John Rumm wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Adrian wrote:
Roland Perry gurgled happily, sounding much
like they
were saying:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html

A very small step (for man or mankind....)

"The S-Class car, a 'mild' hybrid that will still draw most of
its power from petrol..."

Indeed.

But do Lithium Ion batteries provide the step forward that's being
alleged?

In my opinion, yes.

Not really. One litre of petrol provides 35MJ of energy, about
10kWh. Even a small car will have a c.50 litre fuel tank, something
the size of an S-class nearer double that.

So that's 0.5-1MWh of energy on board. Wonder how big the battery
pack would have to be to replace that...? Wonder how long it'll take
to recharge...?


You forget that that energy is converted at less than 27% peak
efficiency, propably less than 20% average.: its nearer 95% with
battery electric, and with regenerative braking you get a little free
recharge.

Using super capacitors, 99% of all kinetic braking energy is recovered.

Seems unlikely given that the power of braking systems typically dwarfs
that of the motive systems in most cars. You will only be able to
recover at a rate proportional to the max output of the drive system.


Actually leaving super capacitors aside, electric motors have good
characteristics for this. Its not hard to make a motor than can have a
burst (say 30 second) heat capacity some several times its peak
continuous capacity. If you wind for optimum efficiency at cruise (which
you probably would) the peak capacity is dominated by copper resistance
heat losses. How much power you can absorb (even at not hugely good
efficiencies) is really about how hot you can allow the motor to get.
there is usually enough thermal mass in there to give you a half a
minute of extremely high power - in OR out.

It is in fact ideal for road use, where mostly you are either stop
starting at low power, or cruising. The extremes of acceleration and
braking are for most drivers outside a race track, only occasional things.

The more you delve into the physics of BEV;'s the nicer the whole thing
looks, bar the one bugaboo - that big battery.

I will certainly never be one to say that BEVs will ever equal IC
engines in terms of sheer racing car performance, or range per weight of
fuel/battery. They wont. You wont see battery powered airliners either -
not with lithium anyway,although its doable (and has been done) with
microlights.

That is not the point. The point is are they good ENOUGH, coupled with
non fossil generated electricity, to replace a *substantial* number of
road cars, and here I maintain that they are just about good enough, and
will be even better shortly.

Personally a 150 mile range small electric car able to top 80mph and
plug into an overnight socket, would be good enough for 95% of all my
current motoring needs: I'd still keep the camper for what it does, and
the land rover for when off road is needed, but they would simply not
get used on a daily basis.

Frankly, with just 50 mile range, that would do ALL the shopping trips -
about 50% of what we do.

If someone offered me such a car with suitable guarantees on the battery
life, and at less than £10k I'd probabaly buy it on the spot.




Mechanical recovery into a flywheel might work.

I don't think its needed. I think the motors could easily cope with the
peak powers..the battery should be able to cope also.

Mary Fisher wrote:
"Longshanks" wrote in message
...
* Doctor Drivel wrote:
Which is the vast amount of car journeys. That is why hybrids answer the
current problem. Battery for town, petrol for longer.
The current problem is people use their cars for town.

Not everyone.


Quite: we try and avoid towns altogether, since there is very little in
them of any interest whatsoever these days.


Mary

magwitch wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Mary Fisher wrote:
"Rod" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html
But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally
unheated behicle in the winter.

You could wear warmer clothing. We don't heat our car, ever. We have
a lot of fun :-)

Mary


well more fool you. Current cars throw about 10Kw of heat way..you
might as well use it to stay warm and keep some poor sheep alive.

They don't slaughter sheep for their wool. They shear them.
True.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Actually, PV cells can be the whole roof of the car in any climes. But
they don't help very much with heating on a dark winter day in the UK.

Indeed. Drivel by name, drivel by content, mostly.

One or two have been made like this with encouraging results. Your idea is
have nuclear cell in the car - such is snotty unis.

wrote:
In uk.d-i-y The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There may well come time however, when we see that any distance over
100 miles is better served by driving to a rail depot, and shifting a
container n(or indeed the whole car, as is done with the channel tunnel)
onto a train, rather than driving it there.

