The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: Tyler Durden on March 01, 2010, 09:18:10 AM
-
Since fightingquaker brought up religion and middle east, especially oil in that raghead assassination thread....
Well, it kinda put the bug in my ear about a documentary I watched about two weeks ago.
Now, normally I am very anti-green and very anti-tree hugger, but I do loves me a good conspiracy theory. ;D
Try this YouTube link to a short video about the documentary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsJAlrYjGz8
I think fightingquaker and I are of the same mindset...whatever it takes for us to tell the Arabs to _____ off! is fine in my book.
In the documentary, several very high profile Hollywood actors had leases on these General Motors EV1 (electric vehicle) cars. To me, it sounded like GM went out of their way to only lease these vehicles out. They purposely did not sell them outright. So when the lease was up, they brought in the flatbed trucks and hauled the EV1's away. The original leasee's of the cars (Hollywood actors who evidently had deep pockets) were NOT allowed to buy the vehicles from GM.
If I recall correctly, the EV1's were eventually loaded on to those big vehiclel transporter trucks and taken to GM's test facility out in the Arizona desert. And, again IIRC, they were crushed.
Other manutfacturers of electric cars sent their cars to the shredders as well. :-\
Now, before all you detractors come out of the woodwork and start complaining about the range and weight of lead acid batteries, let me tell ya...there is a guy by the name of Stan Ovshinsky (google his name). He has about 400 patents, one of which, is the nickel metal hydride battery. Those are now in laptops, cell phones, and cordless tools. So, there is just one possibility for a quicker charging, lighter, longer lasting battery.
Another common comment that detractors bring up about electric cars is that it shifts the pollution from the internal combustion engine'd cars to the electric power plants.
Well, I can't really comment on that one way or the other...such comments are fraught with much emotionality and all sorts of statistics get thrown about, in my opinion. In my opinion...is it better to control pollution from one source (a smokestack at a coal burning power plant, many of which are being outfitted with scrubbers)....versus the tailpipes of thousands and thousands of (improperly maintained??) vehicles.
But like I said...I am not really a tree hugger. I just like the electric car because it would be like giving the middle finger to the OPEC cartel.
Anywhooo....just to put the bug in ya'll's ears about maybe... possibly...why we don't have more electric cars on the road. If you get a chance to TiVo or DVR it, I think it is a worthwhile show.
Until then, this video of an electric drag racing car might just be enough to shift your paradigm:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp_jwE0KdOk
-
The problem with elctric cars is that they are only greener than your gas burner if you get your electricty from renewable clean resources. Most of these tree huggers get elctric cars and charge them with coal power, so where is their greeniness now?
I still contend that Prius owners and electric car owners dont give two damns about teh environment, just being cool. Real environmentalists would by USED diesel cars and make their own bio...
I contend that I do more for the environment through HUnting, Fishing, and contributing to organizations who do the same simply through conservation than the greenie wienies in their egg cars.
With all that said, I want a Tesla Roadster... that thing is freakin fast because electric motors make 100% torque all the time. They dont build torque like gas motors... the worlds flattest torque curve
-
As for what or who killed the electric car, I'd look for collusion between the gas companies and the auto makers. What we have now is electric cars (Prius et al.) powered/recharged by gasoline engines. This way both sides get rich off the consumers - at least until the oil runs out - with the gas companies selling us higher priced gas (pushing $3 a gallon here) and the car companies pushing over-priced "hybrids".
-
Yeah, my ultra liberal neighbors across the street have a Prius. I have only met them once, and that was only because their St. Louis Cardinals baseball tickets got wrongly delivered to my house...because they had donated money to the local NPR radio station. ::)
I was talking to the husband who seemed pretty cool. Then his wife pulled into the driveway with her Prius. Through her yammering on, that's how I learned that they "won" the tickets via NPR. Putting two and two together...plus her flabbergastedness when someone was so honest to give them their tickets back... I didn't bother to tell her that us Air Force Academy grads are usually an honest lot like that.
