On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 12:56:47 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article
,
harry wrote:

Getting oil from the Aratic won't be cheap.

Where the **** is that?


Dunno but it tends to be unreliable...

--
Rod

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
has an automatic gearbox

The Prius does not have a gearbox.

Please explain how the drive from the engine gets to the wheels
without a gearbox.

I have explained that you in the past. Unfortunately you are too dumb to
understand.

The Other Mike wrote:

and the Prius is even less economical than BMW M3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=badoMjA_rW0

Total ********.

tony sayer wrote:
In article , Doctor Drivel invalid@not-
for-mail.invalid scribeth thus
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:53:27 +0100, djc wrote:

But these electric cars aren't designed for driving across europe
or any great distance. They are for the wage slaves doing the M-F
9-5 25 mile round trip commute.

But the wage slaves are just the people who can only afford one
car, so it has to do all the other occasional, but so often vital,
trips too.

So they use some of the money they save from the cheap energy,
reduced tax, etc on the day to day electric car to hire a more
suitable vehicle as required.

Figures were posted recently about how much one of these cars would
save someone communing into central London with, no congestion
charge, free parking and charging etc. I forget the numbers but it
was several thousand pounds...

Cars these day cars just do not need an engine of a large capacity.
Four or three cylinder engines are all they need. The days of direct
drive by IC engines are nearly over - we are at the beginning of the
end. Look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_...tro-air_hybrid

Using petro/hydraulic hybrids which is very promising:
http://www.artemisip.com/appli_auto_transm.htm

Overview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYbilBl3GGo

More detail of the BMW car's testing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJw5AvvxBqg

http://green.autoblog.com/2006/06/15...of-hydraulics/

INGOCAR from Valentin Tech shatters the way we think about cars:
http://www.torquenews.com/1080/ingoc...-way-we-think-
about-cars

Interesting .. thats more or less an internal combustion engine
powering the car, perhaps a step in the right direction to an
alternative to conventional motive power;!...

The IC engines is small and runs at a constant efficient speed. Kinetic
energy reclaim is excellent. Again a small Wankel can do the job.

We do have a way to go yet...

We do not. The technology is there. We need these arsehole dinosaur
corporations out of the way.

130 MPG INGOCAR (the hydraulic accumulator is the structure of the
car): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzabH-rBPqI

whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:43:02 PM UTC+1, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:53:27 +0100, djc wrote:



But these electric cars aren't designed for driving across europe
or

any great distance. They are for the wage slaves doing the M-F 9-5
25

mile round trip commute.



But the wage slaves are just the people who can only afford one
car, so

it has to do all the other occasional, but so often vital, trips
too.



So they use some of the money they save from the cheap energy,
reduced

tax, etc on the day to day electric car to hire a more suitable
vehicle

as required.

Figures were posted recently about how much one of these cars would
save

someone communing into central London with, no congestion charge,
free

parking and charging etc. I forget the numbers but it was several

thousand pounds...

I wonder which comedian came up with the figures.....

You must stop making things up.

The Other Mike wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 08:37:57 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
geoff wrote:

Yeah - what sports car did he claim to have too ?

DB5 or other exotic?

That I do have.

and it's made by Dinky

They were in Liverpool. This one bigger and made in Newport Pagnell.

tony sayer wrote:
In article , Doctor Drivel
scribeth thus
Andy Burns wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote:

Bernie Ecclestone has announce a 'Formula E' series for all
electric racing.

About time. They will **** all over IC F1 cars once they settle
down the layouts.

I'm sure TV companies will love it, 30 minute ad breaks while they
come in to recharge, rather than 3 seconds to change tyres!

They slap in new battery sets. Pay attention.

Might be quicker to change the car...

They clip in and takes a second or two.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Doctor Drivel
scribeth thus
Andy Burns wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote:

Bernie Ecclestone has announce a 'Formula E' series for all
electric racing.
About time. They will **** all over IC F1 cars once they settle
down the layouts.
I'm sure TV companies will love it, 30 minute ad breaks while they
come in to recharge, rather than 3 seconds to change tyres!
They slap in new battery sets. Pay attention.

Might be quicker to change the car...

Changing of batteries during a race is specifically banned.

The regulations for 2013/14 are already online.

How dumb.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
You'd think with Mazda effectively canning rotary engines (or at
least
pressing pause) that now would be the time for the ruskies to make
their bid for supremacy ...