Which is no doubt why MotoRail is a rapidly dying service.


is it?

It certainly was hugely more expensive than the ferrys last time I used
it. I was in a hurry and the hovercraft had vanished..

So I doubt its a technical things: simply the way its priced.

It was certainly a good way to do the crossing: just expensive.

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:13:07 on Tue,
27 May 2008, The Natural Philosopher remarked:
200 miles is a very large threshold. I'd use 50 miles as where "long
distance" starts.

Well I used 200miles because that is what is currently achievable at
decent performance with LI-Ion batteries.

Which car is that, then?
--
Roland Perry

I gave a link.

On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:12:31 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Rod" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html

But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally unheated
behicle in the winter.

You could wear warmer clothing. We don't heat our car, ever. We have a lot
of fun :-)

Too much information Mary. ;-)

I guess I might be one of the very few on here to actually have a full
plug_in electric car and have had it for over 20 years (not one of
these petrol driven capacitor-battery hybrid things).

It's not well designed (poor aerodynamics, low voltage, old battery
tech, lossy speed control, poor rolling resistance) but it is an
electric vehicle none the less. Developed the last time the petrol got
expensive.

When I worked at_the_top of the road it served me well as I could
charge it at work (by agreement) or home (from burnt coal/oil/gas) and
it was exempt road TAX and MOT.

But it was (is) just a toy, 20 miles range at 30 mph and batteries
that cost a fortune and die if left unused for a few months (unlike an
IC engine).

My model was quite rare though (I think it's only one of a few left),
good fun in the summer and very easy to maintain (dust the brakes out
once in a while is about it) ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfield_8000

What goes round ...

All the best ..

T i m

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:22:37
on Tue, 27 May 2008, Toby Douglass
remarked:
What they probably mean is that by introducing cleaner diesels (in the
particulate/smog sense) they have persuaded new buyers to pick a diesel
50% of the time, but that market is now saturated and if they want to
further reduce their *carbon* emissions they must look elsewhere than
sell people the better-mpg diesels which have been achieving that goal
so far.

Hasn't diesel caused a huge soot problem? they emit a lot more
particulate matter?

Isn't that what "cleaner diesels" largely avoid?

I rarely see diesel cars emitting clouds of smoke, that seems to be
reserved for buses and trains.

Not in London as they have filters. Diesels busses shake like hell on idle.
The sooner they are electric hybrids the better.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally
unheated behicle in the winter. Even keeping the screens clear becomes
a bit of a problem.

Some earlier electric cars had petrol burners to warm the interior. Is
that included in the fuel efficiency claimed?

There is zero insulation in a car.

Rubbish. I've got the headlining out of the Saab at the moment to
re-trim
it, and - trust me on this - it makes a BIG difference.

Anyway, I thought car weights needed to come down, not go up?

I repeat. "There is zero insulation in a car".

Repeat it as much as you like: It won;'t make it any less silly than the
first time you said it. There is in fact a considerable amount in every
modern car.

Sound insulation, not high performing heat insulation, which keeps in and
out.

"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

There is zero insulation in a car.

Rubbish. I've got the headlining out of the Saab at the moment to
re-trim it, and - trust me on this - it makes a BIG difference.

Anyway, I thought car weights needed to come down, not go up?

I repeat. "There is zero insulation in a car".

sigh
Just because you repeat it doesn't make it right...

Rod wrote:
Adrian wrote:
Rod gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were
saying:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html

But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally
unheated behicle in the winter. Even keeping the screens clear becomes a
bit of a problem.

shrug Easy. Instead of a water-to-air matrix, use an electric
element. The actual air distribution and circulation is electric
anyway. For aircon, the compressor is electrically driven, as many
power steering pumps currently are.

Some earlier electric cars had petrol burners to warm the interior. Is
that included in the fuel efficiency claimed?

