Electric car stuff...

I think it is very ironic how GM made the EV1, and then helped destroyed it but here is the electric car industry once again, though I hope this time it sticks. The article is here http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/business/11electric.html. Personally I really want a electric car, would be a dream actually.

Comments

  • JdoraisJdorais Posts: 653
    Yup, the EV1 was awesome! Lots of electrics on the horizon. There are a number of the Teslas on the road here and I drool every time I see one. The best part is driving next to 1 of the freeway with my window down and listening to the tesla's rev- it's like a spaceship! So quiet! They've got a sedan that's out soon- still priced high though. We need an electric car that has a reasonable cost. I think the Chevy Volt is too spendy for most.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    i want a hydrogen combustion car
  • denniskingdennisking Posts: 3,703 ✭✭✭
    Well since the air has been opened for debate, namely in one other heated thread, and since I seem to be in the mood (I warned you all)...
    Electric cars have a higher carbon footprint in their lifespan from production to destruction than most other cars. A Prius has more environmental impact than a Hummer reference this article and it's only a hybrid. Where do we get electricity from, well from the wall of course. Where does that come from, a power plant. In the PNW we have many hydroelectric dams but in much of our power anitquated nation we rely on coal. Coal is mined, then burned, only after being taken by diesel train to the power plant. The batteries in electric cars WILL fail eventually and where do those batteries go, well the local landfill of course. What's all this mean?
    I know that "Green" companies have agendas just as malicious as the "Big Oil" and "Big 3 automakers" do. I know that they are in a power struggle for the profits from their technologies, just like the opposite side is. I just choose not to buy into the hype. Especially after the records of falsified emails to Congresspeople discussing the farse of "Global warming".
    I warned you all I was opinionated, I'm just trying to not let it all out.
    Phobic, I hope that you aren't offended by any of this as that's not the intention. As for me, I am looking forward to Hydrogen cars or even electric, but only if America's infrastructure will allow more Nuclear Power as it's less wasteful, cleaner, and more viable than coal or even hydro.
  • JdoraisJdorais Posts: 653
    dennisking:
    Well since the air has been opened for debate, namely in one other heated thread, and since I seem to be in the mood (I warned you all)...
    Electric cars have a higher carbon footprint in their lifespan from production to destruction than most other cars. A Prius has more environmental impact than a Hummer reference this article and it's only a hybrid. Where do we get electricity from, well from the wall of course. Where does that come from, a power plant. In the PNW we have many hydroelectric dams but in much of our power anitquated nation we rely on coal. Coal is mined, then burned, only after being taken by diesel train to the power plant. The batteries in electric cars WILL fail eventually and where do those batteries go, well the local landfill of course. What's all this mean?
    I know that "Green" companies have agendas just as malicious as the "Big Oil" and "Big 3 automakers" do. I know that they are in a power struggle for the profits from their technologies, just like the opposite side is. I just choose not to buy into the hype. Especially after the records of falsified emails to Congresspeople discussing the farse of "Global warming".
    I warned you all I was opinionated, I'm just trying to not let it all out.
    Phobic, I hope that you aren't offended by any of this as that's not the intention. As for me, I am looking forward to Hydrogen cars or even electric, but only if America's infrastructure will allow more Nuclear Power as it's less wasteful, cleaner, and more viable than coal or even hydro.

