Jim Wilkins wrote:

wrote in message
...

They have a place. Around here (well, not actually in the town I
live
in) many drive golf carts. The grocery stores all have cart spaces
(closer than the handicapped spaces). Even the high school has a
golf
cart parking lot (cart driving age is 14). As a car replacement,
it's
a stupid idea.

But a golf cart saves many hundreds of dollars a year by not requiring
registration and insurance, which can destroy the savings potential of
having a second limited-range electric car. They solve a problem that
is social rather than a technical.


You see a lot of people with nothing but a golf cart in some large
retirement communities, They can go anywhere, including to their
doctors on the carts. 'The Villages" is one of the largest, and you see
a lot of golf carts, but very few cars.

Dean, Hoffman, wrote:

On 2/24/13 4:33 PM, wrote:

Why would any sane person buy a limited range car? That's *nuts*.


Why do people buy short ladders?


How far do you drive a ladder?

On 2/24/2013 11:42 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 2/24/2013 1:42 PM, dsi1 wrote:
On 2/24/2013 2:46 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
La La Land. ^_^

TDD

It's a good thing for us that folks who said that the infrastructure was
not in place and that the moonbats were trying to replace horses and
buggys with new-fangled automobiles were unable to convince the
citizenry of their anti-progressive ways. What model carriage do you
drive, sir? :-)

Don't be silly, the primitive automobiles were few in number and the
highway system didn't exist at the time not to mention the relatively
tiny population in those days. Electric vehicles will be wonderful if
the infrastructure is allowed to develop and evolve slowly and with the
demands of the market the same way the internal combustion engine based
transportation infrastructure did. Moonbats believe the present
transportation infrastructure can be scrapped and changed overnight. If

Nobody believes that the infrastructure can be developed overnight. The
electric car will develop and mature like any new technology. Naysayers,
as usual, will be proven shortsighted and wrong.

you remember history, our politicians didn't use the newfangled gasoline
powered automobiles and airplanes until the technology matured as much
as the rail and steamship travel had become and widely used safely by a
large number of people. Last week I had to spend a few days working at
the Northern end of the state which was a two hour drive. There is no
windmill and solar cell powered vehicle in existence that would have
made it possible for me and JH to transport ourselves and a half ton of
tools and equipment to the job site and back. So my assertion of the
moonbattery of the Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks still
stands. ^_^


Sorry, I won't get sucked into some political rant. That's just a red
herring anyway.

TDD

On 2/24/2013 12:37 PM, wrote:

The new model carriages were not forced on anyone. There *IS* a
difference. When economics wins, everyone wins. When it takes a back
seat, everyone loses.

Economics does not take a backseat to anything or anybody. It always
wins out.

Frank wrote:


I know Prius owners that love them.
My point is that hybrids are not for everyone.
In my case, the batteries would be a concern if warranty is 10
years/100,000 miles I'd come up 40,000 miles short in 10 years.
Prius, I rode in had one surprise. While the cars are quiet on the
outside, it appeared to have a lot of road noise on the inside.

Yup, I think it is the tiny tires on the Prius that cause some
ride and noise problems.

On the other hand, the Honda Civic hybrid is an amazingly quiet
car, and the handling is fine for a smaller car. if you insist on
driving a boat, then pay the fuel bill. I've driven smaller cars
for ages, and feel fine in it. I've had a few emergency maneuvers
to make in the last 4 years, and was DAMN surprised at how well
it did on those, too. I drove an MR2 for a while, and while
the Honda is not quite in the same handling class, it comes
surprisingly close!

Jon

On Feb 24, 8:04*pm, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 14:51:51 -0500, "Existential Angst"









wrote:
"harry" wrote in message
....
On Feb 24, 10:52 am, "Existential Angst" wrote:
Awl --

After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the purchase
of
one, but bleeve, it's hard.
I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a Volt
would
proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.

Now, about those electricity costs.....

If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.

Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you about c per
kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into what
you actually wrote on your check. Around NYC, that seems to be about
25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.

So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to
charge
it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per mile in
gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WTF??

You get similar numbers for the Leaf, and Volt.

Now, it gets worse:
There's the ever-present thermodynamic kick-in-the-ass.
It will NEVER take only 85 kWhrs to charge an 85 kWhr battery -- it will
take proly 20% more.

So even if the Tesla DOES get 200 mi per charge (and jb's article suggests
that it does
nothttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highw...
)

factor in the charging inefficiency, and you are just about EQUAL in $ per
mi cost of a 30 mpg vehicle.

Anything less than 200 mi per charge, and the Tesla loses, and poss. loses
badly.

So at NYC electric rates, an electric car, not counting ANY other factors,
is actually MORE expensive than gas, at $4/gal.

YET, you see these huge "equivalent" mpg numbers for electrics, typically
around 100 mpg, implying a $ per mile cost of less than 1/3 the cost of a
30
mpg vehicle..
But my calcs show that an electric will be *at least* as expensive as gas,
and likely considerably more than gas, as a fuel.... What gives??

Holy ****.... there goes my Volt....

Now factor in the high initial cost of electrics, inevitable battery
deterioration AND replacement cost, and wow, simply not viable. Unless I
made a mistake somewhere.

Now, some may bleat, Oh OH, MY electric rates are 5c/kWhr.... and I would
repeat, do the net division on your bill to see what it REALLY is. At a
TRUE 5c/kWhr, yeah, it makes sense, you could divide all the above
electric
costs by FIVE.
But I don't think anyone is really paying 5c, and quite a few places, like
CA, pay MORE than NYS utility rates.

AND, if your small car gets 40 mpg, that's even tougher competition for
electrics.

Idears?? Opinions?
--
EA

It is not an 85 Kwh battery it is around 12Kwh.

So everything you have written is completely wrong.
==============================================

Mebbe, but not for the reasons you are giving.
The 85 kWhr batt is Tesla'a largest battery, and the one the NYTimes article
was based on, in jb's thread.
The Leaf has a 24 kWhr battery, good for, sposedly, 60-130 mi, depending
depending depending.
The Volt has a 16 kWhr battery for it's 30-40 mi electric-only range --
already some disparity in the above batts.

Accelerations notwithstanding (subject to car mass), and factoring in CdA's,
the range of an electric car should be linearly proportional to the battery
size.
The fact that this appears not to be the case suggests people are plucking
numbers out of the air, or tests are not being properly standardized.

