Thread: Electric cars are a pipe dream

  1. #2721
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy T View Post
    Yes and I still say that for simple reason that China has no data on shale resrves of their own.

    Anything they put in their 5 year plan on this is SECONDARY information, mainly from the 5 April 2011 EIA report or some now prehaps from the partnership with the western oil companies who (and only who) Have the technical knowledge required to base prodictions and expectaions you find in the one month old Chinese 5-year plan.

    I spoke of the PRIMARY SOURCE, NOT THE COPIES AND INTERPRETATIONS OF THAT INFORMATION IN SECONDARY SOURCES.
    Not so fast Billy.

    You didn't say it was from Western Oil companies, you SPECIFICALLY said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Billy T
    are all just quoting from the US Gov EIA study report, as I stated
    And that I was wrong and should admit my error, and I will if I am wrong.

    So WHERE IS THIS QUOTE in the EIA report Billy?

  2. #2722
    Please use Sugar Cane Alcohol Billy T's Avatar
    Posts
    19,693
    Quote Originally Posted by adoucette View Post
    Not so fast Billy. You didn't say it was from Western Oil companies, ...
    Yes, initially I said that China´s data came for the EIA´s 5 Ap 2011 report (and noted the my original post on this, was quoted from Morningstar, which also was just quoting from that report, and adding some comments of their own).

    To be more accurate, in a recent post I did acknowledge that the Chinese plan might have some information the Chinese got directly from their partnerships with western oil companies, in the last 12 months. Western oil companies are the primary source of ALL Chinese data on their shale reserves, (mostly via the AIE report) but they may have more recent information than is in the 5Ap11 AIE report that they have shaired with their Chinese partners (I.e. information devloped in the last year may be part of the basis of the Chinese government reports, plans, and announcements.)

    The Chinese reports and 5-year plan are NOT in English so the only thing in them that is a direct quote from the EIA repost is the number 1,275 trillion cubic feet technically recoverable reserves. Everyting else published by China is their translations and interpretations of information they got from the Western sources. I.e. I will admit that what is written in Mandrin (except the 1,275) is not strictly speaking a "quote" of western sources, but that is how most reasonable people would refer to it and I did as they have NO information of their own.
    Last edited by Billy T; 03-18-12 at 09:51 AM.

  3. #2723
    No Billy, the Morningstar report was not just quoting from the EIA report and "adding some of their own".

    It was a Dow Jones report they were quoting from and that was quoting heavily from the Chinese Report. There was ONE TOTAL from the EIA report, and no quotes at all.

    BEIJING (Dow Jones)--China's annual output of shale gas is expected to skyrocket from virtually zero now to 6.5 billion cubic meters in 2015, and to at least 10 times that amount just five years later, helping the country reduce its reliance on dirtier coal and cut its carbon emissions, the government said in a shale gas development plan released Friday. <== That would be the Chinese Govt and the Chinese Plan they are referring to Billy


    China is expected to have identified total exploitable gas reserves of 200 billion cubic meters by 2015 and total proven reserves of 600 billion cubic meters, it said. <== "IT" refers to the Chinese Plan released by the Chinese Govt, not the EIA

    Shale gas output is also forecast to rise dramatically from 2015, to 60 billion-100 billion cubic meters annually by 2020, due to more intensive exploration in the 19 designated exploration areas, the plan said.The five-year plan was drafted by the National Energy Administration and issued by the National Development Reform Commission. <== Those are Chinese plans released by the Chinese Govt agencies Billy, NOT quotes from the EIA

    The targeted 2015 output of 6.5 billion cubic meters would boost China's overall natural gas output by more than 6% from current levels.

    In the plan, the government urges Chinese companies to work with foreign companies and research institutes with expertise in exploring for and exploiting unconventional natural gas resources. <== The Chinese Plan Billy

    It also stressed the environmental benefits of exploiting such resources. Using just 6.5 billion cubic meters of gas to generate electricity instead of the coal needed to generate an equivalent amount would cut annual emissions of carbon dioxide by 14 million metric tons, sulfur dioxide by 115,000 tons and nitrogen oxides by 43,000 tons. <== Again, "IT", refers to the Chinese Plan Billy, not the EIA.

