution. I do a lot of solar panel (electricity and hot water) installations and more and more customers are asking for receptacles in their garages for their electric powered cars. Some people who don't have electric powered cars have even asked us to put in charging stations just to provision for the future. The flip side is these PV installations are very expensive. At this point your basically putting in PV not because it will save you money (unless your entirely off the grid) but because you have the money and you're trying to be environmentally conscientious. My dream is to have a little solar powered studio out here in the woods. Some day...... a customer of mine put in a solar system(lol, reads funny, his name is God 8), it was $18,000, i saw their first bill last week, -$5.00, awesome, of course we live in sunny SoCal...so? |
|
|
|
Post by odyssey76 on Nov 11, 2014 17:35:15 GMT -6
Tony, you're right on with the renewable energy solution. I do a lot of solar panel (electricity and hot water) installations and more and more customers are asking for receptacles in their garages for their electric powered cars. Some people who don't have electric powered cars have even asked us to put in charging stations just to provision for the future. The flip side is these PV installations are very expensive. At this point your basically putting in PV not because it will save you money (unless your entirely off the grid) but because you have the money and you're trying to be environmentally conscientious. My dream is to have a little solar powered studio out here in the woods. Some day...... a customer of mine put in a solar system(lol, reads funny, his name is God 8), it was $18,000, i saw their first bill last week, -$5.00, awesome, of course we live in sunny SoCal...so? Yes, you'll definitely save on your electric bill every month. I was speaking more to the initial investment vs. payback over time. You will eventually break even and get ahead if you stay living in that house long enough for sure. Don't know if most people do? Geographics also does factor in. I'm sure it is a quicker return on your investment in So. Cal vs. the Northeast. |
|
|
|
Post by mobeach on Nov 11, 2014 18:06:13 GMT -6
Yes, it's like financing a Jaguar. I know someone with a Tesla though, nice car! |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,099 
|
Post by ericn on Nov 11, 2014 18:10:56 GMT -6
I loved the spyder, and if I had the cash would buy the sedan in a heartbeat! That thing is a rocket!
|
|
|
|
Post by ElGato on Nov 11, 2014 18:38:23 GMT -6
I guess until the power doesn't come from renewable energies and batteries, distribution of energy, etc. get more developed, it's just moving pollution from one place to another. But I'm positive and think that science would make this happen shortly.
If someone had told me 10 years ago that one of the Canary Islands would be powered 100% on green energy I wouldn't have believed it and now look, the first island in the world that is completely sustainable on its own. And apparently it all started because the "rulers" of this small island didn't get along at all with the oil suppliers from the other larger islands, so they decided to cut the oil flow. Simple as that.
|
|
, and if we put the electric car in context, it's a great idea, the power is in the grid no matter what, the consumables have already been consumed and emitted, slow charging your car off the grid starting at 2:30 am is a good personal cost saving idea, and there is no after the fact emissions, it would actually have a major positive impact on the environment if everyone did it, which everyone will before long(i predict).