How YOU get 80 miles on a 16 kWhr batt would be an inneresting discussion.

On Feb 24, 9:42*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 2/24/2013 1:42 PM, dsi1 wrote:









On 2/24/2013 2:46 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
La La Land. ^_^

TDD

It's a good thing for us that folks who said that the infrastructure was
not in place and that the moonbats were trying to replace horses and
buggys with new-fangled automobiles were unable to convince the
citizenry of their anti-progressive ways. What model carriage do you
drive, sir? :-)

Don't be silly, the primitive automobiles were few in number and the
highway system didn't exist at the time not to mention the relatively
tiny population in those days. Electric vehicles will be wonderful if
the infrastructure is allowed to develop and evolve slowly and with the
demands of the market the same way the internal combustion engine based
transportation infrastructure did. Moonbats believe the present
transportation infrastructure can be scrapped and changed overnight. If
you remember history, our politicians didn't use the newfangled gasoline
powered automobiles and airplanes until the technology matured as much
as the rail and steamship travel had become and widely used safely by a
large number of people. Last week I had to spend a few days working at
the Northern end of the state which was a two hour drive. There is no
windmill and solar cell powered vehicle in existence that would have
made it possible for me and JH to transport ourselves and a half ton of
tools and equipment to the job site and back. So my assertion of the
moonbattery of the Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks still
stands. ^_^

TDD

You charge your car up at home at night Duf.
So there are charging stations everywhere.
The problem is; range and the time it takes to charge from a domestic
outlet.

On Feb 24, 10:02*pm, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800, bob haller wrote:
the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline making
us less dependent on a finite resource.

And what infinite well of energy does electrical power come from? *Just
because it always comes out of the wall when you plug into it doesn't
mean that there isn't some generating station out there burning
_something_ to deliver the bulk of it to you.

Electric cars use around half/one third the energy needed for
conventional cars. That energy is much cheaper too.
It could come from nuclear power or renewable.

On Feb 24, 10:37*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 09:42:38 -1000, dsi1









wrote:
On 2/24/2013 2:46 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
La La Land. ^_^

TDD

It's a good thing for us that folks who said that the infrastructure was
not in place and that the moonbats were trying to replace horses and
buggys with new-fangled automobiles were unable to convince the
citizenry of their anti-progressive ways. What model carriage do you
drive, sir? :-)

The new model carriages were not forced on anyone. *There *IS* a
difference. *When economics wins, everyone wins. *When it takes a back
seat, everyone loses.

Yes that's what happened back in 2008. And in the 1930's.
You got a short memory. Capitalism destroyed the economy.

On Feb 24, 10:44*pm, "
wrote:
On Feb 24, 5:37*pm, wrote:









On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 09:42:38 -1000, dsi1

wrote:
On 2/24/2013 2:46 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology..
Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
La La Land. ^_^

TDD

It's a good thing for us that folks who said that the infrastructure was
not in place and that the moonbats were trying to replace horses and
buggys with new-fangled automobiles were unable to convince the
citizenry of their anti-progressive ways. What model carriage do you
drive, sir? :-)

The new model carriages were not forced on anyone. *There *IS* a
difference. *When economics wins, everyone wins. *When it takes a back
seat, everyone loses.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not to mention that the new-fangled autos had clear
advantages over the horse and buggy. *With electric
cars the pitch relies on, yeah they cost a lot more,
even with huge tax subsidies and they don't go very far,
but folks should buy them to reduce their reliance on fossil
fuels. *Hence, sales are pretty much confined to rich hippies. *Did
they even have hippies back in 1900?

Back in 1900 cars were only for the rich too.
Everybody else was a hippy but not by choice.

On Feb 24, 11:08*pm, jon_banquer wrote:
On Feb 24, 2:57*pm, David Billington









wrote:
On 24/02/13 22:02, Tim Wescott wrote: On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800, bob haller wrote:

the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline making
us less dependent on a finite resource.
And what infinite well of energy does electrical power come from? *Just
because it always comes out of the wall when you plug into it doesn't
mean that there isn't some generating station out there burning
_something_ to deliver the bulk of it to you.

Talking about electric cars with a mate that works in the engine
development industry recently. He had a similar chat with another of his
colleagues that is very knowledgable about electric cars and hybrids and
he said the studies have been done and there is not enough electric
capacity out there on the planet to support *all electric cars or even
close to it so a mixed fuel economy is likely to be around for some
time. He also touched on other vehicles such as trucks and other large
motive power where there is no practical alternative to diesel at the
moment.

"He also touched on other vehicles such as trucks and other large
motive power where there is no practical alternative to diesel at the
moment."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilve...ll-roads-lead-...

http://beta.fool.com/thechieftoo/201...-trucks-who-be...

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/01/...-natural-gas-t...

They already do CNG for cars in Bolivia. Have done for years.

On Feb 24, 11:35*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:25:50 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"

wrote:
wrote in message
.. .

Why would any sane person buy a limited range car? *That's *nuts*.

They are -all- limited unless you find an open gas station. I quickly
became aware of that when driving through the mountains on a
motorcycle, and then during the Carter gasoline f**kup.

It doesn't take much planning to avoid such situations.

I was used to having 24-hour gas stations but couldn't find any out in
the country away from 24-hour jobs, like hospitals.

The plan is to not get in such situations. *;-)

Since retiring I hardly go through 5 gallons a month, mostly for
grocery shopping. I could use a second cheap vehicle with a 10 mile
range as long as it has a good cargo capacity.

...and you are how big of a market? *You never go on a vacation or
anywhere?

I think he is likely a majority.
He fies somewhere to his vacation.

gonjah wrote:

If you read the article, the batteries are lasting much longer than
expected and, according to the article, refurbished battery packs can be
had for $1400. Just don't buy a battery from the dealer.


Sure, keep buying patched up junk. Do you really think that
'refurbished battery' will last anywhere near as long as a new one?

harry wrote:

Back in 1900 cars were only for the rich too.
Everybody else was a hippy but not by choice.


They all smoked dope and wouldn't work?

On Feb 25, 8:08*am, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
harry wrote:

Back in 1900 cars were only for the rich too.
Everybody else was a hippy but not by choice.