    China is pushing hard to increase its use of natural gas and reduce its dependency on coal, which it currently uses to generate around 70% of its electricity. But large-scale exploitation of shale gas reserves has yet to begin.

    China has an estimated 25.08 trillion cubic meters of potentially recoverable shale gas reserves, domestic media reported this month, citing the Ministry of Land and Resources. <== That's a Chinese agency Billy.

    The U.S. Energy Information Administration last year said that China has an estimated 1,275 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable shale gas reserves, which would make it the largest repository of shale gas in the world. <== This is the ONLY part of this article that comes from the EIA report



    Domestic and foreign energy majors working in China hope to replicate the huge increase in shale gas output seen in the U.S. over the past decade. U.S. companies pioneered the technique known as hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," enabling them to extract previously inaccessible gas from rock formations. The result was a massive increase in recoverable natural gas reserves, sharply higher output and tumbling gas prices.

    PetroChina Co. (PTR) and Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSB) said in December that they had found gas after drilling their first shale gas evaluation well at a block in Sichuan province. Other companies, including Total SA (TOT) and Chevron Corp. (CVX), are also seeking shale gas reserves in China.<==So YES, they do have Domestic agencies and drilling companies and yes they have plenty of domestically produced data
    So once again, NO Billy, these plans are NOT "quoted from" that EIA report as you claimed and you have not backed up a single one of your subsequent claims that all of the info comes from Western sources either (the article you linked to certainly doesn't make that claim). As the article points out they do indeed have Domestic Oil companies and Chinese Energy agencies , and of course they do this type of research.

    Indeed from the EIA report you mention disagrees with your assessment:

    China’s Ministry of Land and Resources (MLR) established a National Gas Shale Research Center in August 2010. PetroChina, Sinochem and CNOOC are initiating exploration in China, as are several foreign oil companies. MLR recently (October 28, 2010) announced plans to offer six shale gas exploration blocks within the next month. Bidding will be limited to four Chinese companies (PetroChina, Sinopec, CNOOC, and Shanxi Yanchang Petroleum Group). Foreign companieswould be allowed to cooperate with bid winners. MLR envisions opening blocks to foreign bidding eventually, but no timetable has been announced.
    And here are the references for the Chinese gas reserves that the EIA report cited, also blowing your myth about all info comes from Western sources out of the water:

    1 Zou, C.N, Tao, S.Z., Tang, P., Gao, X.H., Yang, Z., Guo, Q.L., Dong, D.Z., and Li, X.J., 2010. “Geological Features and Exploration for Tight Sand Gas, Shale Gas and Other Unconventional Oil/Gas Resources in China.” AAPG Search and
    Discovery Article #90108, 2010 AAPG International Convention and Exhibition, September 12-15, 2010 Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

    2 Wang, H.Y., Wang, G.J., Liu, H.L., Zhao, Q., and Liu, D.X., 2009. “Development Trend of Unconventional Gas Resources in China.” International Gas Union, 24th World Gas Conference, Buenos Aires, Argentina, October 5-9.

    3 Zhu, G.Y., Zhang, S.C., Liang, Y.B., and Li, Q.R., 2007. “The Genesis of H2S in the Weiyuan Gas Field, Sichuan Basin and Its Evidence.” Chinese Science Bulletin, vol. 52, no. 10, p. 1394-1404.

    4 Cai, C.F., Li, K.K., Ma, A.L., Zhang, C.M., Xu, Z.M., Worden, R.H., Wu, G.H., Zhang, B.S.,and Chen, L.X., 2009. “Distinguishing Cambrian from Lower Ordovician Source Rocks : Evidence from Sulfur Isotopes and Biomarkers in the Tarim Basin.” Organic Geochemistry, vol. 40, p. 755-768.

