Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Other > Motorcycle.Com Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-25-2009, 03:45 PM   #1
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default HA!

CNSNews.com - Electric Cars Will Not Decrease Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Says Federal Study

Nuclear power is the answer. Time to stop listening to the mentally ill and move out of the 19th century as far as power generation goes.
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 06-25-2009, 04:04 PM   #2
acecycleins
Founding Member
 
acecycleins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 4,129
Default

Funny how people believe that electric cars help the enviroment. Just how do we charge those cars? Where's that power come from, again? Stoopid isn't it?
__________________
"Slack" - a state of being in which everything flows smoothly.....a frame of mind so at ease that the universe naturally cooperates.
acecycleins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 04:17 PM   #3
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by acecycleins View Post
Funny how people believe that electric cars help the enviroment. Just how do we charge those cars? Where's that power come from, again? Stoopid isn't it?
1: Yay nukes. Coal plants produce trainloads of highly toxic solid waste every month. Don't even mention the emissions... A nuke plant produces about a refriderator sized turd every ten years. Duh.

2. There's excess capacity in the electric production infrastructure at night (you can't turn off a giant generation plant easily). Thus, the idea is to charge at night with the excess. The studies I've seen say you could replace between 15-20% of the gas cars on the road without adding one iota of extra power generation. Which would make a HUGE difference in where we stand with oil consumption. From the article: “For plug-ins to reach their full potential, electricity would need to be generated from lower-emission fuels such as nuclear and renewable energy rather than the fossil fuels--coal and natural gas--used most often to generate electricity today.” We don't need to reach "full potential" to make electric cars a win.
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 08:09 PM   #4
Buzglyd
Founding Member
 
Buzglyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,904
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenneth_Moore View Post
1: Yay nukes. Coal plants produce trainloads of highly toxic solid waste every month. Don't even mention the emissions... A nuke plant produces about a refriderator sized turd every ten years. Duh.

2. There's excess capacity in the electric production infrastructure at night (you can't turn off a giant generation plant easily). Thus, the idea is to charge at night with the excess. The studies I've seen say you could replace between 15-20% of the gas cars on the road without adding one iota of extra power generation. Which would make a HUGE difference in where we stand with oil consumption. From the article: “For plug-ins to reach their full potential, electricity would need to be generated from lower-emission fuels such as nuclear and renewable energy rather than the fossil fuels--coal and natural gas--used most often to generate electricity today.” We don't need to reach "full potential" to make electric cars a win.
So are you going to force people to own two different cars or are you going to volunteer for it?

Will we look at people's lifestyles and demand they don't "need" a gas car and legislate they buy an electric one because all they do are short commuting trips?

Does the concept of liberty ever float across the liberal transom?

Those percentages are great until you're ensnared in the demand. The universal "we" is great as long as someone else has to do it.
Buzglyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 08:55 PM   #5
seruzawa
The Toad

 
seruzawa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: 8501 ft.
Posts: 17,461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzglyd View Post
So are you going to force people to own two different cars or are you going to volunteer for it?

Will we look at people's lifestyles and demand they don't "need" a gas car and legislate they buy an electric one because all they do are short commuting trips?

Does the concept of liberty ever float across the liberal transom?

Those percentages are great until you're ensnared in the demand. The universal "we" is great as long as someone else has to do it.
What we need, seriously, is a complete revolution in storing energy. Chemical batteries just aren't going to cut it. They just don't store enough energy, are toxic and take too long to charge. Electric cars are going to have to have much longer ranges and charging times of a few minutes. What if you decide to drive across 4 states to visit mom and dad?
__________________
"Make no mistake, Communism lost a big argument - one we know today as the 20th century."
seruzawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-2009, 09:07 PM   #6
Buzglyd
Founding Member
 
Buzglyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 10,904
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seruzawa View Post
What we need, seriously, is a complete revolution in storing energy. Chemical batteries just aren't going to cut it. They just don't store enough energy, are toxic and take too long to charge. Electric cars are going to have to have much longer ranges and charging times of a few minutes. What if you decide to drive across 4 states to visit mom and dad?
The Dali Obama will provide a long cord or he'll make sure Ma and Pa's healthcare is cut off so you won't have to bother with the visit.
Buzglyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 05:31 AM   #7
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

"So are you going to force people to own two different cars or are you going to volunteer for it? "

So you are asking Ken to actually drive an electric car?? Please!
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 06:54 AM   #8
pdad13
Founding Member
 
pdad13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,754
Default

I was just reading an article about Steven Chu, our current Secretary of Energy. Surprisingly, he seems to be very realistic about some things.

Looks like, as far as vehicles go, he's placing his money (more accurately, our money) mostly on advanced bio fuels, which as far as I'm concerned, it good news for us. There have been lots of new schemes for producing ethanol and methanol beyond using corn, which will not come close to providing enough fuel (and ethanol won't work for aircraft). He's slashed budgets for Hydrogen research because he just doesn't think it's practical. Biofuels like methanol will enable us to use our current infrastructure and engine technologies.

Electric vehicles might have a significant role in the near future, especially if there are big advances in solar capture, other clean electric production and battery technology, but its just not there yet. It looks like the good old internal combustion engine will remain the top dog for a while yet.
pdad13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 07:33 AM   #9
longride
Super Duper Mod Man

 
longride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Anywhere they let me
Posts: 10,479
Default

"I was just reading an article about Steven Chu, our current Secretary of Energy. Surprisingly, he seems to be very realistic about some things."

I hope you don't mean this guy!

Obama’s Energy Sec: Hey! Let’s Paint The World White « Bob’s Bites
__________________
I'm a knucklehead
longride is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 07:43 AM   #10
Kenneth_Moore
Registered Member
 
Kenneth_Moore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: VIsiting the GIft Shop in the Pit of DIspair
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzglyd View Post
So are you going to force people to own two different cars or are you going to volunteer for it?

Will we look at people's lifestyles and demand they don't "need" a gas car and legislate they buy an electric one because all they do are short commuting trips?

Does the concept of liberty ever float across the liberal transom?

Those percentages are great until you're ensnared in the demand. The universal "we" is great as long as someone else has to do it.
Why do you and others feel so threatened by electric vehicles? When has anybody said anything about forcing you to buy one? The last ones they made there were people begging for them. They fought to keep them when GM took them back. I'd love an electric car if it met the basic requirements, which they will very soon. Mini-Cooper is testing one in CA and NJ now that I'd be proud to own.

Turning energy into a political debate is a great way to keep the oil companies rich and us poor. Low cost energy and affordable transportation mean freedom. The energy economy we have now is neither, it SUCKS. Maybe we should change it instead of sucking up whatever Exxon/Mobil shoves down our throats.
__________________
www.kennethmoore.org
Kenneth_Moore is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off