Just as it isn't in modern common-rail diesels which are so heat
efficient that many of those have an additional diesel-fuelled heater.

As I said to begin with, early electric cars sometimes had a petrol
burner because the designers felt it unwise to use the stored electric
power for heating purposes. Given very low weight, low cost energy
storage perhaps the balance shifts. But most particularly, I would like
to know that the heating energy usage has been fully factored in - for
cold winters - when fuel consumptions are compared. It could make a huge
difference compared to a cool summer.

Well all I know is that it takes less than 500W to heat our smallest
bathroom - about the size of a car - in the coldest weather. That is
slightly less than a brake horsepower.

I am not 100% sure of the figures, but a small car on cruise at 40-50mph
uses at least 10bhp i would think. So the power to heat is not dominant
at the very least, and may well be very small, or if you can tap into
the - say - 10% heatloss of the cars power train, essentially free anyway.

I would expect the electric car would be made from fairly thin metal to
save wight, with foam insulation inside..major heatloss (and heat gain)
would be via the windows. Double glazing, or even reducing windows and
using rear view CCTV for visibility, would actually be an advantage.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

I wouldn't deny anything bad about the Priapus meself. A cross bred
******* and an abortion, merely produced to sell to the gullible for
Greenie points (like Brownie points, but green).

You haven't a clue how it works! It is brilliant. A seamless quiet drive -
worth buying for that alone. Mine gets 60-65mpg in London. Fab! They are
everywhere in London, The place is swarming with them. Swarming.

"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

I repeat. "There is zero insulation in a car".

Repeat it as much as you like: It won;'t make it any less silly than
the first time you said it. There is in fact a considerable amount in
every modern car.

Sound insulation, not high performing heat insulation, which keeps in
and out.

Yes, dear... I'M TALKING ABOUT HEAT INSULATION.

"Mary Fisher" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

So how come 1.5kWh only gets the Pious two miles at slug-pace?

What's slug-pace?

Dog slow.
Maximum 30mph, and acceleration that would be outstripped by a glacier.

And indeed on longer trips an hour recharge time for driver AND car
every 200 miles is not actually a bad thing!

An hour to recharge 200kWh?

It takes at least that time to re-charge a driver - efficiently and
enjoyably.

It takes about a minute for the passenger to swap seats with the driver.

T i m wrote:
On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:12:31 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:

"Rod" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html
But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally unheated
behicle in the winter.
You could wear warmer clothing. We don't heat our car, ever. We have a lot
of fun :-)

Too much information Mary. ;-)

I guess I might be one of the very few on here to actually have a full
plug_in electric car and have had it for over 20 years (not one of
these petrol driven capacitor-battery hybrid things).

It's not well designed (poor aerodynamics, low voltage, old battery
tech, lossy speed control, poor rolling resistance) but it is an
electric vehicle none the less. Developed the last time the petrol got
expensive.

When I worked at_the_top of the road it served me well as I could
charge it at work (by agreement) or home (from burnt coal/oil/gas) and
it was exempt road TAX and MOT.

But it was (is) just a toy, 20 miles range at 30 mph and batteries
that cost a fortune and die if left unused for a few months (unlike an
IC engine).

My model was quite rare though (I think it's only one of a few left),
good fun in the summer and very easy to maintain (dust the brakes out
once in a while is about it) ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfield_8000

What goes round ...

All the best ..

T i m


Time to fit a lithium pack Tim. Should be a goer!

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"Doctor Drivel" wrote in message
...

...

The articles are about the future. The electric Mini gets 200 miles
range and outperforms a Porche.

What does 'outperforms' mean?

If it means that it goes faster I'm not interested.

Speed.

A Porche is an extravagent status symbol which wouldn't do what we demand
of our Laguna Estate - which we use for fewer than 3,000 miles a year.

It also has zero emissions and a super smooth seamless ride. Fab!

I think it might be some time before there will be an electric or dual
powered vehicle which will meet our demands which is sad, we'll probably
be dead by then. If there was one now we'd use it.