    5 Li, S.M., Pang, X.Q., Jin, Z.J., Yang, H.J., Xiao, A.Y., Gu, Q.Y., and Zhang, B.S., 2010. “Petroleum Source in the Tazhong Uplift, Tarim Basin: New Insights from Geochemical and Fluid Inclusion Data.” Organic Geochemistry, vol. 41, p. 531-553.

    6 Yuan, Y.S., Hu, S.B., Wang, H.J., and Sun, F.J., 2007. “Meso-Cenozoic Tectonothermal Evolution of the Ordos Basin, central China: Insights from Newly Acquired Vitrinite Reflectance Data and a Revision of Existing Paleothermal Indicator Data.” Journal of Geodynamics, vol. 44, p. 33-46.

    7 Hu, G.Y., Li, J., Shan, H.Q., and Han, Z.X., 2010. “The Origin of Natural Gas and the Hydrocarbon Charging History of the Yulin Gas Field in the Ordos Basin, China.” International Journal of Coal Geology, vol. 81, p. 381-391.

    8 Cai, C.F., Hu, G.Y., He, H., Li, J., Li, J.F., and Wu, Y.S., 2005. “Geochemical Characteristics and Origin of Natural Gas and Thermochemical Sulphate Reduction in Ordovician Carbonates in the Ordos Basin, China.” Journal of Petroleum Science &
    Engineering, vol. 48, p. 209-226.

    9 Carroll, A.R., 1998. “Upper Permian Lacustrine Organic Facies Evolution, Southern Junggar Basin, NW China.” Organic Geochemistry, vol. 28, no. 1, p. 649-667.

    10 Wang, S.J., He, L.J., and Wang, J.Y., 2001. “Thermal Regime and Petroleum Systems in Junggar Basin, Northwest China.” Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, vol., 126, p. 237-248.

    11 Pu, R.H. and Qing, H.R., 2001. “Integrative Reservoir Prediction in Duzhai Sub-Depression, Bohaiwan Basin, North China.” Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists, June 18-22, 2001.

    12 Tang, Z., 1982. “Tectonic Features of Oil and Gas Basins in Eastern Part of China.” American Association of Petroleum Geologists, AAPG Bulletin, vol. 66, no. 5, p. 509-521.

    13 Greene, T.J., Zinniker, D., Moldowan, J.M., Cheng, K.M., and Su, A.G., 2004. “Controls of Oil Family Distribution and Composition in Nonmarine Petroleum Systems: A Case Study from the Turpan-Hami basin, Northwest China. American
    Association of Petroleum Geologists, AAPG Bulletin, vol. 88, no. 4, p. 447-481.
    Unless of course you think that Tan, Quig, Pu, Qing, Wang, Cai, Hu, He, Li, Wu, Shan, Han, Yuan, Sun, Pang, Yin, Wang, Zhu, Zhang, Liang, Xiao, Cheng, Su, Zou, Tao, Tang, Gao, Yang, Guo, Dong, and Gu are Westerners.


    http://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/...fullreport.pdf
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PetroChina (Which is a HUGE Oil company)
    Last edited by adoucette; 03-18-12 at 12:15 PM.

  4. #2724
    Please use Sugar Cane Alcohol Billy T's Avatar
    Posts
    19,693
    To adoucette:

    Yes PetroChina is a very large oil company - may have more conventional reserves locked up globally than any other, but it has no experiece (prior to last few months in its working with western companies) in fracking or shale.

    One can qoute from the Chinese 5-year plan what they are planning or from other official sources, and western publications have done so. But the fracking informaion data base and technology is entirely western except that from the two western fracking related companies China has recently bought to get this technology OR form the recent joint projects in China. As I noted before, to do business in China you need a joint venture with a Chinese partner.

    All the Chinese data, on fracking or shale reserves that they have put in Chinese reports or plan, is SECONDARY information based on the PRIMARY information that western oil companies developed, often under contract or in partnership with Chinese companies learning the technology.