    I don't know about pheebs but I'm not wanting an electric car for environmental reasons. It's just that I think they're really neat, sound pleasant and can go from 0-60 in what 3.9 seconds (tesla)?
  • denniskingdennisking Posts: 3,703 ✭✭✭
    Jdorais:
    dennisking:
    Well since the air has been opened for debate, namely in one other heated thread, and since I seem to be in the mood (I warned you all)...
    Electric cars have a higher carbon footprint in their lifespan from production to destruction than most other cars. A Prius has more environmental impact than a Hummer reference this article and it's only a hybrid. Where do we get electricity from, well from the wall of course. Where does that come from, a power plant. In the PNW we have many hydroelectric dams but in much of our power anitquated nation we rely on coal. Coal is mined, then burned, only after being taken by diesel train to the power plant. The batteries in electric cars WILL fail eventually and where do those batteries go, well the local landfill of course. What's all this mean?
    I know that "Green" companies have agendas just as malicious as the "Big Oil" and "Big 3 automakers" do. I know that they are in a power struggle for the profits from their technologies, just like the opposite side is. I just choose not to buy into the hype. Especially after the records of falsified emails to Congresspeople discussing the farse of "Global warming".
    I warned you all I was opinionated, I'm just trying to not let it all out.
    Phobic, I hope that you aren't offended by any of this as that's not the intention. As for me, I am looking forward to Hydrogen cars or even electric, but only if America's infrastructure will allow more Nuclear Power as it's less wasteful, cleaner, and more viable than coal or even hydro.

    I don't know about pheebs but I'm not wanting an electric car for environmental reasons. It's just that I think they're really neat, sound pleasant and can go from 0-60 in what 3.9 seconds (tesla)?
    so can an X5M and it can carry my family and it's the same price but you can actually find one. i guess for me it's partly my anti-green conspiracy theory paranoia and partly because i'm not willing to pay the costs involved as well as have the pious stigma that comes with that type of merchandise. of course i'm not really rocking the cowboy hat and H2 either but....
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    True, but a lot of initiatives are being put forth to make coal power plants a thing of the past. However for the time being they are much better than cars that use gas, and cheaper too. If the majority of Americans go electric than the amounts of CO2 would decrease and it would push away the dependence of oil. The sad thing is, these technologies have been around for some time. Anyone see "Who killed the electric car"? Good film, made me yell a few times. I actually want a Electric for a few reasons, environment, take a bit off the bottom line from big oil, quieter, cheaper to maintain, cleaner, and it would do my daily tasks easily.
  • denniskingdennisking Posts: 3,703 ✭✭✭
    It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation really. Not to worried about greenhouse gases though, since I do smoke cigars and all..... :)
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    dennisking:
    Jdorais:
    dennisking:
    Well since the air has been opened for debate, namely in one other heated thread, and since I seem to be in the mood (I warned you all)...
    Electric cars have a higher carbon footprint in their lifespan from production to destruction than most other cars. A Prius has more environmental impact than a Hummer reference this article and it's only a hybrid. Where do we get electricity from, well from the wall of course. Where does that come from, a power plant. In the PNW we have many hydroelectric dams but in much of our power anitquated nation we rely on coal. Coal is mined, then burned, only after being taken by diesel train to the power plant. The batteries in electric cars WILL fail eventually and where do those batteries go, well the local landfill of course. What's all this mean?
    I know that "Green" companies have agendas just as malicious as the "Big Oil" and "Big 3 automakers" do. I know that they are in a power struggle for the profits from their technologies, just like the opposite side is. I just choose not to buy into the hype. Especially after the records of falsified emails to Congresspeople discussing the farse of "Global warming".
    I warned you all I was opinionated, I'm just trying to not let it all out.
    Phobic, I hope that you aren't offended by any of this as that's not the intention. As for me, I am looking forward to Hydrogen cars or even electric, but only if America's infrastructure will allow more Nuclear Power as it's less wasteful, cleaner, and more viable than coal or even hydro.