* * They all smoked dope and wouldn't work?

They had little money. And no cars.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:48:17 -0800 (PST), bob haller
wrote:


His point was the autos rely on oil for a fuel source
and are responsible for using a whole lot of it.
Very little electricity is generated from oil, at least here
in the USA. It's only a few percent. Coal is the largest
source, followed by nat gas. And there is a lot more of
that available, enough for hundreds of years.

That's true, as far as it goes, but the infrastructure isn't there to
allow a significant number of cars to switch. ...and there are no
plans to put it there because the same people who are insisting on
electric vehicles are standing in the way of more generation.

During the day the power grid is used a lot, but after work, evenings
nights and weekends the power grid as lots of extra capacity

People could charge their vehicles at nght, at off peak rates.

...and come home from work in the morning. Nice idea, dolt.

I got it, I got it.... this krw asshole is Plimpton, THE legendary
venerealated asshole of multiple ngs.....
Howzit goin, Plimpie?? Why'd you give up yer moniker?

And, and once again, you are fulla****, and haller is right.
The night-time grid could easily accommodate the initial transition to
electric.... mebbe not the WHOLE transition, suddenly, but certainly the
transition at its current rate, and rate-to-come for a while.

WTF would you think otherwise??
--
EA

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 05:52:44 -0500, "Existential Angst"
wrote:



Idears?? Opinions?

Here's my idea. Check this
http://gm-volt.com/forum/forumdispla...rum&order=desc

Hundreds of thousands of posts by Chevy Volt owners. You'll get info
from those who actually know about the car.
There's probably Leaf and Tesla forums too.

Here's my opinion. Consider car cost, gasoline cost, electricity
cost, and your daily miles driven, then figure out if you want the
car.
With the tax credit, the Volt is less than $1000 over median price
paid for new cars in the U.S.
With my daily commute, and other driving - except vacation - I'd
probably visit a gas station once a year And my electric rates are
really low. That's all sweet.
I could use the Volt for my yearly vacations and get about 37mpg with
no charges from a cord. But I would probably rent a car instead.
People do drive the Volt cross country, but I'd prefer to keep engine
hours low. Might be wrong about it, but it seems to me that running
the engine constantly is against design intent.
I'd love to have one. Not caring about gasoline price is sweet.
But I'm a car cheapskate. Fix my own, and never paid more than $6k
for a car. If I felt I had the money to pay $30k for a car, as many
people do, I'd buy a Volt.

I

wrote in message
news
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 14:59:11 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Feb 24, 2:51 pm, "Existential Angst" wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...
On Feb 24, 10:52 am, "Existential Angst" wrote:





Awl --

After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the
purchase
of
one, but bleeve, it's hard.
I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a Volt
would
proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.

Now, about those electricity costs.....

If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.

Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you about c
per
kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into
what
you actually wrote on your check. Around NYC, that seems to be about
25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.

So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to
charge
it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per mile
in
gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WTF??

You get similar numbers for the Leaf, and Volt.

Now, it gets worse:
There's the ever-present thermodynamic kick-in-the-ass.
It will NEVER take only 85 kWhrs to charge an 85 kWhr battery -- it
will
take proly 20% more.

So even if the Tesla DOES get 200 mi per charge (and jb's article
suggests
that it does
nothttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highw...
)

factor in the charging inefficiency, and you are just about EQUAL in $
per
mi cost of a 30 mpg vehicle.

Anything less than 200 mi per charge, and the Tesla loses, and poss.
loses
badly.

So at NYC electric rates, an electric car, not counting ANY other
factors,
is actually MORE expensive than gas, at $4/gal.

YET, you see these huge "equivalent" mpg numbers for electrics,
typically
around 100 mpg, implying a $ per mile cost of less than 1/3 the cost
of a
30
mpg vehicle..
But my calcs show that an electric will be *at least* as expensive as
gas,
and likely considerably more than gas, as a fuel.... What gives??

Holy ****.... there goes my Volt....

Now factor in the high initial cost of electrics, inevitable battery
deterioration AND replacement cost, and wow, simply not viable. Unless
I
made a mistake somewhere.

Now, some may bleat, Oh OH, MY electric rates are 5c/kWhr.... and I
would
repeat, do the net division on your bill to see what it REALLY is. At
a
TRUE 5c/kWhr, yeah, it makes sense, you could divide all the above
electric
costs by FIVE.
But I don't think anyone is really paying 5c, and quite a few places,
like
CA, pay MORE than NYS utility rates.

AND, if your small car gets 40 mpg, that's even tougher competition
for
electrics.

Idears?? Opinions?
--
EA

It is not an 85 Kwh battery it is around 12Kwh.

So everything you have written is completely wrong.
==============================================

Mebbe, but not for the reasons you are giving.
The 85 kWhr batt is Tesla'a largest battery, and the one the NYTimes
article
was based on, in jb's thread.
The Leaf has a 24 kWhr battery, good for, sposedly, 60-130 mi, depending
depending depending.
The Volt has a 16 kWhr battery for it's 30-40 mi electric-only range --
already some disparity in the above batts.

Accelerations notwithstanding (subject to car mass), and factoring in
CdA's,
the range of an electric car should be linearly proportional to the
battery
size.
The fact that this appears not to be the case suggests people are
plucking
numbers out of the air, or tests are not being properly standardized.

The only one plucking numbers out of the air appears to
be you. You haven't tested an electric car. You have not
measured a thing. If electric cars really aren't getting about
3.5 cents a mile based on 11c/kwh electric, and are
actually 4X worse than that as you claim, then it should
be very easy for you to do some googling and prove it.
Lots of folks have tested these cars. I gave you Consumer
Reports which came up with the above metric, and you
claim they don't know what they are doing.
Then go check out what CarandDriver, Motortrend, RoadnTrack
say. I'm sure they've done testing.

Then why didn't you cite them?


I'm no big fan of electric car, but neither am I a fan of
folks just ****ing in the dark, too lazy to find the actual
test results.

+1 +1 +1

...and whining about someone else's decision.