    I think you even know this is true, but want to point out that western papers, etc. have quoted from Chinese sources (the infromation that came originally from the western oil companies.) In a few years, no doubt PetroChina will have some knowledge and experience in fracking technology.

    I will not make this point about where the data came from again - ignore it if your like but it is fact.
    Last edited by Billy T; 03-18-12 at 02:41 PM.

  5. #2725
    Billy, the amount of experience Chinese oil companies have in fracking in shale isn't the issue.

    This was your claim that you said I should admit that I was wrong about:

    Quote Originally Posted by Billy T
    China´s own estimates, ChinaDaily etc. are all just quoting from the US Gov EIA study report, as I stated
    But as I showed clearly in the annotated article above, the quotes in the article were not from the EIA as you claimed (and I linked to the EIA report so you can check). They were from the Chinese Report and even the people that wrote those papers the EIA report was based on that was referenced are Chinese.

    So NOTHING you just posted supports your earlier assertion about the source of the quotes or your subsequent assertion that all of that data in the EIA report came from Western Oil companies.

    Unlike your mere assertions, I quoted the actual references used in the EIA report on Chinese reserves and its clear that virtually all of the data comes from Chinese researchers.

    So as usual, you are wrong and as ususal you simply won't admit it.
    Last edited by adoucette; 03-18-12 at 06:06 PM.

  6. #2726
    Please use Sugar Cane Alcohol Billy T's Avatar
    Posts
    19,693
    "... The top-10 global automakers account for roughly 80% of the worldwide production and nearly 90% of total vehicles sold in the U.S. …The automakers continue to shift their production facilities from high-cost regions to lower-cost regions such as China, India and South America. China and South America together are projected to represent more than 50% of growth in global light vehicle production in the auto industry from 2008 to 2015. Asian countries, especially China and India, are expected to account for 40% of growth in the auto industry over the next five to seven years.

    Although automakers continue to focus on shifting their production facilities to new regions driven by cost and demand factors, developing the supplier networks remains one of their greatest challenges. Existing suppliers to automakers often lack the financial strength to expand capacity in new markets. Since 1999, more than 20 of the largest global auto parts suppliers have filed for bankruptcy. The financial condition of the majority of auto market suppliers continues to deteriorate. Thailand severely hampered by floods in the country that killed more than 500 people and damaged many automakers’ and their parts supplier’s plants. In fact, Thai production plummeted to the lowest level in more than 9 years. {Billy T comment: These dying parts suppliers are/were mainly in the US. In some cases, like GM´s captive supplier, Delco, China packed up their machines and relocated them in China to server the world´s fastest growing auto market.) Thailand´s losses helped Brazil´s large auto parts industries to continues to export as well as serve the growing domestic market.

    {EU & English} automakers are trying very hard to entice the consumers with the help of steep discounts and other sales promotions, which will put a downward pressure on their margins. The West European car market is expected to decline to 11 million units in 2012. The present eurozone financial crisis, which is likely to impact the operations of many global automakers, especially GM and Ford, who have a significant exposure to the market. Ford revealed that it is likely to lose between $500 million and $600 million in 2012 in the 19 European markets covered by the automaker owing to the ongoing debt crisis in the region. GM’s European arm, Opel, revealed that it expects to report an operating loss of €1 billion ($1.3 billion) due to fewer car sales than anticipated. ..."

    From: http://www.zacks.com/stock/news/71650/

    The story is very different in Asia, especially China, India and their parts suppliers. Here is the just announce billion dollar plus investment planned by GM:

    “... Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard said {today,22 March12} the national and two state governments would inject A$275 million into GM Holden in the latest hand out to the country's struggling auto makers to protect manufacturing jobs. {BT notes: A$1=$1.04 i.e. is 4% more valuable than the dollar for first time ever as dollar continues to decline, YoY.} The funding will secure the jobs of 12,000 people employed by GM Holden's Adelaide car plant and engine manufacturing plant in Victoria, and shore up thousands more manufacturing jobs in the components sector. After securing Australian government support to help it keep its car plant open until at least 2022, GM will invest A$1 billion (US$1.04 billion) in its Australian operations over the next decade. ..."

