Some advantages of ultracapacitors over traditional energy storage devices such as batteries include: higher power capability, longer life, a wider thermal operating range, lighter, more flexible packaging and lower maintenance.
By contrast, two advantages of batteries are 1) vastly higher energy density, and 2) the fact that they exist.
And here we have the triumph of the capitalists in microcosm. If even those who call themselves Socialists will lie and cheat to avoid contributing to the common good, what hope then for Socialism?
Belief in "socialist" programs and "the common good" doesn't obligate you to pay as much tax as you possibly can. You're well within your rights to claim as many deductions as legally possible under your local system. There is no conflict, here.
Second quote: "it could take five years to commercialise [sic] the patented technology"
Good point. If she was really altruistic she'd have invented solar cells that mass-produce themselves and solve the world's energy problems without anyone having to lift a finger.
I never said I was unwilling to make a change or compromise, I just said that an EV isn't one of them. (that's when you got all offended and started to rant on all my posts)
You've gone on to state blatant falsehood upon blatant falsehood. I seek only to correct your factual errors.
Show me a viable alternative that doesn't require me to
1. Move my family. 2. Stay within a 50 mile radius of my charging station. 3. Drive a REVA.
No one cares if you're satisfied with the status quo. Gasoline cars will be around for decades, so keep doing what you're doing. EVs will be great alternatives for most of the rest of us. Better yet, get a bicycle or take public transportation. But if you're unwilling to make even a single change or compromise, then no fair complaining about gasoline prices.
Obviously you're uninformed and proud of it, so I'm not going to waste much more time on this. However:
Your power plant efficiency number reveals that you're still thinking only in terms your addiction to fossil fuels, because those are the only plants for which that metric even makes sense. Efficiency metrics like that aren't even relevant for nuclear, solar, wind, and hydro power.
Even if you do limit your scope to fossil-fueled generation, your calculation has two glaring flaws. The first flaw is that internal combustion engines are much less efficient than you claim. The theoretical maximum efficiency for most engines is between 30 and 40%, but the real-world average efficiency is between 15 and 20%. There is absolutely unassailable evidence that, even when powered by nasty coal power plants, EVs represent at least a 20% reduction in pollution and CO2 emissions.
Your second flaw is that you're considering the entire electric generation system in your comparison, but you're ignoring the cost of producing your gasoline, refining it, and transporting it. Fair "wells to wheels" energy comparisons reveal that your conclusion is utterly false. The electricity required just to refine your gasoline would take an EV between 50 and 100% of the distance as the energy in the gasoline itself, depending on whose numbers you choose to believe.
Plus, they're shitty in range, charge time,
I've already covered that elsewhere. The evidence is not on your side.
looks,
Something tells me you don't know what you're talking about. A lot of somethings tell me that.
overall safety
Total BS. And here I thought I was replying to a sane person. Oh well.
and nobody's got a realistic plan for battery recycling on a large enough scale to make it worth considering it as an alternative on any widespread distribution.
More BS. Lithium batteries are non-toxic. You can discard them in the landfill with the rest of the car, since a modern battery will likely last as long as said car. But you wouldn't want to do that because the lithium is so valuable. It's almost a certainty that the market will move to recycle batteries once we get to a point where that's even an issue.
I think my estimate was somewhere around 600 Wh/mile.
300 AC Wh/mile is a fair estimate for a small-medium car that would otherwise get 30MPG, as in the example. 600 would be atrocious.
But the significant term in the savings is the E-9 off-peak charging rate. Technically, PG&E *requires* that rate schedule if you have an EV, but you can (at your option) meter the car separately from the house if you want to keep your regular rate for everything else.
Right, but then there's the whole air conditioning/heating situation which most EV proponents forget to mention. 40 miles goes WAY down when you're cooling your vehicle.
What is your agenda? I can't figure anyone would spread such misinformation. Where did you get it? Do you actually believe it?
The air conditioner in our EV uses 600 watts. (Actually it cycles on and off while running, so the average load is certainly lower.) Compared to a typical road load of 20,000 watts, the 600-watt cooling load gets lost in the noise. It's barely measurable.
We have a 4000 watt water heater in our car. Compared to the 20kW road load, it's certainly noticeable but not a big deal. EVs will eventually gravitate toward heat pumps, which will provide heating and cooling for the same 600-800 watt load.
The real point that you're missing (it is rock solid obvious that you're not an EV driver) is that, regardless of the heating and cooling, the car always takes you where you need to go, so you stop thinking and worrying about it. You never need to stop for gas; you simply wake up with a full "tank" every morning, ready for another 100-plus miles.
Stop being an apologist for your gasoline addiction. If you want to bash EVs, pick a legitimate criticism: they're still very expensive and have limited availability.
And I know for a fact that there are plenty of other people for whom that is also true. That doesn't change the unassailable statistics demonstrating that the overwhelming majority of drivers are not in that category.
But when we factor in the cost of owning two vehicles, we're into a whole new realm.
Realistically (and unfortunately), anyone who can afford an EV (expensive!) can easily afford a second car. Whether you do or don't is your choice, of course, but no fair complaining about fuel prices. (I know you didn't say that -- I'm not arguing with you.)
Actually, I did the math, and at the $0.33 I would be paying for each additional kWh from PG&E, my numbers showed that an electric car would cost more by a factor of 2.
$0.33/kWh * 300 AC watthours/mile = ~$0.10/mile for your EV. (And 300 AC watthours/mile is a high estimate.)
$4/gallon / 30 MPG = $0.13/mile for your compact gasoline-powered car. Note that the EV represents a 25% cost reduction in this very conservative example.
BUT, since you live in PG&E territory, you could (and should) be on their E-9 rate, which is only $0.049/kWh for off-peak charging, which makes your EV cost:
$0.049/kWh * 300 AC watthours/mile = 1.45 cents/mile for your EV charged at night, or an 89% energy cost reduction over your gasoline-powered car.
They may not have it now, but nothing prevents them from installing charging equipment if electric cars become popular.
You mean besides power bills?
No, not besides power bills. Even at higher-than-average (but also cleaner-than-average) electricity rates in California, the energy cost is negligible to drive an EV -- between 1 and 2 cents per mile. (This is an improvement over gasoline cost by at least a factor of 5.) So cheap, in fact, that we have free electric charging infrastructure all over California, often sponsored by businesses as an incentive to customers.
EVs suffer from 1) lack of availability, and 2) a high up-front cost of ownership, and that will take a while to change, but the operating cost is fantastically small.
[EVs] can still be extremely useful for the other 90% of us in the meantime.
So how do you enjoy your EV? (I thought so)
I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean. I drive our EV several times per week, and we love it. In the past 18 months there were exactly two times that its 100-mile range wasn't adequate. The first time, we just used our gas car, which we've since sold. The second time we traded cars with a neighbor. The EV is powerful, efficient, and fun to drive, so we have about a dozen friends who are happy to trade cars for a week if we need to take a long trip.
Not good enough. I need: a) 300+ miles per fill up b) 5 min fill ups c) 700+ mi daily range d) Infra everywhere I go
Yawn. Everyone thinks that at first. Statistics unassailably reveal that most of you are wrong. For the tiny fraction of people who do need that spec, then, sadly, an EV is not the car for you. EVs don't have to solve everyone's problems all the time at first. They can still be extremely useful for the other 90% of us in the meantime.
Okay, but my point (whoosh) was that since it's not an auction, there's no "sale" to stop. It's just an ad. You might remove the ad, but you can't do anything beyond that.
Slashdot Mirror
Some advantages of ultracapacitors over traditional energy storage devices such as batteries include: higher power capability, longer life, a wider thermal operating range, lighter, more flexible packaging and lower maintenance.
By contrast, two advantages of batteries are 1) vastly higher energy density, and 2) the fact that they exist.
Obviously, i failed at setting the humour bit correctly, it should of course be zero at all times.
Nah, but you failed at debugging your own comment, because your original comment said the humour bit (must not be set to 1).
And here we have the triumph of the capitalists in microcosm. If even those who call themselves Socialists will lie and cheat to avoid contributing to the common good, what hope then for Socialism?
Belief in "socialist" programs and "the common good" doesn't obligate you to pay as much tax as you possibly can. You're well within your rights to claim as many deductions as legally possible under your local system. There is no conflict, here.
Personally I think the government gets more than enough of my money anyway.
If you live in the South, you're probably wrong.
50cm restriction? do they have something to hide??
Everyone knows WMDs are only 49cm across.
Second quote:
"it could take five years to commercialise [sic] the patented technology"
Good point. If she was really altruistic she'd have invented solar cells that mass-produce themselves and solve the world's energy problems without anyone having to lift a finger.
Ah, that stinks. Sorry to hear that. With any luck that will change along by the time EVs are readily available and affordable.
AC Propulsion eBox. Not that it especially matters, because nearly all modern EVs have the same exceptional efficiency.
eBox features the same basic technology as found in Tesla Motors' roadster. Same spec more or less (aside from acceleration) as a Toyota RAV4 EV.
I never said I was unwilling to make a change or compromise, I just said that an EV isn't one of them. (that's when you got all offended and started to rant on all my posts)
You've gone on to state blatant falsehood upon blatant falsehood. I seek only to correct your factual errors.
Show me a viable alternative that doesn't require me to
1. Move my family. 2. Stay within a 50 mile radius of my charging station. 3. Drive a REVA.
No one cares if you're satisfied with the status quo. Gasoline cars will be around for decades, so keep doing what you're doing. EVs will be great alternatives for most of the rest of us. Better yet, get a bicycle or take public transportation. But if you're unwilling to make even a single change or compromise, then no fair complaining about gasoline prices.
Obviously you're uninformed and proud of it, so I'm not going to waste much more time on this. However:
Your power plant efficiency number reveals that you're still thinking only in terms your addiction to fossil fuels, because those are the only plants for which that metric even makes sense. Efficiency metrics like that aren't even relevant for nuclear, solar, wind, and hydro power.
Even if you do limit your scope to fossil-fueled generation, your calculation has two glaring flaws. The first flaw is that internal combustion engines are much less efficient than you claim. The theoretical maximum efficiency for most engines is between 30 and 40%, but the real-world average efficiency is between 15 and 20%. There is absolutely unassailable evidence that, even when powered by nasty coal power plants, EVs represent at least a 20% reduction in pollution and CO2 emissions.
Your second flaw is that you're considering the entire electric generation system in your comparison, but you're ignoring the cost of producing your gasoline, refining it, and transporting it. Fair "wells to wheels" energy comparisons reveal that your conclusion is utterly false. The electricity required just to refine your gasoline would take an EV between 50 and 100% of the distance as the energy in the gasoline itself, depending on whose numbers you choose to believe.
Plus, they're shitty in range, charge time,
I've already covered that elsewhere. The evidence is not on your side.
looks,
Something tells me you don't know what you're talking about. A lot of somethings tell me that.
overall safety
Total BS. And here I thought I was replying to a sane person. Oh well.
and nobody's got a realistic plan for battery recycling on a large enough scale to make it worth considering it as an alternative on any widespread distribution.
More BS. Lithium batteries are non-toxic. You can discard them in the landfill with the rest of the car, since a modern battery will likely last as long as said car. But you wouldn't want to do that because the lithium is so valuable. It's almost a certainty that the market will move to recycle batteries once we get to a point where that's even an issue.
I think my estimate was somewhere around 600 Wh/mile.
300 AC Wh/mile is a fair estimate for a small-medium car that would otherwise get 30MPG, as in the example. 600 would be atrocious.
But the significant term in the savings is the E-9 off-peak charging rate. Technically, PG&E *requires* that rate schedule if you have an EV, but you can (at your option) meter the car separately from the house if you want to keep your regular rate for everything else.
Right, but then there's the whole air conditioning/heating situation which most EV proponents forget to mention. 40 miles goes WAY down when you're cooling your vehicle.
What is your agenda? I can't figure anyone would spread such misinformation. Where did you get it? Do you actually believe it?
The air conditioner in our EV uses 600 watts. (Actually it cycles on and off while running, so the average load is certainly lower.) Compared to a typical road load of 20,000 watts, the 600-watt cooling load gets lost in the noise. It's barely measurable.
We have a 4000 watt water heater in our car. Compared to the 20kW road load, it's certainly noticeable but not a big deal. EVs will eventually gravitate toward heat pumps, which will provide heating and cooling for the same 600-800 watt load.
The real point that you're missing (it is rock solid obvious that you're not an EV driver) is that, regardless of the heating and cooling, the car always takes you where you need to go, so you stop thinking and worrying about it. You never need to stop for gas; you simply wake up with a full "tank" every morning, ready for another 100-plus miles.
Stop being an apologist for your gasoline addiction. If you want to bash EVs, pick a legitimate criticism: they're still very expensive and have limited availability.
Yawn. Everyone thinks that at first.
I don't think that, I know it.
And I know for a fact that there are plenty of other people for whom that is also true. That doesn't change the unassailable statistics demonstrating that the overwhelming majority of drivers are not in that category.
But when we factor in the cost of owning two vehicles, we're into a whole new
realm.
Realistically (and unfortunately), anyone who can afford an EV (expensive!) can easily afford a second car. Whether you do or don't is your choice, of course, but no fair complaining about fuel prices. (I know you didn't say that -- I'm not arguing with you.)
Jeez, chill out. Since, as you point out, I wasn't quoting you, you really don't need to be so defensive. Seriously, have a nice day.
Actually, I did the math, and at the $0.33 I would be paying for each additional kWh from PG&E, my numbers showed that an electric car would cost more by a factor of 2.
$0.33/kWh * 300 AC watthours/mile = ~$0.10/mile for your EV. (And 300 AC watthours/mile is a high estimate.)
$4/gallon / 30 MPG = $0.13/mile for your compact gasoline-powered car. Note that the EV represents a 25% cost reduction in this very conservative example.
BUT, since you live in PG&E territory, you could (and should) be on their E-9 rate, which is only $0.049/kWh for off-peak charging, which makes your EV cost:
$0.049/kWh * 300 AC watthours/mile = 1.45 cents/mile for your EV charged at night, or an 89% energy cost reduction over your gasoline-powered car.
Down boy. I'm not trying to destroy anyone's arguments. Have a nice day.
They may not have it now, but nothing prevents them from installing charging equipment if electric cars become popular.
You mean besides power bills?
No, not besides power bills. Even at higher-than-average (but also cleaner-than-average) electricity rates in California, the energy cost is negligible to drive an EV -- between 1 and 2 cents per mile. (This is an improvement over gasoline cost by at least a factor of 5.) So cheap, in fact, that we have free electric charging infrastructure all over California, often sponsored by businesses as an incentive to customers.
EVs suffer from 1) lack of availability, and 2) a high up-front cost of ownership, and that will take a while to change, but the operating cost is fantastically small.
[EVs] can still be extremely useful for the other 90% of us in the meantime.
So how do you enjoy your EV? (I thought so)
I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean. I drive our EV several times per week, and we love it. In the past 18 months there were exactly two times that its 100-mile range wasn't adequate. The first time, we just used our gas car, which we've since sold. The second time we traded cars with a neighbor. The EV is powerful, efficient, and fun to drive, so we have about a dozen friends who are happy to trade cars for a week if we need to take a long trip.
Hope that answers your question.
Not good enough. I need:
a) 300+ miles per fill up
b) 5 min fill ups
c) 700+ mi daily range
d) Infra everywhere I go
Yawn. Everyone thinks that at first. Statistics unassailably reveal that most of you are wrong. For the tiny fraction of people who do need that spec, then, sadly, an EV is not the car for you. EVs don't have to solve everyone's problems all the time at first. They can still be extremely useful for the other 90% of us in the meantime.
Too bad it's not available. Their vaporware Korean SUV has been a year away from production for 3 years.
Really, it does. Look it up.
Not that I'm a proponent of using more oil, but the "terrorists have all our oil" argument needs to be put in perspective.
I want to know if Bob Jacobsen got his $30,000 (legal fees paid to the scum suckers) back.
Okay, but my point (whoosh) was that since it's not an auction, there's no "sale" to stop. It's just an ad. You might remove the ad, but you can't do anything beyond that.
Craigslist doesn't manage auctions.