You two ought to get a room -- don't forget the Astroglide.
That way you can both miss the point together.
--
EA

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 23:51:48 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

On Feb 24, 9:42*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 2/24/2013 1:42 PM, dsi1 wrote:









On 2/24/2013 2:46 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
La La Land. ^_^

TDD

It's a good thing for us that folks who said that the infrastructure was
not in place and that the moonbats were trying to replace horses and
buggys with new-fangled automobiles were unable to convince the
citizenry of their anti-progressive ways. What model carriage do you
drive, sir? :-)

Don't be silly, the primitive automobiles were few in number and the
highway system didn't exist at the time not to mention the relatively
tiny population in those days. Electric vehicles will be wonderful if
the infrastructure is allowed to develop and evolve slowly and with the
demands of the market the same way the internal combustion engine based
transportation infrastructure did. Moonbats believe the present
transportation infrastructure can be scrapped and changed overnight. If
you remember history, our politicians didn't use the newfangled gasoline
powered automobiles and airplanes until the technology matured as much
as the rail and steamship travel had become and widely used safely by a
large number of people. Last week I had to spend a few days working at
the Northern end of the state which was a two hour drive. There is no
windmill and solar cell powered vehicle in existence that would have
made it possible for me and JH to transport ourselves and a half ton of
tools and equipment to the job site and back. So my assertion of the
moonbattery of the Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks still
stands. ^_^

TDD

You charge your car up at home at night Duf.
So there are charging stations everywhere.

Really? There isnt a charging station within 28 miles of my home.

The problem is; range and the time it takes to charge from a domestic
outlet.

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 14:47:51 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Feb 24, 5:02*pm, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800, bob haller wrote:
the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline making
us less dependent on a finite resource.

And what infinite well of energy does electrical power come from? *Just
because it always comes out of the wall when you plug into it doesn't
mean that there isn't some generating station out there burning
_something_ to deliver the bulk of it to you.

--
Tim Wescott
Control system and signal processing consultingwww.wescottdesign.com

His point was the autos rely on oil for a fuel source
and are responsible for using a whole lot of it.
Very little electricity is generated from oil, at least here
in the USA. It's only a few percent. Coal is the largest
source, followed by nat gas. And there is a lot more of
that available, enough for hundreds of years.

Yet the Left is shutting down coal mines and coal fired generation at
an astounding pace.

No nukes, no oil, no coal. And the cost of building solar power and
windpower (and remember the millions of dead raptors those create)
will supply the US with energy for centuries to come...right?


The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 23:54:01 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

On Feb 24, 10:02*pm, Tim Wescott wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800, bob haller wrote:
the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline making
us less dependent on a finite resource.

And what infinite well of energy does electrical power come from? *Just
because it always comes out of the wall when you plug into it doesn't
mean that there isn't some generating station out there burning
_something_ to deliver the bulk of it to you.

Electric cars use around half/one third the energy needed for
conventional cars. That energy is much cheaper too.
It could come from nuclear power or renewable.

Nukes! Shame on you for wanting to poison the planet and kill us
all!!!

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...d-decommission


The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:45:31 -0600, Dean Hoffman
" wrote:

On 2/24/13 4:33 PM, wrote:

Why would any sane person buy a limited range car? That's *nuts*.


Why do people buy short ladders?

Because they are nuts.


The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

So, if I need to go some where about 200 miles away. I drive about 50 miles,
the range of the car. Get a motel room with charging dock, spend the night
and charge the car over night?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"bob haller" wrote in message
...

Very little electricity is generated from oil, at least here
in the USA. It's only a few percent. Coal is the largest
source, followed by nat gas. And there is a lot more of
that available, enough for hundreds of years.


During the day the power grid is used a lot, but after work, evenings
nights and weekends the power grid as lots of extra capacity

People could charge their vehicles at nght, at off peak rates.

I think the exception is government regulation. At which point economics,
and everyone loses.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"dsi1" wrote in message
...
On 2/24/2013 12:37 PM, wrote:

The new model carriages were not forced on anyone. There *IS* a
difference. When economics wins, everyone wins. When it takes a back
seat, everyone loses.

Economics does not take a backseat to anything or anybody. It always
wins out.

On 2/25/2013 1:51 AM, harry wrote:
On Feb 24, 9:42 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 2/24/2013 1:42 PM, dsi1 wrote:









On 2/24/2013 2:46 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
La La Land. ^_^

TDD

It's a good thing for us that folks who said that the infrastructure was
not in place and that the moonbats were trying to replace horses and
buggys with new-fangled automobiles were unable to convince the
citizenry of their anti-progressive ways. What model carriage do you
drive, sir? :-)

Don't be silly, the primitive automobiles were few in number and the
highway system didn't exist at the time not to mention the relatively
tiny population in those days. Electric vehicles will be wonderful if
the infrastructure is allowed to develop and evolve slowly and with the
demands of the market the same way the internal combustion engine based
transportation infrastructure did. Moonbats believe the present
transportation infrastructure can be scrapped and changed overnight. If
you remember history, our politicians didn't use the newfangled gasoline
powered automobiles and airplanes until the technology matured as much
as the rail and steamship travel had become and widely used safely by a
large number of people. Last week I had to spend a few days working at
the Northern end of the state which was a two hour drive. There is no
windmill and solar cell powered vehicle in existence that would have
made it possible for me and JH to transport ourselves and a half ton of
tools and equipment to the job site and back. So my assertion of the
moonbattery of the Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks still
stands. ^_^

TDD

You charge your car up at home at night Duf.
So there are charging stations everywhere.
The problem is; range and the time it takes to charge from a domestic
outlet.


Electric vehicles are wonderful for the capabilities they have. The
electric car can never take the place of a gasoline powered vehicle
until it has the range and convenience of what we have now. Perhaps
a small nuclear reactor would give an electrically driven vehicle the
ability to travel long distances without having to stop every 50 miles
to recharge the battery. My concept of vehicle range is one that travels
far enough and long enough so that I must stop to empty my bladder
before the vehicle runs out of power. ^_^

TDD

On 2/24/2013 11:21 PM, dsi1 wrote:
On 2/24/2013 11:42 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 2/24/2013 1:42 PM, dsi1 wrote:
On 2/24/2013 2:46 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered
limousines
and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy
and
transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
La La Land. ^_^

TDD

It's a good thing for us that folks who said that the infrastructure was
not in place and that the moonbats were trying to replace horses and
buggys with new-fangled automobiles were unable to convince the
citizenry of their anti-progressive ways. What model carriage do you
drive, sir? :-)

Don't be silly, the primitive automobiles were few in number and the
highway system didn't exist at the time not to mention the relatively
tiny population in those days. Electric vehicles will be wonderful if
the infrastructure is allowed to develop and evolve slowly and with the
demands of the market the same way the internal combustion engine based
transportation infrastructure did. Moonbats believe the present
transportation infrastructure can be scrapped and changed overnight. If

Nobody believes that the infrastructure can be developed overnight. The
electric car will develop and mature like any new technology. Naysayers,
as usual, will be proven shortsighted and wrong.