    From: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-inv...051310556.html

    Billy T comment:All governments try to bias the market place to promote what Big Brother knows is best for you (EVs get $7,500 and more in some states) and to protect jobs (whose workers vote anyway) so no where in the world does the free market exist. (Perhpas for common goods purchased by most peple, China comes closest to a free market, with at times too little government interference with what is for sale in the market place. (toxic milk etc.) The US does this interferrence not only with bail outs of banks with extremely cheap loans from the steady supply of printing press dollars and also with direct financial aid to critical industries, like the auto industry and mortgage industry (owns Fanny & Freddy May now) but also by excess production of fiat money that lowers the dollar´s value with two objectives:

    (1)Immediately gain more favorable exchange rates for US exports, as China does too with its creeping but too low peg of the yuan, and as Germany does by being part of the Euro, with much lower value currency than if still using the Mark.
    (2)Longer term a greatly devalued dollar is the only way the US can pay off the 14.5 trillion, and rapidly growing debt. (avoid outright default on it bonds).

    A few years ago, Brazil´s Finance Minister correctly called this US policy a “currency war” on other nations, like Brazil that have high interest rates to control inflation. Cheap dollar have flooded into Brazil, but they need to buy Brazilian Real before they can be invested in Brazil. This demand for the Real has made the value of the Real double in about five years. That has destroyed several low value added industries, like manufacture of shoes, as they can no longer economically export, when paying their workers in high value Real while earning low value dollars with exports.

    SUMMARY: Despite all these US efforts, I doubt the US auto industry and its US (not Mexican) suppliers will ever get back to even half the umber of jobs they had before the Lehman collapse. The future of autos (and most other things) belongs to Asia, especially China* and some what to India. The US lived way beyond its means for more than a decade, on borrowed money and can not pay it back without a dollar collapse. I still expect it to come on or before Halloween 2014.

    Already the FED, not China or Japan, holds the most of US treasury paper promise to pay later. China reduced its holdings of dollars in 2011 but Japan did buy more with newly printed Yen mainly to reduce** the value of the Yen (wrt the dollar. Now only 83 Yen buys a dollar. With the Yen so valuable Toyota etc. are not able to earn much with exports.)

    * In part that is because US has a "replacement car market." I.e. There are 845 cars for every 1000 Americans, but per 1,000 people, Germany has 540; Japan has 593; Britain has 525; and China has 37. For how long do you think so many Chinese will be willing to forego driving cars? As the people in emerging markets buy cars, what do you think that will do to global oil demand? New-car sales in China have zoomed past U.S. auto sales, and China is expected to add 125 million cars to its roads over the next five years, with auto production targets of 30 million annually by 2016. US replaces about 13 million per year. (All this from today´s Yahoo Email news.)

    **That pumps Yen out into the economy, reducing the value of each already there. Nearly the same thing as ECB & FED have done, but most of these newly printed dollar and Euro, did not enter the economies as desired. They were used to buy government bonds, not lent to business, etc. I.e. they just returned to the national Treasuries, not the economies. Both FED and ECB are “pushing on a string” with their freshly printed money, but the ECB has like the FED, been able to reduce the costs of borrowing. Unfortunately, there is so much surplus production capacity (wrt to demand) that very few want to borrow. In fact most are doing “negative borrowing” now – reducing their total debt by paying back loans or building their cash reserves. Apple was sitting on 100 billion dollars, why would it borrow? Etc.
    Last edited by Billy T; 03-22-12 at 12:47 PM.

  7. #2727
    Extravagantly Introverted ... universaldistress's Avatar
    Posts
    1,464
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...ck_24_03_2012/

    Why do they bother when electric cars are so patently doomed? (16:15)

  8. #2728
    Quote Originally Posted by adoucette View Post
    Well Feb Sales figures are in

    And Volt gained quite a bit of ground

    Chevrolet delivered 1,023 Volts in Feb vs just 603 last Jan, a big increase.