Anywhooo... my point is this...I think people buy Prius's to flaunt their liberalness...in my opinion.
As far as biodiesel goes, yeah, I met a guy at a party who makes his own bio diesel. It only costs him 62 cents a gallon to do it. So he is saving at least 2 dollars a gallon versus buying "dino-diesel".
I really don't care all that much about the pollution aspects of electric versus gas car. Anything that keeps American money out of the shieks hands is fine by me. ;D
Just doing a quick google search on the documentary, I found this wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
As far as coal burning power plants go, well, IIRC, there either like 103 or 133 nuke plants here in the US. Now, if "they" would just iron out the kinks of where to store the spent fuel rods...plus everybody's Not In My Back Yard mentality (NIMBY) about having new nuke plants built we could have "greener" electricity being made to re-charge an electric car's batteries.
-
Currently there are about 100 operating commercial nuclear plants in the US. I've worked at about 32 of them, some of those are now decommissioned and buried somewhere....
We need some sort of repository for spent fuel, when I got out of the business the Feds had promised something, that was 14 years ago and we're no closer today than we were then. Until that becomes a priority, the politicians will just use nuclear power as a talking point.
Electric cars, hybrids, don't really have an opinion. I've been buying cars that get 20-30 miles a gallon for twenty years for no other reason that I survived the gas wars in the 70's. As a factor of inflation, I believe we pay less per gallon today than we did then.
-
We need some sort of repository for spent fuel, when I got out of the business the Feds had promised something, that was 14 years ago and we're no closer today than we were then. Until that becomes a priority, the politicians will just use nuclear power as a talking point.
We spent billions on Yucca Mountain Already. Oh, and the Obamic Plague has suspended shipments.
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/energy/2009/03/16/lessons-from-the-yucca-mountain-nuclear-waste-storage-debate.html
Lessons from the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Storage Debate
By Kent Garber
Posted March 16, 2009
Over the past decade, more than 7,000 shipments of radioactive nuclear waste have been sent, without any problem, to a government repository in the southwestern United States.
This crucial repository is not the ill-fated Yucca Mountain, the Nevada site that has been steeped in controversy since Congress selected it 22 years ago to store the country's civilian nuclear waste. Yucca Mountain, in fact, has gotten so bogged down in legal and political fights that President Barack Obama, in his new budget, is proposing to eliminate almost all of its funding and explore "alternatives," raising serious questions about how the United States will resolve its nuclear waste problems—and, for that matter, whether the nuclear industry will be able to grow in coming decades.
Click here to find out more!
The functioning repository is located in Carlsbad, N.M., and it may hold some useful answers. Since opening in 1999, it has received more than 60,000 cubic meters of radioactive waste from the country's nuclear defense facilities. Experts say its success offers valuable clues about how Washington can learn from the mistakes made at Yucca Mountain to find a lasting waste solution.
and another one.
http://www.yuccamountain.org/
It is sealed in poured concrete coffins, and placed inside a sealed cavern deep in the mountain. Guarded 24/7.
It's just politicians being well,.....politicians...
-
Thanks TW.....problem though, that handles "defense waste" and what does the "radioactive waste" consist of? It could be contaminated equipment, laundry, highly radioactive tools, compacted equipment, etc.....where do they store the spent fuel rods that power the 100 active reactors or the dozens of reactors that have been decommissioned since the late 80's?
It's a stick wicket for sure. The commercial facilities are CLEAN compared to the government facilities. Our government has been known to just dig big holes in the desert and bury entire rail cars and loaders that have been contaminated by one means or another.
The "Defense" industry is what scares the holy hell out of me in regards to nuclear power. If you fear what they can do with your health care, you should fear their handling of nuclear waste exponentially... I've seen some films over the years of our nuclear history that still give me nightmares.
-
Your right Timothy, it is "defense dept." waste. (I'll let a rocket scientist differentiate the danger and difference between Turkey Point Nuclear Plant waste here in Fl. or the latest tactical nuke waste). It all could be stored at Yucca regardless. Trijicon Night Sights are encapsulated nuclear material from Savannah, Ga plant...
