This is not about fascism, or freedom. The fact that you have to resort to name calling speaks volumes about where you come from.
I have had to deal with spies for some time. I have seen that nations like China, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, and of course, AQ terrorists are here.
I fully support ITAR.
This girl was having what she thought was a private conversation with her uncle and it came out in the farsi language that they were mailing the ipad back to Iran, while she KNEW that it was ILLEGAL FOR THEM TO DO THAT.
In this case, the girl was overheard by another Iranian ex-pat who understood what was being said.
He then did the RIGHT thing and said no. To which she called in news trying to get him to back down.
Now, I have a number of Iranian neighbors. They will quickly tell you that they KNOW that they can not mail back things like Ipad, other high tech, cash, etc (esp. NOT NOW). More importantly, they will tell you that you absolutely SHOULD NOT DO IT. Why? Because they want the current oil blockaide to succeed and for the current gov. to fall QUICKLY. They WANT Iranian citizens to be free like was promised by Iranian leaders when Carter quit supporting the Shah (interesting that a number of them also blame carter for NOT supporting the shah). But more than anything, the want the suffering that their relatives and friends go through to stop. But they KNOW that the ONLY way is for this gov. to fall.
Obama has the right idea. Basically, starve the gov. of cash and allow the military to go after the gov. (and they will, if things are bad enough). But when you help them by sending them tech, food, cash, etc that they are not supposed to have, then it helps them. And yes, it helps them a LOT.
Sadly, jackasses like this girl and yourself are prolonging this.
I wish that kids like you would have lived in a time where we dived under desks to know what the real cold war was all about. Iran, along with North Korea, China, Venezuela, etc. are in a cold war with the west. But what kids like you miss is that a number of nations are building nukes around the globe and striving to have a distributed attack force. This whole situation with Iran needs to stop, preferably PEACEFULLY. But it will not if we continue to have neo-cons outing information about what we are up to, along with kids like you either sending aid to them, or pushing for others to be allowed to send aid to them.
But then again, you likely only care about yourself.
Gads, Dolphin. You used to be over on Space.com screaming about O as well, making loads of wild assertions then.
So, again, manned space program is certainly not dead in NASA. Never has been. We have several ppl up in space.
Secondly, O promised to NOT kill manned space. It is doing just fine. W and you neo-cons killed the shuttle. And your same group killed constellation. The EARLIEST that Ares I would have flown was 2017 and it was already looking to slip again. br>
Third, it is you neo-cons that are hard at work wasting money on the SLS, which will fly human in 2020, while private space is trying for 2014/2015. Sadly, you neo-cons are AGAIN trying to kill private space. Thankfully, an agreement was made for 2.5 funds (likely spaceX, boeing and SNC) for private space. The current problem is that we need MULTIPLE destinations for private space to go to. Sadly, again, you neo-cons are hard at work blocking bigelow aerospace.
Assuming that SpaceX makes it in 2014, I think that BA will have their first BA-330 going up in 2014. At that time, hopefully, we can stop you neo-cons from wasting so much money.
Not likely. It is almost certain that by 2018, we will have a tug for the western half. Even now, NASA is hard at work on developing a tug, as well as automated docking.
The rest of it is great as it stands. The issue for Russian side is that they have very little room, and literally no power.
Yeah, that is why they continue to suck down Colorado's share of the Colorado River. They are supposed to be dropping their usage, but that has not happened.
That is for the car that was rated for 300 miles/ charge.Drop the batteries down to the lowest value (which is only 160 miles/charge) and then you get a radically different value (i.e. greatly increased). However, EPA will only rate cars that are currently being sold. The 220 will come out this fall and the 160 this winter. At that time, the models will be rated and it will be substantially higher. And note that focus does not have the speed, the carrying capacity, or the torque.
Secondly, the model s gets 160 miles/40 kwh. That means that it gets 4 miles/kwh or $.025/mile.