The Russians use a Rotary in a helicopter. Available for sale in the
west.

Can you give some details of it's fuel efficiency versus similar
helicopters with other types of engines? No? What a surprise.

The Wankle engine - same as other two stroke designs

Oh my God, the senility has really set in. The Wankel is a 4 stroke cycle.
Shame isn't it. How sad.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Andy Burns wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Doctor Drivel wrote:

The seal problem was solved decades ago. The Russians have a
design that has the seal in the engine body, which can easily be
replaced by removing a plate - DIY job.

Anyone else see the flaw in the Russians being at cutting edge car
engine design?

You'd think with Mazda effectively canning rotary engines (or at
least pressing pause) that now would be the time for the ruskies to
make their bid for supremacy ...

The RX8 is still made.

The long and the short of the rotary engine is it inst really any
better than a conventional one in any way. They were fuel hungry and
wore out quickly and were hard to make.

Nonsense. They were easy to make having few moving parts. They never wore
out quickly once the problems were ironed out. Fuel efficiency? Not good
when running in the same operating conditions as in a piston IC engines.
But when as a high speed, constant speed, running at it most efficient sweet
spot", they shine.

For aircraft if you are burning fuel, use a jet, fan, or turboprop.

For helicopters use a rotary as well. The Russians do.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Anyone else see the flaw in the Russians being at cutting edge car
engine design?

The Russians put rockets and vehicles on the moon. This man is
senile.

Using Wankle engines and super capacitors, obviously.

They did. Such senility. Sad isn't it.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Oh no! He thinks it is the 1960/70s again. Not that old one. The
seal problem was solved decades ago. The Russians have a design
that has the seal in the engine body, which can easily be replaced
by removing a plate - DIY job. This shows his age and state of mind.

Anyone else see the flaw in the Russians being at cutting edge car
engine design?

You wont find them in aircraft either. Nor will you find an
aircraft engine revving much over 2500 rpm.

Pay attention at the back !!!! Wankles are good when running at
their high revving, constant speed, most efficient "sweet spot". Got it?

yes, when the seals last about 25 hours.

Oh my God! This old ******* still thinks it's 1967. Such sadness. he went to
snotty uni as well.

tony sayer wrote:
In article , Doctor Drivel invalid@not-
for-mail.invalid scribeth thus
Andy Champ wrote:
On 15/09/2012 16:22, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
On 11/09/2012 23:53, Doctor Drivel wrote:
You could have a 10 year old car and slap in a new battery set
and it is transformed.

I have a ten year old car. I haven't had to buy a new engine,
gearbox, or anything else big.

You must pay attention. The car can be "transformed". Replacing
your auto box will cost about the same as battery set but the car
is not transformed, just still the same as it was.

Oh, I thought you meant it was transformed from a dying heap back to
the equivalent of a new model. What does the new battery do that
the original didn't?

Pay attention at the back!. Batteries are improving all the time.
In 12 years time a new battery set will get the car a lot further
than the current crop. Economy will be vastly improved.

Incidentally while one day I'm sure I'll meet an auto box that can
do a better job than me I haven't yet. The Prius may well have
such a transmission - but it's damned expensive.

The Prius is an old design, it is 15 years old now. Mine is still
superb to drive.

Three people I know of who bought them no longer have them as they
"outgrew" the effective range..

Uh. They run on petrol. They cannot be charged from a plug. Nor un less you
get a conversion done.

The Vaux' Ampera is vastly superior and the new cars predicated to
be out using the small, light, Lotus 1200cc 3 cyl' genny engine
(range extender) running at its efficient constant speed "sweet
spot" will be even better.

Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant
high speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very
small size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.

This is an interesting subject and the electric motor transmission is
excellent just need to get that prime mover power sorted first and
that it seems .. isn't going to be that easy..

And thats the rub. Where is the prime power coming from as at the
moment we are using an Internal Combustion engine using fossil fuel
to make the difference between the stored electric motive energy made
using mainly fossil and the inefficiencies of doing that..

I think the real breakthrough is yet to come..

The breakthrough is here. The terrorist corporations will not implement it.
And senile people believe what they say.

On 18/09/2012 17:19, Doctor Drivel wrote:
John Williamson wrote:

It does with the Ampera

Only by using the fossil fuel engine to keep the battery charged. In
which case, why not just use a simpler internal combustion engined
vehicle?