McGuire Nuclear Plant on Lake Norman, had a nice big railway behind the plant, where the spent fuel rods went, I don't know.
It's a political football, just like the electric car.
Where does France store it's nuclear waste? BHO and the tree huggers love Europe and its "earth friendly" model for the world so much,,,,,,, ???So,.....
But here in the US, your damned if you do, and damned if you don't...
We need more refineries AND Nuclear Plants, AND every other viable option pursued, including off shore drilling in our own waters, and the shale oil deposits in the rockies and mid west. Oh,....and freakin' ANWR!!!!!!!! Make the elk happy, and drill.
How's that for some shovel ready jobs....
Tell OPEC (blank you) very much....and lets go. Put the crap in the mountain, and keep going.
-
Commercial fuel of Uranium 235 has a half life of approximately 700 million years where as, Plutonium-239 is about 24K years. I need a physicist to explain why one is worse than the other. We have stockpiles of both of these elements all over the country. Savannah River was a tritium facility whose breeder reactors were supplying the needed elements for the "triggers" in the bomb cycle. Been there, don't plan on going back! ;) Lovely part of the country if you ignore Savannah River.
Plutonium is the most toxic substance known to man and though we've essentially stopped making nuclear weapons, we have enough for tens of thousands of weapons should the need arise.
Can I drift a thread or what?
;D
Oh, yea, I agree on the refineries, nuclear plants, ANWR and the rest. OPEC, though we don't really use their oil, can bite me!
Research the SL-1 Reactor Accident, Idaho Falls, ID circa 1961 for some of our "nuclear history".
-
Tyler,
I think people buy Prius's to flaunt their liberalness...in my opinion
Its not so much their liberalness, its their self righteousness. And its fact not opinion ;D. As far as environmental impact, there is an article somewhere that compared the "carbon footprint" of the manufacture and use of both a Prius or hybrid of some type and a Hummer. The Hummer had a smaller "footprint" due to the extensive transportation costs of the components of the hybrid. Essentially, it rounded the globe before sale. As far as the fuel cost, you would have to drive a hybrid close to seven years before you recouped the added cost of purchase. So it boils down to which foreigner do you want with your money to prove that you are better than that wing nut tea bagger across the street that brought our tickets back.
Timothy,
I am not sure where I read/heard it, but there was research that was done with nuclear waste where they bombarded it with gamma rays and were able to reduce the half-life extensively. Now, my remeberer may be full of excrement but that was the main thrust of what I remember. KNIBB HIGH FOOTBALL RULES
-
Another good read.....National Geo... http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/earth/inside-the-earth/nuclear-waste.html
Scary stuff.....can anyone say "Cluster F@&K!"
-
I gotta stop reading this type stuff before I go to bed........... :-\
-
From what I have heard and read, the thing that killed the "Electric Car", and is killing off Hybrids, is the American non buyer.
F-ck the Ice caps, I want my F 150.
I say go with Bio fuels, Wind, Solar, and hydro - power.
These units can be mounted on homes and factories.
Years ago on "Modern Marvels" they did a piece about a photovoltaic foil that would work (though at greatly reduced rates) by starlight.
I also remember a Popular Mechanics ( ? Science ? Whatever ) side bar about a solar generating "glass", for windows and greenhouses.
Why aren't we all over these things ? Sun ? Wind ? The fact that water flows downhill ? At least one of those things is guaranteed any where on this planet.
Onsite generation would decentralize the energy network, making electricity available to everyone every where for the cost of maintaining it.
As for Nukes ? How can they say it's "cleaner", if the crap doesn't go away for 24000 Years ?
But the REAL problem with Nuke power is that it is dependent on one element that exists in finite amounts, in other words, some day we run out of Uranium, We wind up going with the free stuff anyway, but with the burden of a bunch of radioactive crap to deal with.
-
ha we wish the world is all sunshine.