Hybrids are availabe to suit your needs.

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"Adrian" wrote in message
...

So how come 1.5kWh only gets the Pious two miles at slug-pace?

What's slug-pace?

It means he hasn't got a clue.

The Natural Philosopher gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

200 miles is a very large threshold. I'd use 50 miles as where "long
distance" starts.

Which, going by the battery-to-mileage efficiency of the Pious would
require 75kWh of capacity.

There's also the problem of people not necessarily having access to
charging sockets at either home _or_ work currently, which would
require a LOT of infrastructure upgrades in order to be provided.

Domestically its a twelve hour charge overnight on cheap rate. Easy
enough for those with garages and well within domestic supply limits.

Can your local substation cope with every house it supplies pulling so
much extra current?

For regulated car parking, again easy enough to add socket-in-pole
charging meters.

Again, can substations cope?

Anyway - if 12hrs is only giving you 50 miles range, an hour on a meter's
barely worth bothering with.

Hardest one is on street unregualated parking. Poeple will have to find
sopmewhere else to park their cars overnight. Oh dear. What a shame.

Congratulations, you've just waved your hand and removed a very large
percentage of urban residents from the equation.

And where's all this extra electricity coming from, anyway?

About 70 nuclear power stations by my reckoning, and a 3:1 upsize in the
the grid overall.

Quite.

Howver tht would happen over a couple of decades progressively

Oh, well, that's OK then... Just remind me of the timescales being talked
about for the couple of nuclear power stations we might one day get round
to building? Then, of course, there's the political implications of
building even those couple, let alone 70 more...

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
Toby Douglass gurgled
happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Hasn't diesel caused a huge soot problem? they emit a lot more
particulate matter?

Not these days. Perticulate emissions have been VERY tightly controlled
in the last couple of rounds of Euro emission standards.

When they're new.

Even with excellent servicing they are smelly in only a few months. I
wouldn't inflict the particulates of a diesel engine on anyone.


Well said Mary .

"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

And the answer to how big that is, is well under half a tonne for
the smaller one.

...or about half the weight of the rest of the car...

Similar to the power train on an IC car.

Rubbish. Rover's K-series weighs about 130kg with transmission. Add
50kg for fuel, and you have a complete powertrain with a 300 mile range
(and five minutes recharge for the next 300 miles) for 40% of that
"half a ton".

The powertrain on a 2cv - engine and gearbox - is light enough to be
carried by two people. With 25 litres of fuel, it'll give a four-seater
car weighing half a ton _complete_ a range of 200+ miles.

..and still emits filth from the exhaust and still 75% of the energy in
the tank is wasted.

....and still you miss the point more than slightly...

Boy you are dumb!

I do wish you'd stop referring to yourself in the second person. It's
very... odd...

"Jonathan Schneider" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher writes:

Why it gets special treatment is beyond me. It should be taxed double.

Or even doubly.

Or Doubly Bubbly.

"Mike P" gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

Rubbish. Rover's K-series weighs about 130kg with transmission. Add
50kg for fuel, and you have a complete powertrain with a 300 mile range
(and five minutes recharge for the next 300 miles) for 40% of that
"half a ton".

The powertrain on a 2cv - engine and gearbox - is light enough to be
carried by two people. With 25 litres of fuel, it'll give a four-seater
car weighing half a ton _complete_ a range of 200+ miles.

You must be getting weak. I can carry a 2CV engine and box myself :-)

I can carry 'em separately, but together...? ****, remind me never to get
into an argument with you...

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Mary Fisher" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

So how come 1.5kWh only gets the Pious two miles at slug-pace?

What's slug-pace?

Dog slow.

That's meaningless.

Maximum 30mph,

That's the limit in urban areas in UK.

and acceleration that would be outstripped by a glacier.

You've just completely discredited your statements.

And indeed on longer trips an hour recharge time for driver AND car
every 200 miles is not actually a bad thing!

An hour to recharge 200kWh?