You are very slow. As the name implies, "hybrid". Full EV in cities
and when you go long distance occasionally the car runs on the genny
and still gets 60mpg.

And I can get 70mpg on a run in a number of small cars

The Ampera is NOT small. Again dumbo, it runs on zero emissions in the
city where we do not need harmful, toxic emissions. For the long range

So what harmful toxic emissions come out of conventional modern cars then?

in the country the IC genny cuts in running at a more efficient constant
speed.

Possibly helps make up for all the extra weight they are carrying and
the extra beneficences of the multiple conversions required.

Daft idea... build the nukes, then use the electricity to make synthetic
liquid fuel. Anything else is just ****ing in the wind.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 18/09/2012 19:24, Doctor Drivel wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

BFD. 60mpg is what I got anyway Canterbury to Durham with a couple
of overnight stops earlier this year, in a 2008 dizzle C4.

Totally irrelevant comment

Completely pertinent comment. You're trying to tout 60mpg as something
special when it is not.

For that size of car it is. And it is smooooooooth and quiet and emits
far less crap into the air..

What CO2 and H2O...?

Unlike that coal fired power station running at 35% efficiency into a
distribution network with 10% losses that you would rather use.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Doctor Drivel invalid@not-
for-mail.invalid scribeth thus
Andy Champ wrote:
On 15/09/2012 16:22, Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Andy Champ" wrote in message
. uk...
On 11/09/2012 23:53, Doctor Drivel wrote:
You could have a 10 year old car and slap in a new battery set
and it is transformed.
I have a ten year old car. I haven't had to buy a new engine,
gearbox, or anything else big.
You must pay attention. The car can be "transformed". Replacing
your auto box will cost about the same as battery set but the car
is not transformed, just still the same as it was.
Oh, I thought you meant it was transformed from a dying heap back
to the equivalent of a new model. What does the new battery do
that the original didn't?
Pay attention at the back!. Batteries are improving all the time.
In 12 years time a new battery set will get the car a lot further
than the current crop. Economy will be vastly improved.

Incidentally while one day I'm sure I'll meet an auto box that can
do a better job than me I haven't yet. The Prius may well have
such a transmission - but it's damned expensive.
The Prius is an old design, it is 15 years old now. Mine is still
superb to drive.

Three people I know of who bought them no longer have them as they
"outgrew" the effective range..

The Vaux' Ampera is vastly superior and the new cars predicated to
be out using the small, light, Lotus 1200cc 3 cyl' genny engine
(range extender) running at its efficient constant speed "sweet
spot" will be even better.

Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will
be used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant
high speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The
very small size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.


This is an interesting subject and the electric motor transmission is
excellent just need to get that prime mover power sorted first and
that it seems .. isn't going to be that easy..

And thats the rub. Where is the prime power coming from as at the
moment we are using an Internal Combustion engine using fossil fuel
to make the difference between the stored electric motive energy
made using mainly fossil and the inefficiencies of doing that..

I think the real breakthrough is yet to come..

the problem is there IS no possible breakthrough with any available
technology.

This man is senile.

Whilst stuff we know about gets a little better - batteries,
flywheels, super-capacitors etc, nothing comes close to carbon fuel
in an oxygen bearing atmosphere in terms of being a safe, light, and
compact storage of energy.

He is getting worse.

snip drivel

It had to be snipped.

ownerbuilder2012 wrote:
harryagain;2923472 Wrote:
Drove an electric car today.
Uncanny experience but good.
'Technology | Mitsubishi i-MiEV | Mitsubishi Motors UK'
(http://www.mitsubishi-cars.co.uk/imiev/technology.aspx)

I haven't drove one,

They took his license way as he is too old.

On 19/09/2012 11:30, The Other Mike wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 08:37:57 +0100, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
geoff wrote:

Yeah - what sports car did he claim to have too ?

DB5 or other exotic?

That I do have.

and it's made by Dinky - do they allow metal objects in your secure facility?

Its probably like the one I have - there is a button to push on the side
that makes the little plastic man fly out of the ejector seat ;-)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 18/09/2012 18:23, charles wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
John Williamson wrote:

It allegedly takes a Nissan Leaf to 80% charge in 30 minutes.

The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.

from what size of supply? Certainly not a domestic 13A one.

Again....The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.
Have you got that yet?

yes, I got that.

Fantastic. It took two goes.

no, it only took one. but you have snipped my question to you. Presumably
because you can't answer it.

Dribble does not like numbers, they lay waste to his claims!


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Doctor Drivel wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

You'd think with Mazda effectively canning rotary engines (or at
least pressing pause)

The RX8 is still made.

They might be flogging off the last few sitting on the dock-side or in
showrooms, but they haven't made them for over a year ...

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2011...NEWS/110829973

John Rumm wrote:
On 18/09/2012 19:24, Doctor Drivel wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

BFD. 60mpg is what I got anyway Canterbury to Durham with a couple
of overnight stops earlier this year, in a 2008 dizzle C4.

Totally irrelevant comment

Completely pertinent comment. You're trying to tout 60mpg as something
special when it is not.

For that size of car it is. And it is smooooooooth and quiet and emits
far less crap into the air..

What CO2 and H2O...?

Unlike that coal fired power station running at 35% efficiency into a
distribution network with 10% losses that you would rather use.


less than 2% actually, typically.

Still you cant run a car on coal can you?

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

On 19/09/2012 00:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

yes.

Not cheap - Neodymium magnets and enough silicon iron in the stator..

http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbycity/s...ner_Motor.html


is running at about 5bhp per kg.you probably need about 20bhp per wheel
for a small car (80bhp AWD). Which is 4kg per wheel. That's probably
about the same as an axle hub and CV joint.


Hmm. I'd like a bit more power than that, remember I have to hoik a
battery pack around. 10kg per wheel seems closer. And the brakes need
to be outboard too, if you don't have shafts. (you still need brakes, if
only for emergencies)

Its definitely better weight wise to use a motor per wheel and dump the
differential as well.

With you there.

The problem with an inboard motor is you need the CV joints (or a
dreadful swinging axle) as well. Those add weight and cost.


I think you only need the outboard joint.

Plus you get better packaging with in wheel motors.

I'll take your word for that.

Biggest problem is you probably can't gear it - except with more in
wheel weight like an epicylic box. So it needs a LOT of poles to get the
actual torque you need. AND you need flexible and pretty substantial
cables as well

Equally true for inboard!

But overall I think that the best way to package a leccy car from a
'blank sheet' is battery under the floor to keep weight down low and
extending right into the axle regions, and a motor on each wheel.
The battery is far and away the heaviest thing so you want it low and in
the car model. The means you probably don't want transmission there at all.

Bernie Ecclestone has announce a 'Formula E' series for all electric
racing. It will be fascinating to follow. And see what they end up with
by way of battery swapping and getting performance out of the cars.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19402383


Thanks for the data.

Andy

On 19/09/2012 13:03, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
The Wankle engine - same as other two stroke designs - suffers from poor
'cylinder' filling and evacuation.

Dunno what this "Wankle" engine is, but the Wankel is a 4-stroke (if
"stroke" is the right word for a rotor) Separate suck-squeeze-bang-blow.

Andy

In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
has an automatic gearbox

The Prius does not have a gearbox.

Please explain how the drive from the engine gets to the wheels
without a gearbox.

I have explained that you in the past. Unfortunately you are too dumb to
understand.

Sadly your explanation is only good enough for the likes of you who
couldn't tell a gearbox from a combi boiler.

--
*Can fat people go skinny-dipping?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
The Other Mike wrote:

and the Prius is even less economical than BMW M3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=badoMjA_rW0

Total ********.

But true. As was a BMW diesel - which is a fast car - using less fuel than
the Pious over a normal suburban run - quite typical of how many use a car.

--
*Generally speaking, you aren't learning much if your lips are moving.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Can you give some details of it's fuel efficiency versus similar
helicopters with other types of engines? No? What a surprise.

The Wankle engine - same as other two stroke designs

Oh my God, the senility has really set in. The Wankel is a 4 stroke
cycle. Shame isn't it. How sad.

Google must have been red hot with you looking up things. Of course I
meant same as two stroke designs. But the significance of that is way
above you so no point in explaining.

--
*Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder...

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Andy Champ wrote:
On 19/09/2012 13:03, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
The Wankle engine - same as other two stroke designs - suffers from
poor 'cylinder' filling and evacuation.

Dunno what this "Wankle" engine is, but the Wankel is a 4-stroke (if
"stroke" is the right word for a rotor) Separate suck-squeeze-bang-blow.

Quite. If you check my post immediately after that one you'll see I meant
same as two stroke designs. Dunno how the 'other' got in there. ;-)
Basically, the Wankle neither charges or evacuates as well as a piston
four stroke.

--
*Proofread carefully to see if you any words out or mispeld something *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sep 19, 10:38*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
* *harry wrote:

If I buy an electric car, it will do infinity MPG if worked on a cash
basis. I can charge it from my solar panels.

Your solar panels and associated control gear and wiring etc were free?

--
*Save a tree, eat a beaver*

* * Dave Plowman * * * * * * * * London SW
* * * * * * * * * To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Er, we're talking about relative fuel costs aren't we?
All fuels have a capital cost implication.
But solar has no primary fuel source such as gas oil or coal.
So you buy your panels and there are no other costs apart from repair
s if by badluck you need any..

On Sep 19, 10:48*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:

harry wrote:
Motor in hubs are available as a DIY hybrid conversion, ie you take a
normal car and add the batteries and motorised hubs.
Where?

He wants to improve his DB5.

--
*The most wasted day of all is one in which we have not laughed.*

* * Dave Plowman * * * * * * * * London SW
* * * * * * * * * To e-mail, change noise into sound.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Wheel_hub_motor#Uses_in_current_and_future_vehicle s

There was/is some firm converts new Citroens to electric.

Also for TurNiP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_h...eight_concerns

On Sep 19, 11:58*am, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
The Other Mike wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:55:34 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

The one thing you need on generators is the ability to run long periods
without breaking. Wankel engines wore the seals out in a few hundred
hours if that.

You wont find them in aircraft either.

There are a number of Mazda Wankel engines in homebuilts in the USA

Also this one used in a number of commercially built self launching gliders

http://www.austroengine.at/cms/uploa..._50_R_Technica...

I can also show you examples of battery electric small planes that only
do a few minutes at most in the air.

I am talking about serious planes that have commercial uses.



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

On Sep 19, 12:37*pm, Steve Firth wrote:
harry wrote:

[snip]

If I buy an electric car, it will do infinity MPG if worked on a cash
basis.
I can charge it from my solar panels.

Excellent idea you can charge it overnight. Oh, hang on.

I take it that you never read the blog of the guy who converted a Bedford
Rascal to LiIon cells and a custom wound electric motor? Even he admitted
that on solar it would take a week to charge.

--
•DarWin|
* *_/ * *_/

In Summer I could charge it in a day from the PV.
Don't forget, it wouldn't be run to depletion anyway.
I don't use my car every day.

On Sep 19, 12:42*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article
s.com, harry scribeth thus





On Sep 18, 10:15 pm, (Steve Firth) wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sun, 16 Sep 2012 10:21:39 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:

And I can use air con, heated seats, headlights and windscreen wipers
without worrying that I'll never get to my destination. I can also
cross Europe in just over a day - that will happen with the Leaf.

Think there is word missing in the end of the last sentance.

Yes, you're right, it's the word "not".

But these electric cars aren't designed for driving across europe or any
great distance. They are for the wage slaves doing the M-F 9-5 25 mile
round trip commute.

Yes also true and for the same people who can't imagine that anyone
would want to do anythign other than drive to work which is less than 12
miles away and then drive back. The fact that such a journey will
*never* recoup the extra they have had to pay for the car does not enter
their minds. Also since they don't understand well to wheel the fact
that the EV will emit more CO2 than a similar sied diesel car doesn't
enter their heads.

Whenever EV makes say their cars will do the equivalent of 230 mpg for
well to wheel CO2 emissions they are using the mix of electricity
supplied in France (mostly nuclear and HEP) for their comparison. Move
to the UK and that 230 mog collapses to 40 mpg because of our dirty
generating mix. Move to the coal capital states of the USA or CHina and
that figure gets even worse.

If I buy an electric car, it will do infinity MPG if worked on a cash
basis.
I can charge it from my solar panels.

The thing is the price of fossil fuels is going to quadruple in the
next decade.
Getting oil from the Aratic won't be cheap.

So harping about fuel costs is ********.

Harry...

Do you think that we'll have enough ground area to put all the solar
panels that will be needed if that idea might have a chance to work?..

I have enough PV on my roof to make the same amount of electricity as
I use.
I could reduce my electricity consumption by quite a bit more too.
If all buildings had panels fitted that is a significant amount.
It will soon be the norm.
There are new solar panels in the pipeline that are far more efficient
than mine, (11%).

There are a lot of daft ****s here that can't get their heads out of
their arses.
They are daft ****s because they pay for domestic fuel and I pay
nothing.
They rabbit on about combi- boilers and other unneccesary **** when
all you need is insulation.
I expect they are descendants of people who wanted to keep horse and
carts. (it'll never catch on syndrome)
The price of all fossil fuels will rocket. But not renewable energy
which will come down.
In twenty years you will be driving an electric car or nothing at all,
regardless of how the technology has progressed. You need to get used
to the idea.

So Drivel you see is a trendsetter. Even if he is mad.

On Sep 19, 12:42*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , John Williamson
scribeth thus





charles wrote:
In article ,
* *Doctor *Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
charles wrote:
In article ,
* Doctor *Drivel wrote:
John Williamson wrote:
It allegedly takes a Nissan Leaf to 80% charge in 30 minutes.
The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.
from what size of supply? *Certainly not a domestic 13A one.
Again....The New Toshiba batteries can do 80% charge in 3 mins.
Have you got that yet?
yes, I got that.

Fantastic. It took two goes.

no, it only took one. but you have snipped my question to you. Presumably
because you can't answer it.

As Drivel can't answer the question, I will.

Nissan and Toyota are part of the ChaDeMo partnership who provide up to
50Kw chargers for quick charging of electric cars. They need a 440V. 3
phase, 110 A supply. They supply 500 Volts DC at up to 110 Amps under
the control of an ECU in the car. They take half an hour to charge it up
enough to get to the next charging point.

If this is the way forward the national grid and distro system is going
the need a very serious upgrade!...
--
Tony Sayer- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In the future, motoring will once again be the province of the
wealthy.
The herbs will be on the buses/trains.

On Sep 19, 12:56*pm, Tim Streater wrote:
In article
,

*harry wrote:
Getting oil from the Aratic won't be cheap.

Where the **** is that?

--
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" *-- *Bill of Rights 1689

It's a conundrum for you to solve. You failed.

On Sep 19, 1:50*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
In article
s.com, harry scribeth thus
On Sep 18, 10:15 pm, (Steve Firth) wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Sun, 16 Sep 2012 10:21:39 +0100, Steve Firth wrote:
And I can use air con, heated seats, headlights and windscreen wipers
without worrying that I'll never get to my destination. I can also
cross Europe in just over a day - that will happen with the Leaf.
Think there is word missing in the end of the last sentance.
Yes, you're right, it's the word "not".

But these electric cars aren't designed for driving across europe or any
great distance. They are for the wage slaves doing the M-F 9-5 25 mile
round trip commute.
Yes also true and for the same people who can't imagine that anyone
would want to do anythign other than drive to work which is less than 12
miles away and then drive back. The fact that such a journey will
*never* recoup the extra they have had to pay for the car does not enter
their minds. Also since they don't understand well to wheel the fact
that the EV will emit more CO2 than a similar sied diesel car doesn't
enter their heads.

Whenever EV makes say their cars will do the equivalent of 230 mpg for
well to wheel CO2 emissions they are using the mix of electricity
supplied in France (mostly nuclear and HEP) for their comparison. Move
to the UK and that 230 mog collapses to 40 mpg because of our dirty
generating mix. Move to the coal capital states of the USA or CHina and
that figure gets even worse.

If I buy an electric car, it will do infinity MPG if worked on a cash
basis.
I can charge it from my solar panels.

The thing is the price of fossil fuels is going to quadruple in the
next decade.
Getting oil from the Aratic won't be cheap.

So harping about fuel costs is ********.

Harry...

Do you think that we'll have enough ground area to put all the solar
panels that will be needed if that idea might have a chance to work?..

Have you done any calculations at all?..

don't be silly.

harry doesn't do sums.

lets do it for him.

http://contemporaryenergy.co.uk/solarmap.htmshows that in winter teh
average insolation is about 500watt hors per sq meter per day.

at 30% efficiency on the PV that's about 150 watt hours per meter per
day. (None at all by night)

No the battery to do about 60 miles is, on a poxy 4 wheeled electric
bicycle, about 15kWh he says.

So he needs 100 sq meters of panels to - on average, charge that up in
the winter. On sunny days it will work,. On gloomy overcast says he will
need at least 8 times more than that.

So to RELIABLY make a trip of 30 miles there, and 30 miles back EVERY
DAY harry will meed 800 sq meters of panels. And of course, that's *only
if he travels at night and charges by day.

The cost will be a little bit shy of a million quid.

Of course in summer he will simply throw the power away, because there
is no way he can use it.