    While the LEAF continued it's downhill slide, selling only 478 down from a pretty dismal 676 in January (or half as many as they did last December)

    So, for the month, the sales totaled 1,699.

    The Ford Focus is still not posting sales numbers, but the EPA came out with it's range numbers, 76 miles (3 more than LEAF) at about $4,000 more ($39k)
    March US sales data is in:

    The Volt had its best month ever in March with 2289 sold.
    That's over twice February volume result of 1,023 and almost 4 times the again dismal Leaf sales of just 579 EVs.

    So for the year, it's 3,915 Volts vs just 1,302 Leafs, a 3 to 1 advantage.

    (average monthly sales for both for the year are 1,405).

    Seems like the Extended range EV concept, even though more expensive, is starting to win out over the pure, but very limited, EV concept, though that could change if enough EV charging stations get built thus lessening the advantage of the Volt's onboard gas powered generator.
    Last edited by adoucette; 04-03-12 at 12:29 PM.

  9. #2729
    Please use Sugar Cane Alcohol Billy T's Avatar
    Posts
    19,693
    "... Natural gas is cleaner, quieter, and the engines last longer. And it's proven technology. There are some 13 million natural gas vehicles on the road around the world.

    Pickens' company, Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE), has 273 fueling stations and is spending $450 million to build a network of LNG stations on major trucking corridors across the country. Waste Management (WM) will only buy natural gas trucks. ..." From: http://www.wealthdaily.com/articles/...64?lloct=2&r=1

    Most do not know what a dodo is. (It was a very common bird, and good to eat and very dumb. Huge swarms would darken the sky like starlings do today. It flew lower, if it flew at all, and one could quickly fill a barrel, just by throwing rocks into the swarm passing over head or walking. It is extinct now, due to these factors.) I´m not sure why, but 100+ years ago the expression "Dead as a Dodo." was in common use.

    In a decade or so that expression will be: "Dead as a Diesel" at least among the drivers of 18 wheelers.
    Last edited by Billy T; 04-29-12 at 08:12 AM.

  10. #2730
    Valued Senior Member Carcano's Avatar
    Posts
    6,788
    Quote Originally Posted by adoucette View Post
    Seems like the Extended range EV concept, even though more expensive, is starting to win out over the pure, but very limited, EV concept, though that could change if enough EV charging stations get built thus lessening the advantage of the Volt's onboard gas powered generator.
    Charging stations dont matter much...as long as the charging TIMES are measured in hours, instead of minutes.

  11. #2731
    Quote Originally Posted by adoucette View Post
    March US sales data is in:

    The Volt had its best month ever in March with 2289 sold.
    That's over twice February volume result of 1,023 and almost 4 times the again dismal Leaf sales of just 579 EVs.

    So for the year, it's 3,915 Volts vs just 1,302 Leafs, a 3 to 1 advantage.

    (average monthly sales for both for the year are 1,405).

    Seems like the Extended range EV concept, even though more expensive, is starting to win out over the pure, but very limited, EV concept, though that could change if enough EV charging stations get built thus lessening the advantage of the Volt's onboard gas powered generator.
    April Sales data are in.

    Volt sales did not match their big month in March but still they sold 1,462 Volts in April which brings total 2012 sales to 5,377 and total Volt sales in the US to 13,374.

    In contrast the LEAF continues it's downward sales spiral with just 370 sold, a substantial drop from their dismal 579 sold in March and their lowest monthly sales in over a year. This brings total 2012 LEAF sales to a piddly 2,103 EVs Last month's Leaf sales were the lowest monthly number in more than a year, and total LEAF sales are but 11,796 vehicles.

    At 17 months sales for both cars this averages to just 693 LEAFs per month vs 786 Volts per month, which shows that Leaf sales are far below their average while Volt sales are above their average.

    In other sales, the Focus has sold 12 cars in the first 2 months, no figures yet for March or April.

    The Mitsubishi I minicar sold 79 cars, bringing the year's total to 215 vehicles.