Here's the problem with bio fuels, wind, solar and hydro power:
1. hydro power - the "fish" yep the fish, hippies don't like fish ladders or dams. (something about the ecosystem being out of whack)
2. wind and solar - aren't 24/7 power. let's face it we don't have an efficient way to store power long term.
3. bio fuel - are grown and then processed into fuel.... well um... you need energy to plow, water, fertilize, harvest, transport, synthesize fuel and distribute said fuel.
As for the electric car. I say yay! good idea! another way for OPEC to go F' them self. If we all got electric cars with renewable energy to go with it. I'm waiting for fusion power to come around. I'm not sure if fusion produces radioactive byproduct, but he energy yield is 10-15 times more than nuclear fission. Either way we might be screwed.
F' OPEC anyway! along with the hippies.
-
one of my fav sayings is
only milk and juice comes in 2 litres that is a sledge against Rice burners as I am a Holden Man love my V8's
however for the Sparky cars look up the Tesla
;D ;D
(http://gallery.mac.com/philw/100018/Simon%27s%20Tesla/web.jpg)
-
I wonder why we don't fire nuke waste into the sun, or at least into deep space? We just need a big gun to shoot it up there.
-
I wonder why we don't fire nuke waste into the sun, or at least into deep space? We just need a big gun to shoot it up there.
They've considered it in the past but I don't know much more than that.
On a rather "Star Wars" kind of thought, what if we ARE NOT the only species! Do we really need to crap up the entire universe because we're too lazy or arrogant to clean up after ourselves?
"Brain Salad" for sure!
We could do like the Russians and just dump the stuff up under the ice caps! (SARCASM ALERT)
-
Here's a 'green' car for ya.
http://www.thelocal.de/society/20100302-25605.html
-
I used to work at GM Advanced Technology Vehicles (home of the EV1) and I can tell you what killed it, they sucked!
We used to drive them when our security vehicles went down. They were fairly good driving vehicles, for about 60 miles, then they would slow way, WAY, down just before they conked out. Recharge time was about 4 hours, assuming the batteries were good, some of them needed replacement and would only recharge partially and only go about 40 miles. The battery packs were custom made and so were replacements. In fact every single EV1 was effectively custom built and there were no parts in actual production, which is why GM scrapped them, they didn't want to get sued when a part went bad and the owner attempted to jury-rig something to keep it running.
In fact, electric vehicles are the most polluting vehicles ever built. Years ago a study was done which compared the electric Ford Ranger to a 4-cylinder Ranger. The electric ranger required an average of 4 TONS of coal for one recharge (remember you not only need the power you put into the batteries, but also the power to push those little electrons through the wires, and then there are all the losses that come with the power grid) and dumped more pollution into the air than running the gas Ranger 100,000 miles.
I like hybrids (they converted ATV to the GM, Daimler, Chrysler, BMV Hybrid Development Center while I was there) but the suck in America. You see, most miles driven in the US are highway miles where Hybrids are the least efficient. Hybrids depend on your hitting the brakes which are like an electric motor and recharge the batteries. Most hybrids are "weak-hybrids" that use the electrics to assist the gas motor, rather than "strong-hybrids" that only use the gas to recharge the batteries. I had units at my facility that got 110 MPG or 70 on the Highway, and they cost about 80 to 90% more than a diesel versions. In fact, the engineers would tell you that even at $4.50 a gallon it would take 9 years to recoup the increase in cost, but even then that didn't count the cost of the replacement battery (about 3 to $7000 depending on the model). I will admit though the BMW X6 (which I drove even before they were announced) was a REALLY cool vehicle.
In reality the reason electric vehicles will not work today is the power-grid and battery technology. The grid wastes more energy than we use because of the inefficiencies of copper wire and all the interconnected systems of generators, transformers and everything else. If the power grid was 100% efficient we would need only a fraction of the power we generate, but it ain't. The other issue is that current batteries are pitifully inefficient themselves, they don't store or deliver all the power you put into them. If we had good large-scale storage systems we could run electrical systems at peak efficiency all the time and not waste energy running them up and down with demand.