Now, in a gas car, lets assume the fleet average of 25 mpg. So, with a cost of $3.5/gal here in America, that means that it costs.14/mile.
Basically, gas is 5x as expensive to go with and it WILL go up again.
BTW, most power companies charge about 1/2 the price if you have an electric car and you charge at night. So, the difference is 10x, not 5.
So many of you ppl scream and compare POSs like the Volt to tesla and say that it can not be done. Yet, they ARE doing it. Hell, by your bizarre math, then the roadster with 56KWH could not POSSIBLY get 220 miles/charge. So, how is it done? Well, the issue becomes what costs you energy? It turns out that it is not rolling drag, but the aerodynamics drag. So, if a company like tesla spends a lot of effort at making their car aerodynamically superior to the junk that you seem to like, then it is TRIVIAL to get the distance that they ARE getting.
Money for the vehicle. Basically, it costs a lot more to go distance on those, which the ones that you listed need 100 miles/day or more. I have written at Tesla several times and have suggested the idea of allowing a PLUG-IN generator on the back of vehicles. IOW, have the ability to add a fuel-cell, extra batteries, wave disk engine, NG engine/Gen, or even diesel engine/Gen to the back of a vehicle (think of those racks that go on the back of suburbans). With such a thing, it would encourage different developers of these units to compete to develop CHEAP AND EFFICIENT supplies. My thought was that it would work for trucks, etc. as well.
But, where they could make a MASSIVE in-road, if they do this right, is come up with small delivery vans, that get say 50-70 miles to a charge, then approach the utility companies to buy these, and then LEASE them to the USPO. The vast majority of the USPO's fleet drive around 30 miles/day. But, they are gas based. OTOH, if electric companies do this deal, they can increase the night time loads so that they make more efficient use of their base load systems (which they want).
And yet, Tesla said that they would have the model S out in June of 2012. Here we are. Recall that bet that Musk did with that pompous reporter from 2 years ago? Somehow I doubt that the bastard will pay, but Musk had called it. Now, we both know that SpaceX is 2 years behind schedule, but that had more to do with F1-1. But overall, I think that Musk has been pretty good with scheduling. So, I expect that X will be next year, and Tesla is saying that they will have White Star (or gen 3) out for 2015 model (i.e. out in june 2014).
The batteries were THOUGHT to be at risk, but none ever had caught on fire. OTOH, the cruiz HAS caught on fire. So has a number of gas powered cars.
I had not thought about movie theaters. That is actually a good one. And you are right that there needs to be many more stations around. There is a chicken-egg issue. In fact, that is why I also support the NAT GAS act. It addresses the issues of adding natural gas refueling on highways, as well as ramping up commercial vehicles with NG engines (though I would like to see these be serial hybrids; better torque ; abiliity to change the generators later on).
I am not sure about 200. I think for the east coast of America, a true 120 miles is more than enough, while 160-200 in rural or western mountain areas are needed. Regardless, the ability to do 5 minute charges WILL be important down the road.
First off, thorium reactors ramp up in a matter of hours (and cool off very quickly as well).
Secondly, coal is the WORST to ramp up of the base loads. It is not very hot of a fire and it takes a lot to get it going. NG is used in turbines and is within seconds of ramp-up. NG boilers are MUCH MUCH faster than coal to run up AND down (turn it off with NG, but with coal it must burn out).
Third, NG is now about the same price as coal, and that does not include the coming hit on Coal for pollution. Besides, coal can be converted to NG CLEANLY and cheaply.
Fourth, the expectation is that electric vehicles would be charged at night which will increase the base load demand. As such, power companies can drop many of their expensive turbine unit and go to high-effiency NG and Atomic (esp. thorium) units. Then ideally, they would also have energy storage to take up excess power (say wind or solar) that could be called on within say 12 hours. For me, I am a fan of adding 24 hour thermal storage to all NG power plants. In doing that, it allows a power plant to have CHEAP storage (though you lose about 50% of the energy, but economically, it makes sense).