You've obviously never met a wide eyed dumbass who voted for the present
administration. Electric vehicles haven't been developed
to the point that they can take the place of existing internal
combustion engine powered vehicles except for short range commuting
which I think is a wonderful use for them. An electric vehicle is
not suitable for my use because I often must travel a hundred miles
or more in a day and carry a load of tools and equipment. There is
no electric vehicle in existence that a normal citizen could afford
that has anything near the capabilities of my old gasoline powered
service van. O_o

you remember history, our politicians didn't use the newfangled gasoline
powered automobiles and airplanes until the technology matured as much
as the rail and steamship travel had become and widely used safely by a
large number of people. Last week I had to spend a few days working at
the Northern end of the state which was a two hour drive. There is no
windmill and solar cell powered vehicle in existence that would have
made it possible for me and JH to transport ourselves and a half ton of
tools and equipment to the job site and back. So my assertion of the
moonbattery of the Progressive Liberal Leftist Commiecrat Freaks still
stands. ^_^


Sorry, I won't get sucked into some political rant. That's just a red
herring anyway.


Political rant my irritated red posterior. It's the morons in Washington
D.C. who are trying to push junk science and technology
on the citizenry when they have no understanding of said technology.
It's amazing how much taxpayer money was wasted on trying to prop up
so called "green" energy when the companies promising great and
wonderful solar cells and super duper batteries sucked in hundreds of
millions of taxpayer dollars them went bankrupt. I wonder why GM hasn't
been able to put an electric car in every driveway? Perhaps it's because
no normal citizen want's one of the darn things? Perhaps if Apple came
up with an iCar, folks would be clamoring for one? O_o

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/24/...nded-failures/

http://tinyurl.com/csodhvk

TDD

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 19:00:26 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:25:50 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

It doesn't take much planning to avoid such situations.

It takes foreknowledge of places you've never been before.

Enough smarts to not get overextended.

That is your mistaken ass.umption, troll.

The bike's range was about 150 miles and I had ~30 left, plenty to
look for gas in town but not enough to risk finding any on the highway
late on Sunday night. I've always recorded every gas purchase and
tracked the MPG and remaining range.

I'm just warning not to assume the tourist areas you visit will have
the same 24-hour service as the more densely populated place you live.
jsw

In article ,
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

Jim Wilkins wrote:

wrote in message
...

They have a place. Around here (well, not actually in the town I
live
in) many drive golf carts. The grocery stores all have cart spaces
(closer than the handicapped spaces). Even the high school has a
golf
cart parking lot (cart driving age is 14). As a car replacement,
it's
a stupid idea.

But a golf cart saves many hundreds of dollars a year by not requiring
registration and insurance, which can destroy the savings potential of
having a second limited-range electric car. They solve a problem that
is social rather than a technical.


You see a lot of people with nothing but a golf cart in some large
retirement communities, They can go anywhere, including to their
doctors on the carts. 'The Villages" is one of the largest, and you see
a lot of golf carts, but very few cars.

There is an area on Duck Key in Fl where they actually post (and
enforce) golf cart speed limits. These are an option but only in certain
areas, at least so far.
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the *******s."-- Claire Wolfe

In article ,
The Daring Dufas wrote:

to recharge the battery. My concept of vehicle range is one that travels
far enough and long enough so that I must stop to empty my bladder
before the vehicle runs out of power. ^_^

TDD

And that is is power filled during the time it takes my wife to empty
hers....
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the *******s."-- Claire Wolfe

On 2/24/2013 10:33 PM, gonjah wrote:
On 2/24/2013 5:43 PM, Frank wrote:
On 2/24/2013 3:48 PM, gonjah wrote:
On 2/24/2013 12:59 PM, Frank wrote:
On 2/24/2013 11:02 AM, gonjah wrote:
On 2/24/2013 8:25 AM, Frank wrote:
On 2/24/2013 5:52 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
Awl --

After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the
purchase of
one, but bleeve, it's hard.
I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a
Volt
would
proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.

Now, about those electricity costs.....

If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.

Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you
about c per
kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into
what
you actually wrote on your check. Around NYC, that seems to be
about
25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.

So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to
charge
it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per
mile in
gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WTF??

You get similar numbers for the Leaf, and Volt.

Now, it gets worse:
There's the ever-present thermodynamic kick-in-the-ass.
It will NEVER take only 85 kWhrs to charge an 85 kWhr battery
-- it
will
take proly 20% more.

So even if the Tesla DOES get 200 mi per charge (and jb's article
suggests
that it does not
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/au...ewanted=1&_r=0






)

factor in the charging inefficiency, and you are just about EQUAL
in $
per
mi cost of a 30 mpg vehicle.

Anything less than 200 mi per charge, and the Tesla loses, and poss.
loses
badly.


So at NYC electric rates, an electric car, not counting ANY other
factors,
is actually MORE expensive than gas, at $4/gal.

YET, you see these huge "equivalent" mpg numbers for electrics,
typically
around 100 mpg, implying a $ per mile cost of less than 1/3 the cost
of a 30
mpg vehicle..
But my calcs show that an electric will be *at least* as
expensive as
gas,
and likely considerably more than gas, as a fuel.... What gives??

Holy ****.... there goes my Volt....

Now factor in the high initial cost of electrics, inevitable battery
deterioration AND replacement cost, and wow, simply not viable.
Unless I
made a mistake somewhere.

Now, some may bleat, Oh OH, MY electric rates are 5c/kWhr.... and I
would
repeat, do the net division on your bill to see what it REALLY is.
At a
TRUE 5c/kWhr, yeah, it makes sense, you could divide all the above
electric
costs by FIVE.
But I don't think anyone is really paying 5c, and quite a few
places,
like
CA, pay MORE than NYS utility rates.

