Chevy Volt

Orangehair- you're right about an electricity plant. But one big thing to remember- only electricity is American based, does not pose security issues to obtain, we have an unlimited supply and are never forced to compromise our values, American lives or money to keep. No ICE will ever top that- ever.

On to the engineering: I read your post- I must say my research disagrees a little.

It is true that, given our current sources of electricity, we would still be using fossil fuels (mostly coal; 70% by some estimates) to generate most of the electricity that would run our electric cars. However, it is worth pointing out several things that make the switch to electric cars worthwhile even if we never moved away from “dirty” sources of electricity:
1) It is much easier to regulate and control pollution from single large point sources (power plants) than it is to control it from a couple hundred million cars.
2) When new technology becomes available that can either reduce the pollution from power plants (i.e better pollution control devices) or nearly eliminate it altogether (i.e. a wholesale switch to wind or solar), it is much easier to implement those new technologies for a handful of power plants than it is for a couple hundred million cars.
3) Distribution of electrical energy is hugely more efficient than distribution of liquid fuel energy, therefore, even if fossil fuels are powering our cars through power plants, the amount of fossil fuel used per mile of car traveled is way less.
4) The conversion of electrical energy into movement in an electric car is roughly 80% efficient. The conversion of fossil fuel energy to movement in a gas powered car is roughly 30% efficient. This means much less wasted energy in an electric car.
5) Electric cars have a fraction of the amount of moving parts and, hence, lubrication requirements of gas powered cars, which mean less petroleum products used for lubrication as well.
 
mcbrett,
Why would we depend on foreign countries at all if we went with hydrogen? I mean if hydrogen is indeed the petrol of the future?
 
Implementing pollution controls on power plants is actually much harder than implementing them on cars. The service life of a power plant is much longer than that of a car (old plants get grandfathered in), people who build them are much more conservative in design than automotive engineers (if regulation X means something isn't profitable to build, it is not built and old power plants with grandfather protection continue to shoulder the burden), and finally, fuel cells are a great equalizer.

While power lines are a more efficient manner of transporting energy, they have a lot of drawbacks in the transportation market. A battery and/or ultracapacitor will very likely be an optional source of power, so that you can operate a vehicle in the manner desribed for the Volt. Such a system actually dovetails quite well with a fuel cell vehicle. However, when it comes to outright replacement of the liquid hydrocarbon powerplant, a lot of issues come up. If you run out of gas in an all electric vehicle, you need a tow. Living in the country or on a farm, you are not in the same position to rapidly replace batteries or recharge them. In heavy vehicles, the abysmal energy density of present and emerging battery technologies is a deal breaker. Barring a major, unforseen and possibly impossible technological advance, electric vehicles won't make a dent in heavy vehicles and has major drawbacks in light ones.

Finally, THEU:

We built the suburbs because energy was cheap. Now energy is expensive. I see no reason to think that the force that made something can't disassemble it as well.
 
Maduro,
I think that saying we built suburbs because energy was cheap is a bit of an over simplification of the matter. I am not an urban planning expert, and I will try to talk to a fried who is. I do know a bit about history and people moving out into suburbs because of at least in part these reasons. They wanted more green space, lower crime, better schools, more affordable housing, it is/was a place where in many ways rural values meet urban conveniences...

Now I can't say exactly what part all of those factors play in a decision to move out of the city, and my list is in no way complete. I do have friends who live in the Metroplex and Houston, who live as single people in the city, and when they get married and have kids they nearly always move out to suburban style neighbourhoods.
I just don't think cheap energy is the only, or even main reason for the advent of suburbs.
 
Maduro-

I'd say look at current House and Senate bills to see just how tough it is to regulate pollution controls. Tax carbon.

Then you say if I run out of electricity on a country road I am screwed. Sure I am- as much as I would be if I ran out of gas. Both solutions involve either a friendly helper or a long walk to a gas station. But, what if I had a portable solar or fuel cell- that could with a little time and effort give me enough to get to the next charge station.

Heavy duty? Sorry- wrong. Already available today. Meet the Smith Electric Vehicle:
Electric Heavy Duty

If you want to talk long haul 18-wheeler types- that is not a heavy duty unique situation as both cars and HD trucks are working to improve distance, with as you said, improvements to battery technology (something I personally am working with.)
 
I just want to chime in here and say how much I appreciate this thread. We all seem to be normal 'average' citizens who care about the future of our country, transportation, energy, and the environment.
I am glad to be posting here where we are talking about real solutions and thinking about the effect any solution or choice will have. Sometimes I with our politicians could do the same.
 
Agreed THEU, on this thread. If it was on WestMall, 2 or 3 "oil" backers would chime in to say these cars will never work, whine about subsidies, and explain that they don't want to drive a golf cart. We've had this thread on WM before. Folks hear what they want to hear sadly.

Luckily for us- many companies have some great, realistic products coming out soon that make economic sense and look great.
 
I am hopeful for the Volt to prove to be a great car but I am doubtful. I would imagine that they will be able to presell many of them with a strong tax incentive based program.

This is a good first attempt at a "normal" electric car though I think that a 40 mile range is way too low(granted, there is a gas tank that will power a generator for a few hundred miles).