As to the nuclear waste issue. The reactor rods are only "Waste" because the US government will not allow them to be reprocessed. A reactor rod will not sustain a reaction when 5% of the rod has converted to other materials (plutonium, neptunium, etc.). By reprocessing the rods you get all those very valuable products and only require replacing that missing 5%. The anti-nuke movement got reprocessing stopped after Three Mile Island and DuPont loved it because it means that you have to keep digging up and processing fresh Uranium, and then somebody got the great idea to convert the old rods into anti-tank ammo (FYI there ain't no such thing as "Depleted" Uranium, it just won't sustain a controlled reaction). If we did reprocess the rods (and take back the DP ammo) we could supply all the electrical power for the US (assuming again we built enough reactors) for 1000 years (and that includes the increases due to expanding population etc.).
One last bit of trivia, I was going to be in "Who killed the Electric Car" but they didn't like my agent, so they cut my appearance, as the security officer keeping them out of ATV.
-
We need some sort of repository for spent fuel.
Iran looks good to me. Besides we'd look good to the rest of the raghead world. He's looking to kick his nuclear program in the pants. The least we can do is help him along! Besides they're easier to hit at night when they're all glowing. Bill T.
-
In fact, electric vehicles are the most polluting vehicles ever built. Years ago a study was done which compared the electric Ford Ranger to a 4-cylinder Ranger. The electric ranger required an average of 4 TONS of coal for one recharge (remember you not only need the power you put into the batteries, but also the power to push those little electrons through the wires, and then there are all the losses that come with the power grid) and dumped more pollution into the air than running the gas Ranger 100,000 miles.
I like hybrids (they converted ATV to the GM, Daimler, Chrysler, BMV Hybrid Development Center while I was there) but the suck in America.
I recall an article some years back comparing the ownership of a Prius and a Hummer H1. Turns out the total cost of ownership of the Hummer was 1/3 that of the Prius, due to the Prius' short lifespan (100k miles) and the fact that the batteries that Toyota used (custom as well but mass produced) started life in Canada.
The materials for the batteries were mined somewhere in Ontario, turning the landscape into something so devoid of life that NASA used it to test extra-terrestrial rovers. Then the stuff was shipped to Germany for processing, then on to Japan for development into batteries, and finally, shipped to the US in the Prius to sell to greenies here. All that shipping helped kill the Prius' TCO.
-
Who killed the electric car...well none other than Mr. Physics.
Mr. Physics says you can only do so much with what you've got...so if you are using conventional power lines you are going to lose about 30% of the electricity generated to heat before it ever get's to your home...a huge loss in efficiency if you were to use...say gasoline to power an electric plant.
Then there is that old bug-a-boo Mr. Physics again...he says you lose the heck out the what's left of that energy when you charge a conventional battery...awww...party pooper that Mr. Physics is. Another oh...20% or so lost. Then Mr. Physics says with that same battery when you use it it heats up again so....of that maybe 70% that made it from the power plant you only got to use 50-55% of that electricity to go to your car motor.
Bad old Mr. Physics. He just doesn't want to play the liberal game. In fact...he demands that if you want better you have to spend money on research and an industrial complex that sucks money from the power and victim game that elects the liberals. Mr. Physics says that if you had room temperature super-conductors that you would get 99% plus of that electricity to your home and battery. Mr. Physics says since a super-conductor works so well the power plants would not have to burn so much fuel....well dang Mr. Physics that sounds good but why can't you just use the old lines because the libs say so?
Anyway, Mr. Physics says nano-batteries can recharge with far less loss and far more quickly...less than 5 minutes. Mr. Physics says they are just maturing in the reseach phase right now. Toshiba has one that recharges fully in two minutes with very little loss, mPhase company has one that will stay fully charged for 20 years if you walk off and lose it....a little more research and some scaling up might do it.
The libs know that what they say is true so the bad old car companies, power companies, oil companies and the such must be regulated and taxed until the black helicopters fly out of their corporate offices and the world is at peace. Because the libs know and they are right we must elect them or we will continue to be the victims they say we are.