    I don't know about pheebs but I'm not wanting an electric car for environmental reasons. It's just that I think they're really neat, sound pleasant and can go from 0-60 in what 3.9 seconds (tesla)?
    so can an X5M and it can carry my family and it's the same price but you can actually find one. i guess for me it's partly my anti-green conspiracy theory paranoia and partly because i'm not willing to pay the costs involved as well as have the pious stigma that comes with that type of merchandise. of course i'm not really rocking the cowboy hat and H2 either but....
    true... Though I pay (varies) 68-70 bucks at 2.63 a gallon to fill my 01 durango. I love my D, but for going to the store, or shopping or going to my jobs, a electric car would save me a lot of money. I spend a few hundred dollars in a 2 week time in gas. Your not willing to pay for the price of an electric or the big suv/van/truck? All in all it's cheaper to pay 28-30 grand for a electric than to maintain a normal gas car. I do think that they should be launched cheaper for sure, but in a few years they will get cheaper. There's also going to be a good tax credit for these new cars. I'm only worried about being able to get one....
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    i have thought about the idea of getting off of oil while simultaneously boosting the economy. the plan would satisfy environmentalists and die-hard capitalists .

    i dont really have time to type it all out right now but i can at some point if anyone is interested in hearing it.
  • denniskingdennisking Posts: 3,703 ✭✭✭
    kuzi16:
    i have thought about the idea of getting off of oil while simultaneously boosting the economy. the plan would satisfy environmentalists and die-hard capitalists .

    i dont really have time to type it all out right now but i can at some point if anyone is interested in hearing it.
    Biodiesel is the answer. money for the companies, sustainability for our nation through farming, and green practices for the greenies.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    dennisking:
    kuzi16:
    i have thought about the idea of getting off of oil while simultaneously boosting the economy. the plan would satisfy environmentalists and die-hard capitalists .

    i dont really have time to type it all out right now but i can at some point if anyone is interested in hearing it.
    Biodiesel is the answer. money for the companies, sustainability for our nation through farming, and green practices for the greenies.
    the fuel in my plan doesnt really matter. biodiesal may be what it ends up being, but the bigger issue is the change over. there are many different energy sources that we have the technology for right now. (electric, biodiesel, hydrogen fuel cells, hydrogen combustion, etc...) one of the biggest reasons why we dont switch over to whatever it may be is the fear that people have in making the switch in relation to the investments hey have now, and the investment of the new stuff.
    not to mention accessibility of the new fuel.

    my thoughts have been on how to overcome these obstacles, rather that on what fuel it would be.
  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,132
    kuzi16:
    dennisking:
    kuzi16:
    i have thought about the idea of getting off of oil while simultaneously boosting the economy. the plan would satisfy environmentalists and die-hard capitalists .

    i dont really have time to type it all out right now but i can at some point if anyone is interested in hearing it.
    Biodiesel is the answer. money for the companies, sustainability for our nation through farming, and green practices for the greenies.
    the fuel in my plan doesnt really matter. biodiesal may be what it ends up being, but the bigger issue is the change over. there are many different energy sources that we have the technology for right now. (electric, biodiesel, hydrogen fuel cells, hydrogen combustion, etc...) one of the biggest reasons why we dont switch over to whatever it may be is the fear that people have in making the switch in relation to the investments hey have now, and the investment of the new stuff.
    not to mention accessibility of the new fuel.

    my thoughts have been on how to overcome these obstacles, rather that on what fuel it would be.
    To me the first obstacle would be getting everyone to understand that the government does not need to pay for this "switch."
  • phobicsquirrelphobicsquirrel Posts: 7,349
    PuroFreak:
    kuzi16:
    dennisking:
    kuzi16:
    i have thought about the idea of getting off of oil while simultaneously boosting the economy. the plan would satisfy environmentalists and die-hard capitalists .

    i dont really have time to type it all out right now but i can at some point if anyone is interested in hearing it.
    Biodiesel is the answer. money for the companies, sustainability for our nation through farming, and green practices for the greenies.
    the fuel in my plan doesnt really matter. biodiesal may be what it ends up being, but the bigger issue is the change over. there are many different energy sources that we have the technology for right now. (electric, biodiesel, hydrogen fuel cells, hydrogen combustion, etc...) one of the biggest reasons why we dont switch over to whatever it may be is the fear that people have in making the switch in relation to the investments hey have now, and the investment of the new stuff.
    not to mention accessibility of the new fuel.