AND, if your small car gets 40 mpg, that's even tougher competition
for
electrics.

Idears?? Opinions?


Did the math myself.
Hybrids are good for those that drive over maybe 20,000 miles per
year.
For the bulk of us, they cost more. For those that think it is worth
the cost of conservation, hidden costs have not been considered like
mining the battery material, and these are often environmentally
unfriendly.
When Prius first came out, I looked up cost of battery replacement
and
figured after warranty ran out and batteries needed replacement you
might as well junk the car for what it was worth.

I don't know about the hidden cost but, the Prius battery is under
warranty for 100k miles, IIRC.

Here is a interesting article about the life of the battery.

http://www.tirebusiness.com/article/...y-as-you-think






http://tinyurl.com/b6rvkws

We had a Prius for about 50k miles. Great car with great mileage. We
sold it to my niece who loves it too. My wife bought a Sonata Hybrid.
Nice car, but expensive and doesn't get as the gas mileage of the
Prius.
Personally, I'd have kept the Prius but it is important to find a good
mechanic to do any repairs. The dealer will soak you. Fortunately I
know
a guy that used to work for Toyota and does repairs for a fraction of
what the dealer will. Not that it needed many repairs. The video
display
went out and the replacement cost at the dealer was outrageous. I
ended
up paying less than $275 for a used display. I think my guy charged me
about $25 to do the replacement. To do the repair at the dealer would
have cost around $5000.


Might have been over 10 years when I googled battery replacement and I
recalled 7,000 Australian dollars. Still a lot of money today.
Doing cost of car repair, if repair exceeds Blue Book value is is time
to trade in the car.


No argument there. When the dealer told me $5k for the repair of the
display I was wondering what we got into. A quick internet search found
a used display and I found a really good cheap mechanic. If it hadn't
been for that the Prius would be a bad memory.

I'm retired and both wife and I only put about 6,000 miles per year on
our cars. We'd be wasting money on hybrids.

snip

I'm not really sure about that. Most hybrids don't perform that well on
mileage but the Prius is an exception. On one cross country trip we
averaged 75 mpg with the Prius. From that point, I was sold on them.

I'd put your battery worries to rest.

I know Prius owners that love them.
My point is that hybrids are not for everyone.
In my case, the batteries would be a concern if warranty is 10
years/100,000 miles I'd come up 40,000 miles short in 10 years.
Prius, I rode in had one surprise. While the cars are quiet on the
outside, it appeared to have a lot of road noise on the inside.

That was my wife's complaint. She also said the car didn't have enough
weight to feel safe in.

If you read the article, the batteries are lasting much longer than
expected and, according to the article, refurbished battery packs can be
had for $1400. Just don't buy a battery from the dealer.

I'd love to have a Prius but I have a 98 Tacoma that will probably last
longer than me. Also, I don't have $25k to spend.

We live on a hill and I like to hunt and wife and I both have Subaru
Foresters with AWD. I mention this as a guy's wife had a Prius and said
it was not good in snow and traded it in for a Subaru Outback.
I had thought maybe Prius had electric motors on all wheels but
apparently only on the front.

My Subaru is 10 years old and only has 50k+ miles. Needed a new battery
last year but remote battery still works

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Feb 24, 3:45 pm, "Existential Angst" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Feb 24, 9:17 am, bob haller wrote:









On Feb 24, 7:50 am, "
wrote:

On Feb 24, 5:52 am, "Existential Angst" wrote:

Awl --

After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the
purchase of
one, but bleeve, it's hard.
I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a
Volt
would
proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.

Now, about those electricity costs.....

If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.

Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you about
c
per
kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into
what
you actually wrote on your check.

That isn't the correct way of doing the calculation. What
you want to find is the INCREMENTAL cost of charging a
car. That could be lower or higher than the rate with your
method. For example if you have a monthly fixed charge
of $25, you're paying that regardless of the car and it
should not be attributed to the car. And if you're
in an area where rates escalate if you exceed a certain
amount, then you're going to pay more for the car
charging than shown by your method.

Around NYC, that seems to be about
25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.

Could be. Here in NJ it's been around 15c to 17c.

So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to
charge
it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per
mile
in
gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WTF??

The Tesla is a performance car that does 0 to 60 in like
4 secs.

You get similar numbers for the Leaf, and Volt.

Now, it gets worse:
There's the ever-present thermodynamic kick-in-the-ass.
It will NEVER take only 85 kWhrs to charge an 85 kWhr battery -- it
will
take proly 20% more.

So even if the Tesla DOES get 200 mi per charge (and jb's article
suggests
that it does
nothttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highw...
)

factor in the charging inefficiency, and you are just about EQUAL in
$
per
mi cost of a 30 mpg vehicle.

Anything less than 200 mi per charge, and the Tesla loses, and poss.
loses
badly.

So at NYC electric rates, an electric car, not counting ANY other
factors,
is actually MORE expensive than gas, at $4/gal.

YET, you see these huge "equivalent" mpg numbers for electrics,
typically
around 100 mpg, implying a $ per mile cost of less than 1/3 the cost
of a 30
mpg vehicle..
But my calcs show that an electric will be *at least* as expensive
as
gas,
and likely considerably more than gas, as a fuel.... What gives??

I don't know. But rather than winging the calcs, there must be
some actual real world test results available online. One key
factor is that you're assuming the battery fully discharges on each
cycle. They don't. How much is left IDK.

Holy ****.... there goes my Volt....

Now factor in the high initial cost of electrics, inevitable battery
deterioration AND replacement cost, and wow, simply not viable.
Unless
I
made a mistake somewhere.

Now, some may bleat, Oh OH, MY electric rates are 5c/kWhr.... and I
would
repeat, do the net division on your bill to see what it REALLY is.
At
a
TRUE 5c/kWhr, yeah, it makes sense, you could divide all the above
electric
costs by FIVE.
But I don't think anyone is really paying 5c, and quite a few
places,
like
CA, pay MORE than NYS utility rates.

AND, if your small car gets 40 mpg, that's even tougher competition
for
electrics.