Until they can do something about the Weight of these cars(this one is gonna be about 3300 lbs), the battery life is going to be a huge challenge.
 
I appreciate that heavy electrics exist in some capacity, but a max speed of 50mph and a max range of 150 miles isn't practical. The issue surrounding batteries is that the technology appears to be maxed out- there isn't something on the horizon that looks like it will radically change the landscape. EEStor has yet to prove that their design does not violate the laws of physics (as much as I hope that it turns out to be workable). Even if they can do what they say they can, their solution is still inferior to a hydrocarbon "burning" DCFC in the transportation sector.

Hydrocarbons are an incredible energy storage mechanism. The major problem that remains with them is the fact that DCFC membranes don't like going from 30-800 degrees C twice a day. I view the emerging technology directed at solving that problem as much more convincing and likely than the hope that we can make a battery with an order of magnitude more power per kilogram.

Finally, it's important to recognize that energy storage is different from energy generation. If we posted a universal 50 mph speed limit, there is basically no functional difference between a DCFC vehicle running on gas and an electric. The issue is how to generate the energy that we need without going to fossil fuels. The simple fact remains that our long term goal is to use solar energy to meet all of our needs. In order to do that, our demand for energy per person must drop by 50-90%, depending on how the world population changes. That's why I bring suburbs up in these discussions.


@THEU:

I'm not disputing that a ton of factors were involved in the white flight. However, I am pointing out that the critical enabler was the automobile, which is now much more expensive to operate than it was in 1955. Further, and this cannot be overstated, the biggest Federal subsidy for the auto industry, the Federal Highway Fund, went bankrupt this year. We can't afford to live in a collection of poorly insulated solar ovens from which we must commute, by ourselves, 5 days a week. Even if we could, why would we give up all of the other cool things that we could do with the money? I'm going to start a thread, when I have time, about profitably increasing population density in urban settings; hopefully we can flesh out this discussion there.
 
Maduro,
You say it is more expensive to operate a car now than it was in the 1950s. I don't get that... from most of the inflation calculators I have seen, we are about where we were then as far as cost. I haven't looked lately, but with gas in the mid $2 range is about what should be expected from mid 50s $.15 gas I think. I would say that given the technology, power, and safety advances in cars, they are actually cheaper at purchase, or at least a better value than in the 50s.
You are correct about roads being expensive, but a HUGE part of that on the federal level is the interstate system correct? Isn't that more about commerce and LONG distance travel than suburban travel? Granted, I can't tell you how much the feds pour into intrametropolitaion freeways, but I could probably agree with you it isn't a function of the federal government to do that.
Also, I live in a suburban area in Temple, which has nearly ZERO 'city.' Also, I live 1.0 miles from garage at home to parking space at work. Many people live AND work in suburbs and/or midsized towns which are non urban dense. I don't know what solutions would be for that. I guess to stop urban/suburban sprawl which I am ALL for. I grew up in Arlington and the population density of the Metroplex is an embarrassment. I just don't see energy as being the main fiscal limitation even today. It has a great deal to do with property. I don't see that changing so greatly as to tip energy/car prices.
 
Maduro,
I think what you and I DO agree on clearly is that going forth into the future rising energy costs are going to change the way we live; where we live, how big our living spaces are, where we keep the thermostat, forms of transportation... etc.
I don't disagree with you that urban density is a GREAT thing. I am a huge fan of mass transit where it can be effective. I am not a fan of urban sprawl. I just wonder what the demographic numbers are on how far people live from work, etc. I would guess MOST people who live in suburbs actually work in suburbs or office clusters near where they work.
Off the top of my head I think of people who live far north of Dallas but work in the Galleria area. They live in suburban sprawl, but their 'urban' work isn't far.
I think in Houston the Williams Tower or whatever they call it now is the tallest building and it is NOT in downtown.
 
I think the most significant aspect of the Volt is that it doesn't exist.

GM has produced about 30 Volts so far and is making 10 a week, said during a presentation of the vehicle at the company's technical center in the Detroit suburb of Warren.

Not expected in showrooms until late 2010.
 
Way to up the level of the conversation Alpine. In 1995 you could say the internet was really available for consumers, in 1989 you could say the mobile phone wasn't available- and we can go on and on.

Excuses are for a-holes.. some folks are working on the next generation of technology today.
 
I didn't make any excuses for anything, I just pointed out that the car is still in the experimental stages. It's way too early to tell how successful or revolutionary it will be, or whether it will ever even be commercially available. If it was up to me, I wouldn't bet any money on it. Unfortuantely, it is not up to me since my tax dollars are being used to subsidize GM.
 
It's not exactly experimental- and you said it essentially didn't exist. Thus, you are like the guy in 1989 saying mobile phones "don't exist."

There are dozens of auto journalists who have driven it already- it is past the prototype stage and they are headed into production.

Plus, you could if you wanted buy two dozen different hybrids, a few electric cars like the Tesla Roadster or Tesla Model S, or a Smith Electric Truck if you need it for your company- or my favorite- the Fisker Karma sports car.

CAFE was raised to 36.5 mpg by 2016, this is no pipe dream Alpine.
 

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Back
Top