Electric cars are a pipe dream

Ford has announced that the Focus Electric will launch in late 2011. The car will offer a mile-per-gallon equivalent better than Chevrolet Volt and competitive with other battery electric vehicles. It is also expected that a full recharge will take three to four hours at home with the 240-volt charge station -half the charge time of the Nissan Leaf.

The Focus Electric also introduces a whole host of new features and technologies - including a unique version of the MyFord Touch driver connect system especially for electric vehicles, a new value charging feature powered by Microsoft and a smartphone app called MyFord Mobile that helps plug-in owners control their vehicles remotely.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...8p3gCg&usg=AFQjCNEAWAuDhQNZ1fgn3nGzbDp-794iBw

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...8p3gCg&usg=AFQjCNE966Z8X4oH1AZeIzN2Gi0RSw-sPg

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Because you can't have it both ways.
You can't be saying that energy is going to go down significantly and still be worried about global warming.

Or do you not agree with the IPCC?

They say we only need to stop CO2 growth by 2015 and then slowly cut back to ~50% below 1990 levels by 2050 to hold the warming to below the 2 C (by 2100) that is considered to be harmful.

Arthur

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't know why they compare this car to the Volt, it really is a competitor to the Nissan Leaf, with about the same range and thus the same limitations that the Leaf has.

The larger on-board charger is a plus (3 hr charging if 240 Volt outlet is available), but unfortunately there's no word on pricing of the Focus Electric yet.

http://www.plugincars.com/ford-focus-electric/review

Arthur

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"...half the charge time of the Nissan Leaf."

- I can't immediately find a measure of range though. Any idea?
<Scratch that - Thanks for more info Arthur>

 

Range is given at 100 miles, and also at 30 miles per 1 hour of charging at 240V.
That last number, miles per hour of charging is something that is very important to Electric vehicle owners.
Consider that if you go shopping at the grocery store and it is 6 miles from your house and if you arrive with a nearly dead battery, but have a place to plug in, you only have to be in the grocery store for 12 minutes to have enough juice to get you home.

Arthur

 

Then there is that fellow out in California who put a salt water spray in the chimney of a coal burning power plant. It has reduced the CO2 emissions by 70% while producing concrete. 2 birds, 1 stone, possible progress towards "clean" coal.

 

Electric cars perform a role equivalent to the role of charity in western capitalist democracies, it's a cover for the real problems, which are too deep for people to come to terms with. We look for technological miracles to somehow patch up a failing system, but it's the political/ economic system itself that is to blame.

 

Stoniphi

NaCl+H2O+CO2 = concrete???????

Please explain.

Spidergoat

Saying it is the political/economic system that is to blame is like saying it is all due to black magic. We need specifics.

 

Specifics, like we won't rebuild our passenger train system because there is too much profit to be made from selling cars and gasoline? It's like a bunch of people stranded on a desert island who can't make a raft because they can't figure out how to finance and market it. The markets cannot solve our problem because they are the cause. Short term profits preclude the search for long term solutions.

 

Cars have nothing to do with it.
Cars only compete with rail for transportation in large metropolitan areas and virtually all of them run light rail systems, the more dense, the more rail, like NYC, Chicago, DC, Seattle, Portland, LA, Atlanta, Denver, Philly, Miami, San Diego, San Fransisco etc etc
In general though our country is too big and our cities too far apart for trains to be very effective and thus we use planes, not cars to travel coast to coast.

Arthur

 

Naw, it was more like CaCl + H2O + CO2 <=> CaCO3 + 2HCl or something along those lines. Sorry I didn't balance the equation properly.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I am leaving that as an exercise.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The fun part is that this is cheap, simple and it not only cuts the CO2 emissions by 70% but it completely eliminates the need to heat limestone up to 4500 deg F to make concrete - with the associated energy and carbon costs. If we are going to continue burning coal as our primary source of energy, than it behooves us to clean up our act. This could help us do that.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The article is in a recent issue of Sciam or Discovery or Popsci...one of the sci mags, though I forget which. It should be findable out there though, if you want to check it out more thoroughly.

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cement-from-carbon-dioxide

Arthur

 

I am still a bit puzzled about this cement making process.
Normal cement is not, of course, CaCO3, which is what the CO2 sequestering method is designed to create. Normal cement is a reactive calcium silicate complex.

So we end up making lime. Powdered CaCO3?
How does this set into hard concrete?

 

See link in previous post.

 

I read the link. Did not answer the question.

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cement-from-carbon-dioxide

http://energy-eng.blogspot.com/2008/11/comments-marine-cement-production.html

Chalk AKA Limestone -

http://geology.com/rocks/limestone.shtml

 

Most concrete is portland cement mixed with sand and gravel.

Portland cement is made from lime, clay and a few other ingredients.

Have we digressed?

 

Cement is made from roasted CaCO3, which emits CO2 and produces (with water) calcium hydroxide. Along with the roasting is a source of silicate, such as certain minerals. End result is a chemically active calcium silicate complex.

That is why I wonder how CaCO3, which is, after all, the raw material for making cement, can be called cement in its own right. If it is a diluent mixed with proper cement, that explains it. Apart from that, I still do not have an explanation. As a diluent, though, it should make the cement less potent.

 

What they say is: "The Calera process essentially mimics marine cement, which is produced by coral when making their shells and reefs, taking the calcium and magnesium in seawater and using it to form carbonates at normal temperatures and pressures. "

So no, it's not Portland Cement, it's a marine cement and they didn't give enough details to figure out the final chemical reactions that occur when you mix water with the dry ingredients.

Arthur

 

It's an awesome idea.