Idears?? Opinions?
--
EA

I think your math may be off a bit, but I think the conclusion
is probably valid. That's why the govt is subsidizing these things
with big tax credits. They were picking up about 12K of the cost
of the Volts, don't know what the deal is now. And from what I
saw, even with that, the car still wasn't as good as a conventional
car.

BTW, do you know that if you ever let the Tesla battery go
completely dead, it's bricked? That it cost like 30 -40K to
replace it? That's a nice feature. Even better, you would
think that would be in big print in the owners manual. It's
buried somewhere in there, but not made obvious. The car
can self drain the battery in about a month from a FULL charge.
So, what happens if you drive to the airport, arrive with the
battery low and leave on a week long trip?

It does have a phone home system where it alerts Tesla
that it's about to go kaput. And they then try to contact
you. LAst resort, when they could not find the owner,
they have even used the GPS to find the car and dispatch
their own Tesla service folks to plug it in. Despite that,
some have been bricked. A homeowner put one in a
garage for a couple months and thought it was plugged
in. Something happened with the cord getting disconnected.
Battery bricked and it isn't covered under warranty.

Another nice feature for pioneers.... But they seem to be
hippies that are focused on the idea that the car is zero
emission, conveniently forgetting that in most cases that
power is still coming from coal, nukes, etc.

on telsa or any vehicle where a stone dead battery can kill the
battery it should have a automatic total disconnect relay of some type
to protect the expensive battery, self discharge of a disconected
battery should be low. plus a built in solar panel in case its
outdoors when the battery gets low.

the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline
making us less dependent on a finite resource.

although i think any only electric vehiicle should be designed to
hitch on a trailer generator in case someone needs to take a really
long trip. generator trailers could be sold or rented for occasional
use- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

How many cars do you think you'd sell when you advertise the fact
that for a long trip you need to go rent a trailer with a generator?
================================================== ===========

LOL!!! A deal killer f'sure....

And my roof-top portable generator is proly not far behind!!!!
I don't know if a rooftop generator smacks more of Chevy Chase or Sanford
&
Son..... lol

But, still, an idea that in principle has merit -- a kind of piece-meal
Volt.

My 15,000 W genset measures, iirc, about 30" long, by 16" wide, by 21"
high.... and a "very heavy" 230#.
And THAT is VERY compact for a generator that size.
I don't know how you could make it more compact, for mebbe a permanent
placement somewhere (soundproofed lol) in the car, and just manually hook
it up in a pinch, or for the long-ish drive or low batt.

So, a good idea, that might be difficult to implement. But mebbe someone
will figger it out.
--
EA

You can buy such a car with all that built in. Called a Chevy Volt
(or a Vauxhall Ampera over here.)
================================================== ===

That is an excellent point!! lol

But I think the point to the observation of "carrying a portable generator
around" is that this is, essentially, a *really simple deal*, not a $45,000
(Volt) deal. An electric car is a goddamm electric motor, a bunch of
batteries, and in this case, a HD generator as backup.

How is it, then, with 1/100 of the machining of an I.C.E., these compact
electric cars are DOUBLE++ the price of a Honder Fit or Toyoter Yaris??

Most people on RCM could build their own electric car.
--
EA

On 2/24/2013 10:17 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 21:35:31 -0600, gonjah wrote:

On 2/24/2013 4:48 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 10:02:02 -0600, gonjah wrote:

On 2/24/2013 8:25 AM, Frank wrote:
On 2/24/2013 5:52 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
Awl --

After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the
purchase of
one, but bleeve, it's hard.
I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a Volt
would
proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.

Now, about those electricity costs.....

If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.

Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you
about c per
kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into what
you actually wrote on your check. Around NYC, that seems to be about
25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.

So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to
charge
it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per
mile in
gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WTF??

You get similar numbers for the Leaf, and Volt.

Now, it gets worse:
There's the ever-present thermodynamic kick-in-the-ass.
It will NEVER take only 85 kWhrs to charge an 85 kWhr battery -- it
will
take proly 20% more.

So even if the Tesla DOES get 200 mi per charge (and jb's article
suggests
that it does not
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/au...ewanted=1&_r=0

)

factor in the charging inefficiency, and you are just about EQUAL in $
per
mi cost of a 30 mpg vehicle.

Anything less than 200 mi per charge, and the Tesla loses, and poss.
loses
badly.


So at NYC electric rates, an electric car, not counting ANY other
factors,
is actually MORE expensive than gas, at $4/gal.

YET, you see these huge "equivalent" mpg numbers for electrics, typically
around 100 mpg, implying a $ per mile cost of less than 1/3 the cost
of a 30
mpg vehicle..
But my calcs show that an electric will be *at least* as expensive as
gas,
and likely considerably more than gas, as a fuel.... What gives??

Holy ****.... there goes my Volt....

Now factor in the high initial cost of electrics, inevitable battery
deterioration AND replacement cost, and wow, simply not viable. Unless I
made a mistake somewhere.

Now, some may bleat, Oh OH, MY electric rates are 5c/kWhr.... and I
would
repeat, do the net division on your bill to see what it REALLY is. At a
TRUE 5c/kWhr, yeah, it makes sense, you could divide all the above
electric
costs by FIVE.
But I don't think anyone is really paying 5c, and quite a few places,
like
CA, pay MORE than NYS utility rates.

AND, if your small car gets 40 mpg, that's even tougher competition for
electrics.

Idears?? Opinions?


Did the math myself.
Hybrids are good for those that drive over maybe 20,000 miles per year.
For the bulk of us, they cost more. For those that think it is worth
the cost of conservation, hidden costs have not been considered like
mining the battery material, and these are often environmentally
unfriendly.
When Prius first came out, I looked up cost of battery replacement and
figured after warranty ran out and batteries needed replacement you
might as well junk the car for what it was worth.

I don't know about the hidden cost but, the Prius battery is under
warranty for 100k miles, IIRC.

...and after that the car is junk. BTW, how many years? We're not
talking about a high-mileage car, here. If so, there are far better
solutions.

...


Not necessarily. Read the article I posted. They are well built cars.

http://tinyurl.com/b6rvkws

Just don't go to the dealer for parts.

I did read the article. It's written by someone who already had the
solution. IOW, it's propaganda.


Could be, but it's true the batteries are lasting a long time and the
price of replacements will drop. I can attest to the car's ruggedness.
Toyota's are known for being quality imports and Toyota has a lot
invested in the Prius.