It takes at least that time to re-charge a driver - efficiently and
enjoyably.

It takes about a minute for the passenger to swap seats with the driver.

Why would you want to?

Why are you in such a hurry?

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

There is zero insulation in a car.

Rubbish. I've got the headlining out of the Saab at the moment to
re-trim it, and - trust me on this - it makes a BIG difference.

Anyway, I thought car weights needed to come down, not go up?

I repeat. "There is zero insulation in a car".

sigh
Just because you repeat it doesn't make it right...

You keep repeating yourself :-)

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

There may well come time however, when we see that any distance over 100
miles is better served by driving to a rail depot, and shifting a
container n(or indeed the whole car, as is done with the channel tunnel)
onto a train, rather than driving it there.

Or chain them together and pull them along a motor way with a vehicle in the
centre reservation. A serious idea once. Back to the train.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 May 2008 12:12:31 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Rod" wrote in message
...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html

But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally
unheated
behicle in the winter.

You could wear warmer clothing. We don't heat our car, ever. We have a lot
of fun :-)

Too much information Mary. ;-)

Your imagination working overtime again, Tim :-)

I guess I might be one of the very few on here to actually have a full
plug_in electric car and have had it for over 20 years (not one of
these petrol driven capacitor-battery hybrid things).

It's not well designed (poor aerodynamics, low voltage, old battery
tech, lossy speed control, poor rolling resistance) but it is an
electric vehicle none the less. Developed the last time the petrol got
expensive.

When I worked at_the_top of the road it served me well as I could
charge it at work (by agreement) or home (from burnt coal/oil/gas) and
it was exempt road TAX and MOT.

But it was (is) just a toy, 20 miles range at 30 mph and batteries
that cost a fortune and die if left unused for a few months (unlike an
IC engine).

My model was quite rare though (I think it's only one of a few left),
good fun in the summer and very easy to maintain (dust the brakes out
once in a while is about it) ;-)

I'll take it off yer 'ands, guv ...

Mary

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Actually, PV cells can be the whole roof of the car in any climes.
But they don't help very much with heating on a dark winter day in
the UK.

Indeed. Drivel by name, drivel by content, mostly.

One or two have been made like this with encouraging results. Your idea
is have nuclear cell in the car - such is snotty unis.

outright lie.


One expects nothing less from our chippy imbecile.

The Natural Philosopher gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

And the answer to how big that is, is well under half a tonne for
the smaller one.

...or about half the weight of the rest of the car...

Similar to the power train on an IC car.

Rubbish. Rover's K-series weighs about 130kg with transmission.

And radiator?

Weighs sod all.

and starter motor?

I would assume included.

and exhaust system?

10kg at most.

and fuel pump

Oh, please...

and mountings for all those, and ancillary pipework?

Next-to-nothing.

Add 50kg for fuel, and you have a complete powertrain with a 300 mile
range (and five minutes recharge for the next 300 miles) for 40% of
that "half a ton".

And costs ten times as much per mile on fuel to run.

These 70 nuclear powerstations and tripling of the National Grid - free
to build, are they?

Current lipo technology is about 185Wh per kilogram.

http://www.maxamps.com/Lipo-10000-Cell.htm

That puts a 50Kw pack at 270kg.

The powertrain on a 2cv - engine and gearbox - is light enough to be
carried by two people. With 25 litres of fuel, it'll give a four-seater
car weighing half a ton _complete_ a range of 200+ miles.

pretty much the same as an electric would be, then.

Apart from the small detail that 200 miles worth of batteries alone would
weigh the same as, if not more than, the petrol car.

"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

I rarely see diesel cars emitting clouds of smoke, that seems to be
reserved for buses and trains.

Not in London as they have filters. Diesels busses shake like hell on
idle. The sooner they are electric hybrids the better.

Riiiight. Now, that would be "Electric hybrids" with the electricity
generated by what power source...?