    my thoughts have been on how to overcome these obstacles, rather that on what fuel it would be.
    To me the first obstacle would be getting everyone to understand that the government does not need to pay for this "switch."
    I don't think that's an issue. Most of the development is private. Your really set on Govt being the center of everything aren't you puro? lol. Bio diesel.. Na I doubt it. Pretty much the same. Fuel cells are probably not going to happen as they are really expensive. electric seems to be the next source. Perhaps hydrogen (water)... will be next. "Fear", maybe though I know it's less of an issue these days. My biggest theory on why it has taken so very long for this to happen is due to the money involved and corporate control. The EV1 story is a great example. I think the biggest thing is that companies need to milk the last dime out of people, and resources then move on to something else. It seems strange really, as they are only hurting themselves. Seems to always be a struggle for people, change and doing things more efficient.
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,616 ✭✭✭✭
    phobicsquirrel:
    I don't think that's an issue. Most of the development is private. Your really set on Govt being the center of everything aren't you puro?
    you are right. the private sector does do a great job of development in this area.
    i feel that the government is actually standing in the way of cleaner energy.
    really?
    ...with democrats in office?

    yes!
    right now the tax on oil and gas are a huge profit to the US government. why would they want to lose that?
    this is part of the reason why a "carbon tax" is so popular with the Government. it would replace (to some extent) the money lost on less fuel usage.

    the switch over would be difficult on the government front because of taxes and on the private sector front because of loss of jobs in the oil industry.
    however, you could combat this with a sound fiscal policy to energy.

    it would be a 15 year plan.

    year one:
    the government announces that any company that comes up with and proves a fuel that is cleaner and just as/more cost effective than Gasoline will get a tax break in the neighborhood of 5% for the remainder of the 15 year plan.
    this new fuel ("X") will be the fuel used to power cars after the switch over.

    Before year five (when fuel "X" is properly vetted):
    the government will approach oil companies that do business in the US and tell them that Fuel "X" is showing promise. it is their job to come up with a distribution system. the first company to do so will get a tax break.

    year five:
    the government will give tax breaks to companies that distribute oil (gas stations and the like) for having the new fuel available at their service stations. this tax break will be up to 20% of the total tax burden they would have normally in proportion to the percent of service stations offering the fuel. (if 50% of their stations offered the new fuel they would get a 10% tax break, if 75% then 15%, etc...)

    still year five:
    auto companies would get a tax break up to 20% of the total tax burden by proportion of their fleet made up by these cars that run on the new fuel.

    again, year five:
    people would be able to wright off 50% of the value of the new "X" fueled car they paid for in that year on their taxes.

    year 15: all tax breaks stop.
    the taxes on oil companies go back to where they are. if all goes well, the new fuel will be at least competitive with gasoline. the demand will be high for it the technology will make them more efficient as it develops. Market forces will help with that.
    there will still be taxes on the fuel "X" and they will be comparable to gas taxes now. the government, in the long run, wont lose out too much.



    im sure there are holes in that plan (especially from a libertarians POV) but its a thought given how our government seems to run now.
    phobicsquirrel:
    lol. Bio diesel.. Na I doubt it. Pretty much the same. Fuel cells are probably not going to happen as they are really expensive. electric seems to be the next source. Perhaps hydrogen (water)... will be next.
    i really do hope its hydrogen combustion. electric cars creep me out. too quiet. i need engine roar. you get that in hydrogen combustion.
    phobicsquirrel:
    "Fear", maybe though I know it's less of an issue these days. My biggest theory on why it has taken so very long for this to happen is due to the money involved and corporate control. The EV1 story is a great example. I think the biggest thing is that companies need to milk the last dime out of people, and resources then move on to something else.
    not so much corporate "control" as corporate "self interest"
    the oil companies have been doing fine as it is. whats the incentive to change?

    as stated above, the government has something to gain from oil as well.
Sign In or Register to comment.