"Wes Groleau" wrote in message
...
On 02-24-2013 10:21, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800 (PST), bob haller

wrote:

although i think any only electric vehiicle should be designed to
hitch on a trailer generator in case someone needs to take a
really
long trip. generator trailers could be sold or rented for
occasional
use

That's the *dumbest* idea you've ever come up with. ...and that
takes
some doing!

He didn't come up with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ac...o_DSC00467.jpg


We towed small fuel and water trailers behind trucks and Jeeps on Army
convoys in Europe.
http://www.armedforces-int.com/suppliers/tecimer.html
They caused less trouble than towing a boat.

Trailer aren't dumb, only drivers who can't learn to back them up.

On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:00:51 -0500, "Existential Angst"
wrote:


Most people on RCM could build their own electric car.

Right on! At least for incredibly small values of "most." The real
problem is that know-nothing companies like GM prefer wasting money on
unnecessary and overly complicated tech. They could have produced a
cheaper vehicle by coming to RCM for great ideas such as nuclear
powered cars. **** me, the expertise we have here a'wastin' is
awesome. Guys who can ride motorcycles at over 250mph, guys who have a
hotline to heaven for driving directions, and guys who know how to do
a better job on anything from running the country to choosing who
should live or die. The only real mysteries are why the level of
talent frequently appears to be inversely related to the level of
funds, and why so many of the masterful prefer talking about their
abilities instead of utilizing them.

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:00:51 -0500, "Existential Angst"
wrote:


Most people on RCM could build their own electric car.

Right on! At least for incredibly small values of "most." The real
problem is that know-nothing companies like GM prefer wasting money on
unnecessary and overly complicated tech. They could have produced a
cheaper vehicle by coming to RCM for great ideas such as nuclear
powered cars. **** me, the expertise we have here a'wastin' is
awesome. Guys who can ride motorcycles at over 250mph, guys who have a
hotline to heaven for driving directions, and guys who know how to do
a better job on anything from running the country to choosing who
should live or die. The only real mysteries are why the level of
talent frequently appears to be inversely related to the level of
funds, and why so many of the masterful prefer talking about their
abilities instead of utilizing them.

I'm sure Gummer is fully capable of building an electic car.
He would just try to mount a machine gun on the roof -- you know, prepping
for The Great Cull.

As far as GM goes, I never said it wadn't a good car.
But, yeah, most pyooter **** these days is gratuitously (read:
ass****ingly) complicated.

And yeah, if GM were not fellating the (m)asses, there are better designs.
I already stated, several times, that GM got it right, by copying the motive
strategy of diesel-electric locomotives.
But they didn't get it totally right, ito lower-hp hub motors, and a few
other things, like, well, more batteries.

Almost 3800#????? My mid-sized 1990 Mazder 929S weighed 3400#. The Honder
Fit weighs 2500#.
The 1974 VW beetle weighed just under 2,000.

Sheeit, if they tack on a few more goodies, they could get the weight up to
4500#, which is what my V6 crewcab Frontier (6' bed) weighs.

But no biggie. 'tis what 'tis. We should just be aware of what is....
and mebbe why it is.
--
EA

On Feb 24, 8:25*pm, bob haller wrote:
On Feb 24, 10:21*am, wrote:





On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800 (PST), bob haller
wrote:

...

the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline
making us less dependent on a finite resource.

Nonsense.

although i think any only electric vehiicle should be designed to
hitch on a trailer generator in case someone needs to take a really
long trip. generator trailers could be sold or rented for occasional
use

That's the *dumbest* idea you've ever come up with. *...and that takes
some doing!

how so? it makes the all electric vehicle typically used for around
town easy to plug into a tiny trailer for long term trips. owner could
buy trailer or rent it for occasional use..

and since very little electric is generated by burning crude oil,
around here its nuclear, coal and natural gas.

anything that uses less crude oil / gasoline is less $$ given to the
arabs who hate us.......- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Does it really matter if instead of US dollars going into the pockets
of arabs, it's chinese or europen dollars? They still are going to
sell all the oil they produce and wind up with about the same amount
of
revenue.

Gunner on Mon, 25 Feb 2013 02:23:14 -0800 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 16:45:31 -0600, Dean Hoffman
" wrote:

On 2/24/13 4:33 PM, wrote:

Why would any sane person buy a limited range car? That's *nuts*.

Why do people buy short ladders?

Because they are nuts.

Or they don't need to do anything useful.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

On 2/25/2013 3:14 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:

You've obviously never met a wide eyed dumbass who voted for the present
administration. Electric vehicles haven't been developed
to the point that they can take the place of existing internal
combustion engine powered vehicles except for short range commuting
which I think is a wonderful use for them. An electric vehicle is
not suitable for my use because I often must travel a hundred miles
or more in a day and carry a load of tools and equipment. There is
no electric vehicle in existence that a normal citizen could afford
that has anything near the capabilities of my old gasoline powered
service van. O_o

It sounds like an electric vehicle is not for you. The reality is that
most passenger cars would not suit your needs. What's your point? Are
all normal citizens supposed to drive gasoline powered service vans?

Kurt Ullman wrote:

There is an area on Duck Key in Fl where they actually post (and
enforce) golf cart speed limits. These are an option but only in certain
areas, at least so far.


I've never been that far south. Tampa is about as far as I've been.


Some communities around here give the golf carts the right of way.
They ignore stop signs, and drive down the middle of the roads. If they
pull out in front of a car, the car's driver is at fault. They even got
the state to build a private golf cart bridge over US-441 near Leesburg.

The Daring Dufas wrote:

Electric vehicles are wonderful for the capabilities they have. The
electric car can never take the place of a gasoline powered vehicle
until it has the range and convenience of what we have now. Perhaps
a small nuclear reactor would give an electrically driven vehicle the
ability to travel long distances without having to stop every 50 miles
to recharge the battery. My concept of vehicle range is one that travels
far enough and long enough so that I must stop to empty my bladder
before the vehicle runs out of power. ^_^


There were five mounting locations for 30 gallon tanks on my old
stepvan service truck. Fully loaded, it got over 20 MPG or 600+ miles
per tank. Dual tanks easily let you drive over a thousand miles. All
five would take you over 3000 miles, if you could afford to fill all of
them. ;-)