    Toyota released their plug in Prius Hybrid in Feb but with a slow ramp up, and sold an impressive 1,654 of them in April.

    So all in all, for April, 3,565 cars with plugs attached were sold in the US, which if kept up would put 2012 sales at around 43,000 vehicles.

    Which would be a piddly 3/10ths of a percent of forcast US car sales.

  12. #2732
    Looking at the figures it seems clear that after the initial buying spree, later buyers seem to prefer the gas/electric combo over the pure electric.

    Consider the latest month sales:

    Gas/Electric Combos sold 3,116 vehicles compared to just 449 for pure EVs

  13. #2733
    In my opinion even after the high costs the electric car can do better because of other advantages like low maintenance etc.

  14. #2734
    Valued Senior Member Carcano's Avatar
    Posts
    6,788
    http://evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=28057

    PULLMAN, Wash. – Washington State University researchers have developed a new technology that could triple the capacity of lithium-ion batteries, which as anyone who owns a cell phone or laptop knows, can be frustratingly limiting.

    Led by Grant Norton, professor in the School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, the researchers have filed patents on the nanoscale-based technology, which also allows the batteries to re-charge many more times and more quickly than current models. They expect to bring it to the market within a year.

  15. #2735
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Carcano View Post
    Charging stations dont matter much...as long as the charging TIMES are measured in hours, instead of minutes.
    Charging TIMES don't matter - as long as there are charging stations (to be specific - outlets) available. Why do you care if your car takes two hours to charge if you are eating dinner, working or watching a movie during that time?

  16. #2736
    Valued Senior Member Carcano's Avatar
    Posts
    6,788
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Why do you care if your car takes two hours to charge if you are eating dinner, working or watching a movie during that time?
    Because you may not be doing any of those things. You may be on a ten minute shopping trip, or picking someone up, or collecting documents from an office, or dropping kids off at school...even worse, you may be on a long trip between cities.

  17. #2737
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Carcano View Post
    Because you may not be doing any of those things. You may be on a ten minute shopping trip, or picking someone up, or collecting documents from an office, or dropping kids off at school...
    Yes, you might. And at those times you generally don't have to charge; every EV out there can handle ten minute shopping trips, and most parents don't drive fifty miles to drop their kids off at school.

    even worse, you may be on a long trip between cities.
    Yep. And for such trips, fast chargers are very nice. For example, there is now a chain of fast chargers on route 5 from Canada to Ashland, Oregon.

  18. #2738
    Registered Senior Member
    Posts
    98
    It's just a matter of time.
    Safe electric cars like Tesla Model S with full electric range of 300 miles are already launching on the road.Though very expensive,it's very certain that furhter R&D will bring the production cost down.
    Scientists and engineers are now trying to increase the electric car's age from 300 miles per charge to 500 and even heard 650 miles approximately.

    http://www.teslamotors.com/models

  19. #2739
    I see Nissan Leaf is selling well in Japan. AND their sales pitch is pretty cool. That said, liquefied hydrocarbons are the densest store of energy outside of nuclear. It's physically impossible to make a battery that is more efficient than hydrocarbons. I'd like to see a day when out wastes can be turned into hydrocarbons right in our house. Just toss in any garbage, out comes hydrocarbons which go straight into the tank.

  20. #2740
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    6,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    It's physically impossible to make a battery that is more efficient than hydrocarbons.
    Not at all. It's just impossible with current chemistries. (Of course, 20 years ago a 600 watt-hour per liter battery was impossible too.)

Similar Threads

  1. By Avatar in forum Art & Culture
    Last Post: 10-12-08, 02:18 AM
    Replies: 30
  2. By Dinosaur in forum Human Science
    Last Post: 07-30-08, 03:40 PM
    Replies: 35
  3. By draqon in forum Free Thoughts
    Last Post: 07-22-08, 06:56 AM
    Replies: 7
  4. By (Q) in forum Free Thoughts
    Last Post: 01-19-07, 12:29 AM
    Replies: 16

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •