 | Bovada is the only Internet casino endorsed by the Wizard. Here are my reasons why and my promise of support. |
Newest urban electric vehicle
| February 4th, 2012 at 1:56:32 PM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Nov 2, 2009 Threads: 153 Posts: 2912 |
Uh, whatever "envrionmental footprint" means, but thanks. It is quite simple, however. Most of our jobs are some distance away-one at a particular resort. And my day job is where it is, I'm not moving because the day job could change. Right now I have a second side-jon in the works that I expect could add even more need to make similar trips in the evening. Such jobs pay far better and have more flexibility than say a c-store clerk. The tradeoff is you need to go where the work it. It hasn't yet with me, but I did quite a few times when I needed the cargo space.
No, but until the new technology does at least the basics at least as well as the old one, it will not be adopted.
Not a valid comparrison. Yes, they choose it because it has more utility. I use mine to scan doccuments, mostly. It can also check and send my email; check web pages (though not as good as a PC); find me the nearest Starbucks; be a poker timer; and hundreds of other things. OTOH, an EV does NOTHING more than a gasoline powerd car does. And it has considerable drawbacks, which I will not repeat. Even if you solve the distance-and-charging issues it still just does the same thing a gasoline powerd car does. It really cannot do it "better" in most respects. It cannot do it "faster" as speed limits and congestion will not change. That leaves "cheaper" which is nowhere in sight.
Loading the iron with uranium might have promise. Your statement kind of makes my point. People think charging the electric is the way to go. But it didn't work 100 years ago, it doesn't work now, and physics suggests it won't work 100 years from now. But perhaps we could design a car-sized nuke. Why not? Size of today's engine blocks, charges a battery over and over, and that drives the electric motor. Call it a postmodern nuke-electric. But today's EVs? After the greenies buy the initial surge it will be a very hard sell. "The Roman Empire wasn't planned, but neither did it 'just happen.'" |
| February 4th, 2012 at 3:06:22 PM permalink | |
| P90 Member since: Jan 8, 2011 Threads: 7 Posts: 1117 |
Smartphones don't do the basics half as well as a regular cell phone. They are bulkier. A regular phone fits well in any pocket, smartphones are fairly large. You can't type a number blind, like you can with a proper phone, but have to look at the screen to press the virtual buttons. The charge only lasts till the end of the day, at best a little into the next day. With some of them, you even need special Vulcan training just to hold it right. And have I mentioned durability or lack thereof.
An electric car is potentially significantly more reliable and easier to service. It's cleaner, quieter, and a charging station is much more compact and easier to operate than a gas station. It's not cheaper yet, but when gas becomes say $10 a gallon, a lot of people will wonder if it's better to pay once for the batteries or daily for the gas. With your driving of 150mi/day and probably 30mpg, it's $50/d*365=$18,250/year in gas costs, or $91,250 for 5 years, and modern batt packs last more than 5 years. You may choose to stay with gas on principle, but some people will certainly switch. Exactly. And no one is going to do it. Because no one really needs a cordless clothes iron with 5 year load. Technical difficulties aside - because it has no serious advantages over a plain battery electric. The range provided by a battery pack with a lightweight streamlined car is enough for most everyone. When every parking lot has charging outlets, a casual driver will rarely see his charge drop more than 10% from normal. Commercial drivers, in taxicabs or trucks, can simply switch battery packs. Regular cars could too, but there are psychological barriers preventing it. For those few times a year when you do need to take an interstate trip, you'll just have to decide whether the pleasure of driving for 16 hours non-stop once in a while is worth paying extra for fuel every day. People are holding on to the range argument just because they are used to having a long/unlimited range, regardless of whether they actually need it.
It works now just fine. An average American drives about 33 miles per day. In 100 years, assuming that progress hasn't stopped and more Americans still go to church than mosque, urbanization will continue. Larger cities, taller buildings, more condominiums, higher density. And if electric vehicle economy develops, charging nearly everywhere, since it's easy to provide and bill. Long commutes are a waste of time, not just gas, and developing an efficient economy requires getting rid of them. |
| February 4th, 2012 at 3:52:08 PM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Nov 2, 2009 Threads: 153 Posts: 2912 |
Check out the iPhone then. A little less than the size of a USD bill. My charge goes a day and a half, even longer if I don't use lots of my apps.
Fewer moving parts, yes. Quieter, marginally but there is talk they will force them to make noise for benefit of blind pedestrians. Battery life still a question, and even at $10/gal gas the payback is still years. As gas gets to that level; other liquid fuels will become viable on a cost basis before the electric will. Smaller to build a charging station than a gas station? What are you, kidding me? Imagine a one-pump station. You need the space in front of that pump to fuel a car, which takes 10 minutes, tops. At 50% capacity for a 8 hour shift that means you can refuel 18 cars in that one spot. (You can refuel far more, I am being generous.) To refuel the same 18 EVs you need 18 parking spaces, not one. And the customers need to wait around, truck-stop style, while they refuel. How on earth is this more compact?
Your figures are faulty. I do not drive that far every day. Two weeks ago I drove that much 3 times. Last week none. Next week probably once. My car new would be about $16,000. The cheapest EV, without the subsidy, is $40,000. And that EV does not give me the utility my car has. I repeat, no rational customer will switch based on cost.
And who is going to pay for all of those charging stations? As to switching battery packs, why? Why get dirty doing that, get acid all over your hands, when you can just pull up to the pump and refuel? Big step backwards.
It isn't a 16 hour trip, it is a THREE hour trip that puts the electric at the end of it's range. That is three total hours, an hour and a half each way. And that assumes you just drive there and never use the car, which you probably will. People are holding on to the range "argument" because it is valid--EV range is unsatisfactroy for how most people use their cars.
This stat keeps getting repeated over and over. Looks as if it is based on a 12,000 mile per year average. It misses several points. First, many commute that far just one way. Second, maybe you do an average of 20 a day but once a week need to go 200. And there is well beyond the range of the electric. It also assumes most people have a nice garage to park and recharge in, I'd say half the USA does not and instead parks onstreet or in a lot of some type, again killing the EV. Or, as we know on this site, it isn't the average but the varriance that can kill you.
Our history of urbanization is against this. In the USA we have mostly built OUT, not UP. Look at Long Island, hard to find anything over a few stories and very car-dependent. Go to Phoenix Metro. Once several cities with definable suburbe (Phoenix, Glendale, Scottsdale, Tempe, Glendale) is now one big metroplex and all individual units with a nice, small yard. And the "lot charging" I do not see taking off. Big investment for the owners and they will pass that on to charging customers, negating the (claimed) benefit from paying thru the home meter. Forget having "charging stations" like we do gas stations, space dictates it would be next to impossible to turn a profit with the space needed. Americans are going to want to gas-n-go, done in 10 minutes. "The Roman Empire wasn't planned, but neither did it 'just happen.'" |
| February 4th, 2012 at 5:27:47 PM permalink | |
| P90 Member since: Jan 8, 2011 Threads: 7 Posts: 1117 |
What phone did you think I was talking about? There aren't any others known to require Vulcan grip and to shatter after falling just a couple feet.
They already have sound devices on some of these cars. But it's not the same noise, it's a higher frequency signal that is easily audible up close, but doesn't create the same road rumble.
Less than one year for your amount of driving.
Are you serious here? Yes, much smaller. A hundred pounds of copper and rubber versus a hundred tons of metal and concrete.
Once again you are thinking in terms of charcoal clothes irons and horse stables. You don't build big dedicated charging stations, like you need dedicated gas stations with underground cisterns and pumps. A charging outlet is a thick cable, a relay box and a few sockets. It's simpler - any organized parking can function as a charging station. You drive to work, park your car, it's charging there. Stop at a motel, charge there. You don't take trips to a charging station and don't stand and wait there on purpose - just get the charge topped up wherever you go. With a more developed EV network, one option is wireless charging, another a simpler slot/arm system, eliminating the need to even plug it in manually. You park, your car's wireless recognizes a charging station signal, a connection is engaged automatically, if your settings allow it. Instead of 10 minutes pumping gas, it's 0 minutes not even thinking about it.
What acid, is US about to invade Vietnam soon? Developmental EV don't use lead-acid batteries. And if you get acid all over your hands whenever you replace your car's battery, you should hire a mechanic. Just a friendly bit of advice, acid is not good for your skin. Battery switching is already implemented in industrial settings, and all the manual effort it takes is pressing a button. Slide out, slide in, all powered, and good to go in under a minute.
These stats have been researched as well. Most people drive within, IIRC, about 100km radius. That's a worldwide stat from Nissan's study, which is admittedly likely biased. Also, 20*6+200=320, which doesn't average to 33/day. Even then, the range of modern and developmental EV is about 250 miles for higher-end models. Should you need to travel more than that, yes, you might have to consider options. First, ways of travel other than cars. Planes, trains, whatever. Second, you might have to plan your trip with a few stops along the way. Safe charging time for lithiums is about an hour with sufficient current. It's a delay, but it's not a delay impossible to deal with a few times per year. And we're not talking decades into the future, Model S rated for sub-hour charge to 80% is right around the corner. ...just fine for EV - since all you need is a piece of cable, a breaker box, and a plug. I want unlimited range without ever refueling or paying for gas, oh, and it should fly. But guess what? Right. That. There is barely enough gas for just 1 billion cars in the world today. There very clearly isn't going to be enough gas for 10 billion cars in 100 years. And long before that, too. There are multiple viable replacements, with battery-electric one of the most practical for urban settings. |
| February 4th, 2012 at 5:51:11 PM permalink | |
| EvenBob Member since: Jul 18, 2010 Threads: 231 Posts: 6404 |      One casino owner to another: "It would be so much easier if we could just hit them over the head, steal their money, and throw their bodies in the creek." Al Swearengen, Deadwood |
| February 4th, 2012 at 7:35:35 PM permalink | |
| kenarman Member since: Nov 22, 2009 Threads: 10 Posts: 337 |
|
| February 4th, 2012 at 9:01:39 PM permalink | |
| pacomartin Member since: Jan 14, 2010 Threads: 547 Posts: 6210 |
I'm not disputing the cost estimate, the number $400 billion is bandied about. But a lot of that should be returned by eliminating the $80 billion per year in losses. I thought part of the reason was to make electric vehicles possible. BTW China is planning to do it by 2020.  Wine loved I deeply, dice dearly -Edgar, betrayed son of Gloucester in King Lear |
| February 4th, 2012 at 9:05:39 PM permalink | |
| kenarman Member since: Nov 22, 2009 Threads: 10 Posts: 337 |
You lost me on the $80 / year losses? "Computers are useless they only give answers" Picasso |
| February 4th, 2012 at 10:57:45 PM permalink | |
| pacomartin Member since: Jan 14, 2010 Threads: 547 Posts: 6210 |
Sorry. It costs us $80 billion/ year on transmission losses, without High Voltage Direct Current transmission lines. While the investment costs are high, there should be immediate returns in cost savings and a fairly short ROI time. ONce completed there should be energy for electric vehicles. Wine loved I deeply, dice dearly -Edgar, betrayed son of Gloucester in King Lear |
| February 5th, 2012 at 12:14:02 AM permalink | |
| P90 Member since: Jan 8, 2011 Threads: 7 Posts: 1117 |
There is that. But an upgrade of the electrical grid is needed anyway, and gasoline infrastructure doesn't last forever on its own either. To get millions of EV out there, we're not talking about just a few years. While energy generation has substantial costs, don't forget it's a private industry. Consumers pay a certain price for power, and that price covers building and maintaining the infrastructure involved. We're not talking about a handout. And even with all that, even if it comes up due to demand, the cost of electrical power remains only a fraction of the cost of gasoline required for the same effect. Just a quick calculation... gas costs about $1/L in US, that is $1/34MJ. The best gasoline engines extract about 10MJ out of it, but these are high-rev formula car drivetrains, new Porsche engines, a few select small-displacement units, nothing cheap on the list, you need expensive injection and control systems. An average engine only extracts 5-7MJ/L, for a cost of $0.15-$0.20/MJ at current gas price. Electricity costs $0.12/kWh=$0.12/3.6MJ=$0.033/MJ, and it's delivered through battery and motors at 70% to 90% efficiency, boosted by regenerative braking and direct accessory power, for $0.04/MJ. Practical difference is greater as EVs tend to be more efficient overall as well. Cost and efficiency are linked here as well. Lead-acid and NiCd batteries are only about 80% efficient, while lithiums deliver a full 99%. Price at wheels then ranges between $0.035/MJ and $0.045/MJ. That's a difference between 3 times in high-end segment and 4 times in low-end segment. So it requires an investment, but it's much cheaper than oil in any reasonable run including paying off that investment. The price stated is not subsidized, it's slightly higher than total costs at about $0.10/kWh. As to what the investment is, nuclear plant capacity costs between $5,000 and $8,000 per GWe. 1 GWe*yr is about 8,000 GWh, so taking the higher figure arrives at $1/(GWh/yr). Driving a EV 12,000 miles requires between 3,000 kWh and 5,000 kWh, depending on its size and efficiency. That is a one-time investment, for advanced nuclear power, at the highest cost estimate, of $3,000-$5,000 per electric vehicle. Not really all that much. And it's not on top of electricity price, but included in it. For a more visual representation of the scale, a single new build nuclear power plant with 4 reactors, per usual, will have a capacity of 6,000-6,400 MWe, or about 50,000 GWh/year. That is sufficient to power 10,000,000-15,000,000 electric vehicles, losses included. Putting things even more into perspective, a typical low SEER home A/C consumes about 3,500 kWh/year. So a new electric vehicle only consumes as much power over the year as an aircon. |
| Bovada is the only Internet casino endorsed by the Wizard. Here are my reasons why and my promise of support. |