In addition, in most utilities have rates that are approaching half in the middle of the night. So, here in Colorado, if you contact Xcel (or other utilities), you can get rates of around.04-.06/kwh, while during the daytime it is around.11/kwh. And most, if not all PUCs, approve of this. Quite honestly, utilities AND PUC WANT to have electric cars on their grid and nearly all to charge at nights so that they can drop the expensive on-demand units. They would simply move to nuke and NG power plants. The nukes would handle the true baseload, while the NG boilers would be used for increased day demand.
Obviously there is the environmental question too but to be able to answer that you would have to now the environmental impact of manufacturing the battery pack as well as the electricity to charge it. My guess would be that the Tesla would come out on top overall but probably not by a lot (but that is a pure guess).
My wife wants to order either the X or S. We crunched the numbers just for the S @ $50, using the day rate of Xcel (.11/kwh). What it comes out to, is that compared to any other care that costs $35K on up, the S kills it. It is when you compare the S to cars under $30K. Of course, that is like comparing a Mercedes to a Cruiz or an apple to a boat. IOW, these are all different groups. There really is NO comparison. So, you want to compare the S against $40-65K cars. And the tesla comes WAY out on top. Simple as that.
Now, the costs of the battery is a none issue. Tesla's are warrentied for 8 years. So, the question becomes, what did batteries look like 8 years ago, and what will they look like 8 years out? Well, 12 years ago the EV-1 had just died, which used Lead Acid and then NiMH. The Gas powered Hybrids came about 6 years ago, and they STILL use NiMH batteries.
IBM is saying that they are working on Li-air batteries and expect to have them in production by 2020, which is 8 years out. These are expected to have about 5-10K charges, and in terms of charge density, will hold 5-15x what today's batteries hold. Heck, even now, there is a new Li battery out that has double the energy denisty, takes fast charges without a hitch and has some 2K+ charges for the same price.
First off, Cal. U.-berkley does NOT agree with that and the book is NOT a study. It is a visiting prof to CU-berkley with a simple BS in engineering proclaiming it and pushing for fossuel fuels and nukes.
In addition, if doing electric, you have regenerative braking to get back some of your energy. OTOH, with a truck in stop/go, you get a higher maintenance cost in brakes or transmissions.
Add in maintenance costs on ICE engines. Add in oil changes. And in the fact that society subsidizes the pollution from these (and will likely be changed by 2020) and it becomes obvious that batteries are at about break-even.
Now, a tesla model S has higher performance than most cars in the same costs brackets. And have you seen the vehicle. Beautiful. Basically comparable or better quality than German or Japanese cars.
By 2015, the model S is expected to drop to around 45K without subsidies. Likewise, they will have their sub-30K car out there. I was told that it would get around 120-150 miles/charge and have 0-60 of around 6 secs or less.
Point is, I will take that. This is no different than what happened with Ships, Trains, ICE Cars, Aviation, and now space.
First off, the leaf is 100% sold out. And as nissan adds more plant production for it, they are expected to have 100% sales.
Secondly, the gas powered volt WAS selling poorly, but at the time that they cut production, gas prices went up, so GM increased production. I have noticed that I have now seen 2 volts in my area (and we have 2 tesla roadsters here as well).
You assessment of electric and hybrids cars is a bit off. A number of stores (walgreens) are adding high voltage rechargers. Personally, I think that they are the wrong place. Instead, I would try to get attractions (zoos, museums, sporting events, park-n-rides, etc) as well as restaurants along the highways to add these and match them to the needs. For example, I would shoot for 30 minute rechargers at restaurants. OTH, for zoos, museums, sporting events, shoot for 1-3 hours. And park-n-rides? 6-8 hours. Ideally, these would have smart technology where they can drop their charging as demand on the grid increases. For those who MUST have full charge, let them pay more / kw to guarantee that they will have the electricity. For those that can accept a partial charge, then they pay less. All programmed at the meter.
Parallel hybrids are jokes. Bad jokes. They are designed to allow companies to involve all divisions of a normal car company. A serial hybrid makes sense for large vehicles. But for cars? Nope. If you can not accept the range of an electric car, then buy a gas or better yet, a NG car.
1) batteries are recycled.
2) less than an ICE once the production is up.
3) much cleaner. Less metal. ICE vehicles make heavy use of loads of different ore. Think about an engine and complex transmission (to keep the engine operating in a small RPM range) and all the different parts on it. ICE vehicles are COMPLEX. That is why I dislike parallel hybrids and only accept serial hybrids for large vehicles.
4) electric cars will LOWER the costs of electricity. The reason is that most ppl will charge at night, not during the daytime. Electric companies are already starting to charge differential rates for EC owners. From a utilities POV, they would LOVE to charge all transportation at night, with loads of base power generators and then during the day, have the excess power be used by businesses. Right now, utilities have to add very expensive on-demand generators. BTW, the current grid can handle 100% of ALL road transportation being moved to electric IFF it is done at night charging, and if parts of the northwest grid gets upgrade.
5) Right now, coal is around 38% of USA's matrix. Go to China, and it is around 85%. interestingly, if coal was 100% of our matrix, then all pollutants would drop, EXCEPT for CO2. Oil is not that clean.
6) nope. The smart move though, is to kill burning coal directly, switch to NG/atomic power plants (as well as NG for Commercial vehicles) and then convert our coal to Methane (the main ingredient in NG ) so that we have competition to keep NG prices low. Doing this would allow us time to switch to AE/Atomic, while cleaning up the air, dropping our dependency on imported oil, and even dropping our CO2 emissions (the bulk for USA comes from our low density; switch to electric cars and we can cut something like 25-33% of our CO2).
7) Again, we are dropping our dependency on coal. By 2020, we are expected to be less than 25% coal. And if we move to the above (coal=>methane), then we have no dependency on coal, but instead multiple sources. Ideally, we would re-do our NG pipes to ones that can handle hydrogen (which is expensive) so that in time, we can drop NG and have hydrogen shipped around.
Within my lifetime, gas has gone from.23/gal to 4.00/gal. If we are going to repair roads, etc. I suspect that we will need to double taxes. That will mean that we will within a couple of years pay around 6/gal, and I would not be surprised to see us approaching Europe levels of oil prices.
You missed so many points.
Tesla is starting high-end and going towards low. In 2014, they are expected to introduce their sub 30K electric car. Unlike the garbage that is out there, it will likely be a 4 seater, and have decent performance and torque (i.e. 0-60 under 6 if not 5) and a range of around 120 miles.
If 160 miles is not far enough, then for 10K each bump, you can change to 220 or even 300. With the 300 mile range, you also get the improved motor that will drop your 0-60 in the 4's. However, if you can not afford, then you are right. Stay with a gas car or wait another year for a Natural Gas car. For now.
Sigh. Most ppl drive in the day times. So, installing panel do little for you, unless you have one that works based on night time charging. Regardless, electricity is less than $1.00 per gallon of gas equivalence (for most of USA, it is.80-.90).
Same price as a BWM, Mercedes, Nice SUV, etc. The only difference is that the Tesla costs a fraction of the price to own and can outperform most of those cars.
Slashdot Mirror
Sigh.
This is not about fascism, or freedom. The fact that you have to resort to name calling speaks volumes about where you come from.
I have had to deal with spies for some time. I have seen that nations like China, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, and of course, AQ terrorists are here.
I fully support ITAR.
This girl was having what she thought was a private conversation with her uncle and it came out in the farsi language that they were mailing the ipad back to Iran, while she KNEW that it was ILLEGAL FOR THEM TO DO THAT.
In this case, the girl was overheard by another Iranian ex-pat who understood what was being said.
He then did the RIGHT thing and said no. To which she called in news trying to get him to back down.
Now, I have a number of Iranian neighbors. They will quickly tell you that they KNOW that they can not mail back things like Ipad, other high tech, cash, etc (esp. NOT NOW). More importantly, they will tell you that you absolutely SHOULD NOT DO IT. Why? Because they want the current oil blockaide to succeed and for the current gov. to fall QUICKLY. They WANT Iranian citizens to be free like was promised by Iranian leaders when Carter quit supporting the Shah (interesting that a number of them also blame carter for NOT supporting the shah). But more than anything, the want the suffering that their relatives and friends go through to stop. But they KNOW that the ONLY way is for this gov. to fall.
Obama has the right idea. Basically, starve the gov. of cash and allow the military to go after the gov. (and they will, if things are bad enough). But when you help them by sending them tech, food, cash, etc that they are not supposed to have, then it helps them. And yes, it helps them a LOT.
Sadly, jackasses like this girl and yourself are prolonging this.
I wish that kids like you would have lived in a time where we dived under desks to know what the real cold war was all about. Iran, along with North Korea, China, Venezuela, etc. are in a cold war with the west. But what kids like you miss is that a number of nations are building nukes around the globe and striving to have a distributed attack force. This whole situation with Iran needs to stop, preferably PEACEFULLY. But it will not if we continue to have neo-cons outing information about what we are up to, along with kids like you either sending aid to them, or pushing for others to be allowed to send aid to them.
But then again, you likely only care about yourself.
In fact, he should be commended for doing this. And the girl should be carefully looked at by DHS.
Gads, Dolphin. You used to be over on Space.com screaming about O as well, making loads of wild assertions then.
So, again, manned space program is certainly not dead in NASA. Never has been. We have several ppl up in space.
Secondly, O promised to NOT kill manned space. It is doing just fine. W and you neo-cons killed the shuttle. And your same group killed constellation. The EARLIEST that Ares I would have flown was 2017 and it was already looking to slip again. br> Third, it is you neo-cons that are hard at work wasting money on the SLS, which will fly human in 2020, while private space is trying for 2014/2015. Sadly, you neo-cons are AGAIN trying to kill private space. Thankfully, an agreement was made for 2.5 funds (likely spaceX, boeing and SNC) for private space. The current problem is that we need MULTIPLE destinations for private space to go to. Sadly, again, you neo-cons are hard at work blocking bigelow aerospace.
Assuming that SpaceX makes it in 2014, I think that BA will have their first BA-330 going up in 2014. At that time, hopefully, we can stop you neo-cons from wasting so much money.
Not likely. It is almost certain that by 2018, we will have a tug for the western half. Even now, NASA is hard at work on developing a tug, as well as automated docking.
The rest of it is great as it stands. The issue for Russian side is that they have very little room, and literally no power.
Yeah, that is why they continue to suck down Colorado's share of the Colorado River. They are supposed to be dropping their usage, but that has not happened.
Fyi, those are the rates for commercial, epa.gov shows more current rates.
The U.S average residential retail price of electricity was 11.53 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2010
Odd, that looks like residential rates. And my bill lines up with it.
And my delivery charge is $.0005/kwh which is quite minimal.
And I happen to know that Xcell has plenty of excess capacity at night so they charge a great deal less. They have been doing this for decades. The same was true back in Illinois.
If you have ANY proof of what you claim, please provide real links (no faux news; no oil companies) to the data.
That is for the car that was rated for 300 miles/ charge.Drop the batteries down to the lowest value (which is only 160 miles/charge) and then you get a radically different value (i.e. greatly increased). However, EPA will only rate cars that are currently being sold. The 220 will come out this fall and the 160 this winter. At that time, the models will be rated and it will be substantially higher.
And note that focus does not have the speed, the carrying capacity, or the torque.
First, WHERE are you paying .20/hwhr? NO WHERE in the lower 48 or alaska. Only Hawaii pays that.
.14/mile.
Secondly, the model s gets 160 miles/40 kwh. That means that it gets 4 miles/kwh or $.025/mile.
Now, in a gas car, lets assume the fleet average of 25 mpg. So, with a cost of $3.5/gal here in America, that means that it costs
Basically, gas is 5x as expensive to go with and it WILL go up again.
BTW, most power companies charge about 1/2 the price if you have an electric car and you charge at night. So, the difference is 10x, not 5.
I would suggest that you learn about engineering.
So many of you ppl scream and compare POSs like the Volt to tesla and say that it can not be done. Yet, they ARE doing it. Hell, by your bizarre math, then the roadster with 56KWH could not POSSIBLY get 220 miles/charge. So, how is it done? Well, the issue becomes what costs you energy? It turns out that it is not rolling drag, but the aerodynamics drag. So, if a company like tesla spends a lot of effort at making their car aerodynamically superior to the junk that you seem to like, then it is TRIVIAL to get the distance that they ARE getting.
Money for the vehicle. Basically, it costs a lot more to go distance on those, which the ones that you listed need 100 miles /day or more. I have written at Tesla several times and have suggested the idea of allowing a PLUG-IN generator on the back of vehicles. IOW, have the ability to add a fuel-cell, extra batteries, wave disk engine, NG engine/Gen, or even diesel engine/Gen to the back of a vehicle (think of those racks that go on the back of suburbans). With such a thing, it would encourage different developers of these units to compete to develop CHEAP AND EFFICIENT supplies.
/day. But, they are gas based. OTOH, if electric companies do this deal, they can increase the night time loads so that they make more efficient use of their base load systems (which they want).
My thought was that it would work for trucks, etc. as well.
But, where they could make a MASSIVE in-road, if they do this right, is come up with small delivery vans, that get say 50-70 miles to a charge, then approach the utility companies to buy these, and then LEASE them to the USPO. The vast majority of the USPO's fleet drive around 30 miles
And yet, Tesla said that they would have the model S out in June of 2012. Here we are. Recall that bet that Musk did with that pompous reporter from 2 years ago? Somehow I doubt that the bastard will pay, but Musk had called it. Now, we both know that SpaceX is 2 years behind schedule, but that had more to do with F1-1. But overall, I think that Musk has been pretty good with scheduling. So, I expect that X will be next year, and Tesla is saying that they will have White Star (or gen 3) out for 2015 model (i.e. out in june 2014).
LOL.
Where is the leaf currently produced at? The leaf is currently produced right outside Fukishima, Japan. Needless to say, production is down just a little bit . Thankfully, they have a new plant coming on-line
The batteries were THOUGHT to be at risk, but none ever had caught on fire. OTOH, the cruiz HAS caught on fire. So has a number of gas powered cars.
I had not thought about movie theaters. That is actually a good one. And you are right that there needs to be many more stations around. There is a chicken-egg issue. In fact, that is why I also support the NAT GAS act. It addresses the issues of adding natural gas refueling on highways, as well as ramping up commercial vehicles with NG engines (though I would like to see these be serial hybrids; better torque ; abiliity to change the generators later on).
I am not sure about 200. I think for the east coast of America, a true 120 miles is more than enough, while 160-200 in rural or western mountain areas are needed. Regardless, the ability to do 5 minute charges WILL be important down the road.
First off, thorium reactors ramp up in a matter of hours (and cool off very quickly as well).
.04-.06/kwh, while during the daytime it is around .11/kwh. And most, if not all PUCs, approve of this. Quite honestly, utilities AND PUC WANT to have electric cars on their grid and nearly all to charge at nights so that they can drop the expensive on-demand units. They would simply move to nuke and NG power plants. The nukes would handle the true baseload, while the NG boilers would be used for increased day demand.
Secondly, coal is the WORST to ramp up of the base loads. It is not very hot of a fire and it takes a lot to get it going. NG is used in turbines and is within seconds of ramp-up. NG boilers are MUCH MUCH faster than coal to run up AND down (turn it off with NG, but with coal it must burn out).
Third, NG is now about the same price as coal, and that does not include the coming hit on Coal for pollution. Besides, coal can be converted to NG CLEANLY and cheaply.
Fourth, the expectation is that electric vehicles would be charged at night which will increase the base load demand. As such, power companies can drop many of their expensive turbine unit and go to high-effiency NG and Atomic (esp. thorium) units. Then ideally, they would also have energy storage to take up excess power (say wind or solar) that could be called on within say 12 hours. For me, I am a fan of adding 24 hour thermal storage to all NG power plants. In doing that, it allows a power plant to have CHEAP storage (though you lose about 50% of the energy, but economically, it makes sense).
In addition, in most utilities have rates that are approaching half in the middle of the night. So, here in Colorado, if you contact Xcel (or other utilities), you can get rates of around
Obviously there is the environmental question too but to be able to answer that you would have to now the environmental impact of manufacturing the battery pack as well as the electricity to charge it. My guess would be that the Tesla would come out on top overall but probably not by a lot (but that is a pure guess).
My wife wants to order either the X or S. We crunched the numbers just for the S @ $50, using the day rate of Xcel (.11/kwh). What it comes out to, is that compared to any other care that costs $35K on up, the S kills it. It is when you compare the S to cars under $30K. Of course, that is like comparing a Mercedes to a Cruiz or an apple to a boat. IOW, these are all different groups. There really is NO comparison. So, you want to compare the S against $40-65K cars. And the tesla comes WAY out on top. Simple as that.
Now, the costs of the battery is a none issue. Tesla's are warrentied for 8 years. So, the question becomes, what did batteries look like 8 years ago, and what will they look like 8 years out? Well, 12 years ago the EV-1 had just died, which used Lead Acid and then NiMH. The Gas powered Hybrids came about 6 years ago, and they STILL use NiMH batteries.
IBM is saying that they are working on Li-air batteries and expect to have them in production by 2020, which is 8 years out. These are expected to have about 5-10K charges, and in terms of charge density, will hold 5-15x what today's batteries hold. Heck, even now, there is a new Li battery out that has double the energy denisty, takes fast charges without a hitch and has some 2K+ charges for the same price.
Here is one.
Here is another.
First off, Cal. U.-berkley does NOT agree with that and the book is NOT a study. It is a visiting prof to CU-berkley with a simple BS in engineering proclaiming it and pushing for fossuel fuels and nukes.
Here is the book.
Here is the author.
And here is his bio.
If you read through some of his stuff, you realize that he speaks in generalities with no math behind it.
In addition, if doing electric, you have regenerative braking to get back some of your energy. OTOH, with a truck in stop/go, you get a higher maintenance cost in brakes or transmissions.
Then you should read the reviews, esp. the second link on the original posting.
Add in maintenance costs on ICE engines. Add in oil changes. And in the fact that society subsidizes the pollution from these (and will likely be changed by 2020) and it becomes obvious that batteries are at about break-even.
Now, a tesla model S has higher performance than most cars in the same costs brackets. And have you seen the vehicle. Beautiful. Basically comparable or better quality than German or Japanese cars.
By 2015, the model S is expected to drop to around 45K without subsidies. Likewise, they will have their sub-30K car out there. I was told that it would get around 120-150 miles/charge and have 0-60 of around 6 secs or less.
Point is, I will take that. This is no different than what happened with Ships, Trains, ICE Cars, Aviation, and now space.
First off, the leaf is 100% sold out. And as nissan adds more plant production for it, they are expected to have 100% sales.
Secondly, the gas powered volt WAS selling poorly, but at the time that they cut production, gas prices went up, so GM increased production. I have noticed that I have now seen 2 volts in my area (and we have 2 tesla roadsters here as well).
You assessment of electric and hybrids cars is a bit off. A number of stores (walgreens) are adding high voltage rechargers. Personally, I think that they are the wrong place. Instead, I would try to get attractions (zoos, museums, sporting events, park-n-rides, etc) as well as restaurants along the highways to add these and match them to the needs. For example, I would shoot for 30 minute rechargers at restaurants. OTH, for zoos, museums, sporting events, shoot for 1-3 hours. And park-n-rides? 6-8 hours. Ideally, these would have smart technology where they can drop their charging as demand on the grid increases. For those who MUST have full charge, let them pay more / kw to guarantee that they will have the electricity. For those that can accept a partial charge, then they pay less. All programmed at the meter.
Parallel hybrids are jokes. Bad jokes. They are designed to allow companies to involve all divisions of a normal car company. A serial hybrid makes sense for large vehicles. But for cars? Nope. If you can not accept the range of an electric car, then buy a gas or better yet, a NG car.
1) batteries are recycled.
2) less than an ICE once the production is up.
3) much cleaner. Less metal. ICE vehicles make heavy use of loads of different ore. Think about an engine and complex transmission (to keep the engine operating in a small RPM range) and all the different parts on it. ICE vehicles are COMPLEX. That is why I dislike parallel hybrids and only accept serial hybrids for large vehicles.
4) electric cars will LOWER the costs of electricity. The reason is that most ppl will charge at night, not during the daytime. Electric companies are already starting to charge differential rates for EC owners. From a utilities POV, they would LOVE to charge all transportation at night, with loads of base power generators and then during the day, have the excess power be used by businesses. Right now, utilities have to add very expensive on-demand generators. BTW, the current grid can handle 100% of ALL road transportation being moved to electric IFF it is done at night charging, and if parts of the northwest grid gets upgrade.
5) Right now, coal is around 38% of USA's matrix. Go to China, and it is around 85%. interestingly, if coal was 100% of our matrix, then all pollutants would drop, EXCEPT for CO2. Oil is not that clean.
6) nope. The smart move though, is to kill burning coal directly, switch to NG/atomic power plants (as well as NG for Commercial vehicles) and then convert our coal to Methane (the main ingredient in NG ) so that we have competition to keep NG prices low. Doing this would allow us time to switch to AE/Atomic, while cleaning up the air, dropping our dependency on imported oil, and even dropping our CO2 emissions (the bulk for USA comes from our low density; switch to electric cars and we can cut something like 25-33% of our CO2). 7) Again, we are dropping our dependency on coal. By 2020, we are expected to be less than 25% coal. And if we move to the above (coal=>methane), then we have no dependency on coal, but instead multiple sources. Ideally, we would re-do our NG pipes to ones that can handle hydrogen (which is expensive) so that in time, we can drop NG and have hydrogen shipped around.
This is now cheaper and easier. And I prefer the Linux console that it has. Go to your local dealer and try it. Very nice.
Within my lifetime, gas has gone from .23/gal to 4.00/gal. If we are going to repair roads, etc. I suspect that we will need to double taxes. That will mean that we will within a couple of years pay around 6/gal, and I would not be surprised to see us approaching Europe levels of oil prices.
You missed so many points.
.80-.90).
Tesla is starting high-end and going towards low. In 2014, they are expected to introduce their sub 30K electric car. Unlike the garbage that is out there, it will likely be a 4 seater, and have decent performance and torque (i.e. 0-60 under 6 if not 5) and a range of around 120 miles.
If 160 miles is not far enough, then for 10K each bump, you can change to 220 or even 300. With the 300 mile range, you also get the improved motor that will drop your 0-60 in the 4's. However, if you can not afford, then you are right. Stay with a gas car or wait another year for a Natural Gas car. For now.
Sigh. Most ppl drive in the day times. So, installing panel do little for you, unless you have one that works based on night time charging. Regardless, electricity is less than $1.00 per gallon of gas equivalence (for most of USA, it is
Very little maintenance costs.
Same price as a BWM, Mercedes, Nice SUV, etc. The only difference is that the Tesla costs a fraction of the price to own and can outperform most of those cars.