In summer he might generate 80 times as much.

When no one needs it or wants it.

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are a bloody half wit. A range of renewable technolgies are
needed. Solar is just the Summer one.

On Sep 19, 2:12*pm, whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:43:02 PM UTC+1, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:53:27 +0100, djc wrote:

But these electric cars aren't designed for driving across europe or

any great distance. They are for the wage slaves doing the M-F 9-5 25

mile round trip commute.

But the wage slaves are just the people who can only afford one car, so

it has to do all the other occasional, but so often vital, trips too.

So they use some of the money they save from the cheap energy, reduced

tax, etc on the day to day electric car to hire a more suitable vehicle

as required.

Figures were posted recently about how much one of these cars would save

someone communing into central London with, no congestion charge, free

parking and charging etc. I forget the numbers but it was several

thousand pounds...

I wonder which comedian came up with the figures.....

I'm also suspcious of this free charging, will it be free from home too?





--

It's obviously a kick start thing. But if it isn't done, we will be
left behind/back in the horse age..
You can't get it into your head, there is no alternative. Regardless
if the primary power is nuclear or windmills.

On Sep 19, 2:25*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Doctor *Drivel invalid@not-
for-mail.invalid scribeth thus
Andy Champ wrote:
On 15/09/2012 16:22, Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Andy Champ" wrote in message
news:c9idnXW628EadM3NnZ2dnUVZ8oMAAAAA@eclipse. net.uk...
On 11/09/2012 23:53, Doctor Drivel wrote:
You could *have a 10 year old car and slap in a new battery set
and it is transformed.
I have a ten year old car. *I haven't had to buy a new engine,
gearbox, or anything else big.
You must pay attention. The car can be "transformed". Replacing your
auto box will cost about the same as battery set but the car is not
transformed, just still the same as it was.
Oh, I thought you meant it was transformed from a dying heap back to
the equivalent of a new model. *What does the new battery do that the
original didn't?
Pay attention at the back!. *Batteries are improving all the time. In 12
years time a new battery set will get the car a lot further than the current
crop. Economy will be vastly improved.

Incidentally while one day I'm sure I'll meet an auto box that can do
a better job than me I haven't yet. *The Prius may well have such a
transmission - but it's damned expensive.
The Prius is an old design, it is 15 years old now. *Mine is still superb to
drive.

Three people I know of who bought them no longer have them as they
"outgrew" the effective range..

The Vaux' Ampera is vastly superior and the new cars predicated to
be out using the small, light, Lotus 1200cc 3 cyl' genny engine (range
extender) running at its efficient constant speed "sweet spot" will be even
better.

Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range extender
genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be used it is fine.
Wankels are efficient running at their constant high speed "sweet spot", so
come into their own as a genny. The very small size and no vibration is also
a great major advantage.

This is an interesting subject and the electric motor transmission is
excellent just need to get that prime mover power sorted first and that
it seems .. isn't going to be that easy..

And thats the rub. Where is the prime power coming from as at the moment
we are using an Internal Combustion engine using fossil fuel to make the
difference between the stored electric motive energy made using mainly
fossil and the inefficiencies of doing that..

I think the real breakthrough is yet to come..

the problem is there IS no possible breakthrough with any available
technology.

Whilst stuff we know about gets a little better - batteries, flywheels,
super-capacitors etc, nothing comes close to carbon fuel in an oxygen
bearing atmosphere in terms of being a safe, light, and compact storage
of energy.

Except nuclear materials. *A kg of plutonium is equivalent to about 2
million liters of diesel.

which at similar thermal efficiencies is enough to take a car to te subn
- 93 million miles (though not back)

IF we could find a way to harness the fissile energy in a safe compact
way..and reckon that 500,000 miles is enough for a car, you need less
than 6g of plutonium to run a car for that distance. About 0.3cc!

There's several tonnes of plutonium festering up at Sellafield right now.

If someone said to me,. as a pretty experienced engineer. do you think
its more likely that :-

(a) a battery at least ten times better energy density or some other
similar electrical storage system could be developed in the next 50 years?

or :

(b) a way to make a light, safe, radiation free sealed plutonium powered
reactor/generator would happen in the next 50 years?

I'd have to say the latter is *possible, but unlikely, but the former is
simply impossible.

There is no problem of course in transporting 0.3cc of plutonium in a
totally sealed crashproof way. *That's done all the time. Just a box big
enough and thick enough is all it takes.

