electric/water powered cars coming yet?

18 billion from Nasa is peanuts, its why Nasa never went back to the moon, We need hundred of billions a year if we want to switch rapidly.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What exactly does "six times cheaper" mean? Do you mean it will be 1/6 the cost? If so, there is no way energy from space solar panels will be 1/6 the cost of conventional energy production methods for the foreseeable future - the cost of launching stuff into space is just much too high. You can find plenty of serious economic discussions of space solar panels online. The general consensus is that it probably won't be economical until launch prices are brought waaaaay down. Maybe with a space elevator or something.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yeah its a great idea, but not economical at this time, or for the foreseeable future.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The real question isn't electric cars but non-petro powered buses,trucks,planes and heavy machinery.

It is relative easy to make an electric car with all the limitations. But how are we going to power the above mentioned vehicles without using petroleum based energy?? When I see the first electric 18 wheeler I will believe in changes...

 

Biofuels -- Alternative energy economy is not a single technology. The biofuels market is best set to take over the 30% of the oil market that can't be replaced with electrics.

 

Hm, I don't thinks so. I still have to see the plane flying on biofuel, but even so, if the population stays the same, we will need those bio stuff for FOOD..

Cornbased technology is already driving up the price of oil. Also the energy in-energy out ratio is probably pretty bad with the bio stuff....

 

Planes power by biofuels
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=jet-biofuel-ready-for-takeoff
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/10/worlds_first_100_percent_biodiesel_jet_flight.php
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2008-02-24-biofueljet_N.htm

First generation bio-fuels and bio-fuels plants were inefficient and use food stuffs as feedstock. But if you want good energy return ratios just compare against Brazilian sugar cane to ethanol industry, they achieve energy returns of 8-5:1, comparable with today's oil industry energy returns (5:1) and Superior to oil sands (2:1). Algae fuel is still in development but pilot plants have already demonstrated fuel production at 10 times terrestrial plant rates.

 

This is where we need to rethink cargo transportation period.Of course we need money for R&D too.It's not happening in the US since it's broke period.Getting the big trucks off the road and replacing them with super fast cargo trains or evacuated tube transport are areas needing explored.If ETT could be made to work it would easily replace,planes,trucks,cars etc.I know dream on.

http://www.et3.com/index.asp

 

jesus we don't need 'super fast' or 'evacuated tubes' for cargo, moving more cargo over rail requires the least infrastructure change for the the most benefit. Evacuated tube transport is a farce, it would be extremely costly to build, the only place it would be feasible is on the fucking moon (vacuum already provided it would not be a tube, just a monorail)

 

The best way to produce biofuels is using algae growing in sewage at oxidation ponds. Free fertilizer. In fact, we are trying to get ridf of the stuff! High production. Lots of oil from algae.
http://www.ecosherpa.com/green-energy/algae-biofuel-from-sewage/

 

People, stop dreaming. There is simply no substitute for oil, period....

How much sugarcane do we need just for the US's needs? The size of Texas?

 

syzygys

Correction. There is no single substitute for oil.

We will have cars running on battery power. Trucks and planes on biofuel and ships on nuclear. Or something else. There are many options and a range of methods will in turn take over.

We actually have no choice. In a few decades, oil will be no more.

 

We could replace all US oil needs with algae oil using only 6% the land area of existing US farm land, of course algae would not need farm land.

 

That is correct. Although I don't think ships will run on nuclear power. And let's not forget that oil is used to make plastic,etc...

But seriously...

 

Seriously

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I accidentally ran into an article on the history of electric cars. Surprisingly there is no improvement in coverage in 100 years!! There were EVs in 1910 that could go as far as today's electric vehicles and 100 years were not enough for them to catch on...

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/6480#more

"Then and now: 100 miles

If today's supporters of EV's would dig into the specifications and the sales brochures of early 20th century electric "horseless carriages", their enthusiasm would quickly disappear. Fast-charged batteries (to 80% capacity in 10 minutes), automated battery swapping stations, public charging poles, load balancing, the entire business plan of Better Place, in-wheel motors, regenerative braking: it was all there in the late 1800s or the early 1900s. It did not help. Most surprisingly, however, is the seemingly non-existent progress of battery technology. "

"The Nissan Leaf and the Mitsubishi i-MiEV, two electric cars to be introduced on the market in 2010, have exactly the same range as the 1908 Fritchle Model A Victoria: 100 miles (160 kilometres) on a single charge. The "100-mile Fritchle" was a progressive engineering feat for its time, but it was not the only early electric that boasted a 100 mile range. I have only chosen it because its specifications are most complete, and because its range was certified."

 

Bottomline: Electric cars are good for one thing: driving around the golf range.

But I have to tell you, it is a beauty!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

syzygys

In fact, modern electric vehicles can go a hell of a lot further than 100 miles on a single charge. The Tesla has a range of 2 to 3 times that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster

Other vehicles have whatever range they are designed for, and are only limited by the design. Modern Lithium batteries are much more energy dense than the old lead/acid batteries used in 1910, and the materials modern cars are made of are much lighter in weight, meaning that, with the right design, a modern electric vehicle could go 300+ kms on a single charge.

The reason the Nissan leaf has a range of only 100 miles is simply that the designers were happy to settle for that. To increase range requires more of the car's useable space to be occupied by batteries, and the designers decided to draw the line at 100 miles range.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Leaf

We can expect a wide range of electric vehicles to be released over the next few years, and they will be available in a wide range of specifications, including extended range.

 

Didn't read the article, did you? It specially mentions the Tesla. The only reason the Tesla has a 244 miles range because its battery is 2.2 times BIGGER then the other mentioned EVs. So yes, fucking duh, if you put a bigger battery in it, you get bigger range. But for the same size, you get similar range, thus range HAS NOT improved in 100 years!!

The article explains it why, read it... It has to do with more weight (compared to 100 years ago) and more electronics. Sure technology has improved in 100 years and a new battery has 7 times more juice, but when you put more weight around the passengers and heat and power windows, the advantage goes away quickly.

You do like heat in your car, do you?

Again, it is really simple, battery size equals range. But you don't want to drive an 18 wheeler just to be able to drive 400 miles....

You also forgot to mention that battery power dies with speed. One owner mentions the 30/60 60/30 rule, He can get 30 miles by 60 MPH or 60 miles 30 MPH.

That's what they have been saying since 1910.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

P.S.: Guess what else increases with battery size? You guessed it right, yes, it is PRICE. The Tesla's battery costs 30K dollars....

 

Fuel prices were much cheaper then and the electric grid was not nearly as developed. Also considering the lead acid battery gets 40 Wh/kg tops and lithium ion gets up to 250 Wh/kg, that being roughly a x5 performance improvement battery technology has advanced.

The Fritchle could not do more then 25 mph and carry only 2 people, the Nissan Leaf can do 90 mph and carry 5 people, stop comparing apples and oranges.