Because there's no way on this planet that a bus is going to be carrying
sufficient batteries for a full long day's worth of use, and they don't
exactly sit idle for hours on end, either.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Rod wrote:
Adrian wrote:
Rod gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were
saying:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f2f081e-2...077b07658.html

But how do you heat an electric car? Not much fun using a totally
unheated behicle in the winter. Even keeping the screens clear
becomes a
bit of a problem.

shrug Easy. Instead of a water-to-air matrix, use an electric
element. The actual air distribution and circulation is electric
anyway. For aircon, the compressor is electrically driven, as many
power steering pumps currently are.

Some earlier electric cars had petrol burners to warm the interior. Is
that included in the fuel efficiency claimed?

Just as it isn't in modern common-rail diesels which are so heat
efficient that many of those have an additional diesel-fuelled heater.

As I said to begin with, early electric cars sometimes had a petrol
burner because the designers felt it unwise to use the stored electric
power for heating purposes. Given very low weight, low cost energy
storage perhaps the balance shifts. But most particularly, I would
like to know that the heating energy usage has been fully factored in
- for cold winters - when fuel consumptions are compared. It could
make a huge difference compared to a cool summer.

Well all I know is that it takes less than 500W to heat our smallest
bathroom - about the size of a car - in the coldest weather. That is
slightly less than a brake horsepower.

I am not 100% sure of the figures, but a small car on cruise at 40-50mph
uses at least 10bhp i would think. So the power to heat is not dominant
at the very least, and may well be very small, or if you can tap into
the - say - 10% heatloss of the cars power train, essentially free anyway.

I would expect the electric car would be made from fairly thin metal to
save wight, with foam insulation inside..major heatloss (and heat gain)
would be via the windows. Double glazing, or even reducing windows and
using rear view CCTV for visibility, would actually be an advantage.


But a small bathroom is probably a) much better insulated b) not subject
to high winds on all six sides c) not allowed to drop to, say, minus 10
C between uses.

The cooling effect of, say, driving at 60 mph into a 40 mph headwind
with outside air temperature at around minus 10 is considerable. (No - I
don't have figures but even with an inefficient petrol engined vehicle
pushing out lots of 'waste' heat it can get pretty cold inside.) Even
if passengers wrap up (in their woolly clothes) the screens still need
heating to keep clear in freezing rain, snow, etc.

Indeed, insulation may save the day. CCTV is a really good idea
(assuming it is done well). But please at least ensure these issues are
factored in.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

In uk.d-i-y The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:
In uk.d-i-y The Natural Philosopher wrote:
There may well come time however, when we see that any distance over
100 miles is better served by driving to a rail depot, and shifting a
container n(or indeed the whole car, as is done with the channel tunnel)
onto a train, rather than driving it there.

Which is no doubt why MotoRail is a rapidly dying service.


is it?

It certainly was hugely more expensive than the ferrys last time I used
it. I was in a hurry and the hovercraft had vanished..

So I doubt its a technical things: simply the way its priced.

It was certainly a good way to do the crossing: just expensive.

The Chunnel (which I assume you are referring to) is hardly MotoRail,
it just takes your car across the channel because you can't drive on
water.

I'm not even sure the Chunnel is significantly better as regards
carbon emissions than putting your car on a ferry anyway.

Motorail is *long distance* transporting of cars by rail, from Calais
to the South of France for example. It's still available but seems to
be slowly fading away, partly because it's horribly expensive I suspect.

--
Chris Green

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

I repeat. "There is zero insulation in a car".

Repeat it as much as you like: It won;'t make it any less silly than
the first time you said it. There is in fact a considerable amount in
every modern car.

Sound insulation, not high performing heat insulation, which keeps in
and out.

Yes, dear... I'M TALKING ABOUT HEAT INSULATION.

You are? Gosh!

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

There is zero insulation in a car.

Rubbish. I've got the headlining out of the Saab at the moment to
re-trim it, and - trust me on this - it makes a BIG difference.

Anyway, I thought car weights needed to come down, not go up?

I repeat. "There is zero insulation in a car".

sigh
Just because you repeat it doesn't make it right...