The problem is how to get the gamma ray energy out without neutrons and
contamination with fission products so you can get heat, but no crap as
well.

Maybe pure hydrogen fusion is an easier thing to do.. ceramic piston
sucks in water vapour, compresses it, and a laser fires at top dead
centre, making a bang, and some helium.. and some oxygen:-)


You ARE in cloud cuckoo land. Such technolgies are not even on the
horizon.

On Sep 19, 9:48*pm, John Rumm wrote:
On 18/09/2012 17:19, Doctor Drivel wrote:





John Williamson wrote:

It does with the Ampera

Only by using the fossil fuel engine to keep the battery charged. In
which case, why not just use a simpler internal combustion engined
vehicle?

You are very slow. As the name implies, "hybrid". *Full EV in cities
and when you go long distance occasionally the car runs on the genny
and still gets 60mpg.

And I can get 70mpg on a run in a number of small cars

The Ampera is NOT small. Again dumbo, it runs on zero emissions in the
city where we do not need harmful, toxic emissions. *For the long range

So what harmful toxic emissions come out of conventional modern cars then?

Nitric oxide, Nitrogen dioxide, Hydrogen sulphide. Carbon monoxide,
Carbon dioxide, Carbon particles, Ammonia, Sulphur dioxide, VOCs +
numerous unburned hydrocarbons. Even with a catalyser.

On Sep 19, 9:51*pm, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Doctor *Drivel invalid@not-
for-mail.invalid scribeth thus
Andy Champ wrote:
On 15/09/2012 16:22, Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Andy Champ" wrote in message
news:c9idnXW628EadM3NnZ2dnUVZ8oMAAAAA@eclipse. net.uk...
On 11/09/2012 23:53, Doctor Drivel wrote:
You could *have a 10 year old car and slap in a new battery set
and it is transformed.

I have a ten year old car. *I haven't had to buy a new engine,
gearbox, or anything else big.

You must pay attention. The car can be "transformed". Replacing
your auto box will cost about the same as battery set but the car
is not transformed, just still the same as it was.

Oh, I thought you meant it was transformed from a dying heap back to
the equivalent of a new model. *What does the new battery do that
the original didn't?

Pay attention at the back!. *Batteries are improving all the time.
In 12 years time a new battery set will get the car a lot further
than the current crop. Economy will be vastly improved.

Incidentally while one day I'm sure I'll meet an auto box that can
do a better job than me I haven't yet. *The Prius may well have
such a transmission - but it's damned expensive.

The Prius is an old design, it is 15 years old now. *Mine is still
superb to drive.

Three people I know of who bought them no longer have them as they
"outgrew" the effective range..

Uh. They run on petrol. They cannot be charged from a plug. *Nor un less you
get a conversion done.





The Vaux' Ampera is vastly superior and the new cars predicated to
be out using the small, light, Lotus 1200cc 3 cyl' genny engine
(range extender) running at its efficient constant speed "sweet
spot" will be even better.

Audi are looking into using a very small Wankel engine as a range
extender genny slapped under the boot. For the rare times it will be
used it is fine. Wankels are efficient running at their constant
high speed "sweet spot", so come into their own as a genny. The very
small size and no vibration is also a great major advantage.

This is an interesting subject and the electric motor transmission is
excellent just need to get that prime mover power sorted first and
that it seems .. isn't going to be that easy..

And thats the rub. Where is the prime power coming from as at the
moment we are using an Internal Combustion engine using fossil fuel
to make the difference between the stored electric motive energy made
using mainly fossil and the inefficiencies of doing that..
I think the real breakthrough is yet to come..

The breakthrough is here. The terrorist corporations will not implement it.

On Sep 19, 10:52*pm, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
John Rumm wrote:
On 18/09/2012 19:24, Doctor Drivel wrote:
Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Doctor *Drivel" wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

BFD. 60mpg is what I got anyway Canterbury to Durham with a couple
of overnight stops earlier this year, in a 2008 dizzle C4.

Totally irrelevant comment

Completely pertinent comment. You're trying to tout 60mpg as something
special when it is not.

For that size of car it is. *And it is smooooooooth and quiet and emits
far less crap into the air..

What CO2 and H2O...?

Unlike that coal fired power station running at 35% efficiency into a
distribution network with 10% losses that you would rather use.

less than 2% actually, typically.

Still you cant run a car on coal can you?

-

Well you could.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_wagon