It is right!

On Tue, 27 May 2008 13:21:47 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:



Time to fit a lithium pack Tim. Should be a goer!

Well indeed.

New batteries, new controller, new motor and no room for the wind
turbine so still having to buy polluting electricity?

Nope, 20 years on and we still haven't advanced that far at all ..
(over 100 years if you consider the first electric vehicles). :-(

All the best ..

T i m

p.s. And Hybrids really aren't in the equation .. 2 mile electric
range and IC powered after that shrug.

Andy Hall coughed up some electrons that declared:

On 2008-05-27 10:39:18 +0100, Longshanks
said:

* Doctor Drivel wrote:
Which is the vast amount of car journeys. That is why hybrids answer
the current problem. Battery for town, petrol for longer.

The current problem is people use their cars for town.

Umm yes.....

This is because public transport doesn't meet their requirements.

There are then two results:

1) People take their cars to town, which frankly is a PITA because of
parking arrangements being so poor in most places; and so

2) They go to out of town retail parks instead.

This is certainly true. I live in a village 3 miles outside of Tunbridge
Wells. Thanks to infrequent busses (outside of the school run hour) and
silly car parking charges to park in town, there are people here who
actually prefer, and claim it is no more expensive, to take their motor to
Bluewater, some 29 miles away.

Go figure what that does to the environment...

It is also a problem created in part by a lack of joined up thinking by the
local government bodies.

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

I rarely see diesel cars emitting clouds of smoke, that seems to be
reserved for buses and trains.

Not in London as they have filters. Diesels busses shake like hell on
idle. The sooner they are electric hybrids the better.

Riiiight. Now, that would be "Electric hybrids" with the electricity
generated by what power source...?

Petrol. Boy you are slow. This goon wants us all to go back to the 1950s.
Well it takes all sorts.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Actually, PV cells can be the whole roof of the car in any climes. But
they don't help very much with heating on a dark winter day in the UK.

Indeed. Drivel by name, drivel by content, mostly.

One or two have been made like this with encouraging results. Your idea
is have nuclear cell in the car - such is snotty unis.

outright lie.

Totally true. You are obsessed with nuclear power. You are a plantpot
really. Sad.

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
"Doctor Drivel" gurgled happily, sounding
much
like they were saying:

There is zero insulation in a car.

Rubbish. I've got the headlining out of the Saab at the moment to
re-trim it, and - trust me on this - it makes a BIG difference.

Anyway, I thought car weights needed to come down, not go up?

I repeat. "There is zero insulation in a car".

sigh
Just because you repeat it doesn't make it right...

You keep repeating yourself :-)

Mary, he wasn't chastised as a child.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 May 2008 13:21:47 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:



Time to fit a lithium pack Tim. Should be a goer!

Well indeed.

New batteries, new controller, new motor and no room for the wind
turbine so still having to buy polluting electricity?

Nope, 20 years on and we still haven't advanced that far at all ..
(over 100 years if you consider the first electric vehicles). :-(

All the best ..

T i m

p.s. And Hybrids really aren't in the equation .. 2 mile electric
range and IC powered after that shrug.

Only if you go on long runs. The average town journey has the motor
assisting a lot of the time.

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

There may well come time however, when we see that any distance over 100
miles is better served by driving to a rail depot, and shifting a
container n(or indeed the whole car, as is done with the channel tunnel)
onto a train, rather than driving it there.

Or chain them together and pull them along a motor way with a vehicle in
the
centre reservation. A serious idea once. Back to the train.


I remember reading about an idea for automated cars working in that sort
of way (not chained - just controlled as if one vehicle). they said that
woulkd allow cars to run closer together at high speeds. In my view, no
designed system could ever allow the 90 mph bumper-to-bumper driving
that was then prevalent on soem of the roads I used. Just the safety
margins to allow for ordianry failuers (burst tyres, running out of
fuel, engine stops working) would have increase the gap and slowed down
the traffic compared to the reality.

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org