Well boys and girls...Mr. Physics really rules. I think the libs know that but don't really care because as long as you believe them they will stay in power, rule over you and live very well....and happily ever after too!
:D
-
Hmmn...ooookkkkaaayyy...thanks for that post.
Now, smartey pants, tell me just how efficient is your typical gasoline powered internal combustion engine, eh???
And for me, this isn't a green or tree hugger issue...or a liberal issue...NO! for me this about telling the A-rabs to literally go pound sand.
There have been 5,338 American servicemembers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I'm just speculating here, but I would imagine there are about five thousand parents who asked themselves, "Why did my son or daughter have to die in Iraq or Afghanistan?"
@ warhawke... thanks for your informative post. I do appreciate you broadcasting your credentials and experience with the program like you did.
-
There is a point to coal fired electric plants. If your electric is produced by nuclear power you will be "more green" if you drive electric. At least until the next Chernobyl. The big issue is batteries. Extreme temperatures kill batteries. Cold makes them inefficient, and hot simply makes them die. Here in Phoenix I have yet to get more than 2 Summers out of a car battery. No big deal, I can get a new one at Auto Zone for $50.00 or less on sale. If I'm driving a Prius or any other hybrid, I'm guessing at least a couple grand to replace the batteries. Most likely more for a pure electric vehicle. That's the problem with all of this new "green technology". You cannot recoup the cost of the unit with whatever savings you might realize. Solar hot water, solar electric panels, electric cars, etc. all crap out before you save anything.
I agree with your assessment of the ragheads. I'd love to see them drown in all of their own thick, black $h!t. But to be realistic, we're a long way from energy independence in this country, T. Boone Pickens and all. Bill T.
-
...Now, smartey pants, tell me just how efficient is your typical gasoline powered internal combustion engine, eh???
.....
Not as efficient as a fixed power unit that would be used in a power plant. However, looking at it as a system far more efficient than generating electricity and charging batteries as a system of use.
Superconductor research should be a crash program. If it were a fair world, we'd see the portion of our bills that include the energy source in drop 30% if superconductors were incorporated into electrical transmission. It would also benefit batteries to move the internal resistance closer to zero.
-
chernoybl is like bringing an apples to oranges comparison when it comes to nuke plants here in the US. If I recall correctly (if I am wrong, I am sure someone more experienced with nuke plants will correct me... ;) ) the Chernoybl plant used graphite rods to control the rate of the nuclear reaction. Again, IIRC, the reason the Russians did that that was that the spent fuel rods or waste could then be converted over to nuclear material used for atomic bombs weapons. I guess in that respect, the Russians were being cheap like that, and it turned around and bit them in the @$$.
Here in the US, we use water...and again IIRC, we also use boron rods to control the reaction...I guess until the water and the rest of the cooling system is up to speed.
Your lead acid car batteries, I think, is dead technology as far as powering up an electric car....mainly for those reasons you cited...weather extremes....life expectancy....and of course, just their weight.
I am not so sure your idea that green stuff wears out sooner....I guess it all depends on who builds it.
Like in that documentary "Who killed the electric car?" there is lots of money to be made in fixing and maintaining gasoline powered vehicles....
So, with my tin foil hat firmly in place....it is not too much of a stretch in my imagination that the car manufacturers have intentionally designed in the notion of planned obsoleescence.
They only want to make a car so good, but not so good that you will NOT every buy another one from them.
slight thread drift ahead... way back when I used to work at the Wick's Pipe Organ company. They build pipe organs for churches/cathedrals. Way back when, Great Grandpa Wicks came up with the idea of using magnetic solenoids to open and close the valves that let the air into the pipes, which in turn, produced that pipe organ sound. There were two advantages to this system versus all other pipe organ makers: 1. the console the organ player sat at could be several yards away from the actual pipes. 2. there were no mechanical linkages between the console and the pipes that could wear out.
One day while Grandpa Wicks was giving a tour to some church group...probably in an effort to sell that church a pipe organ...one of tourists asked about the longevity of the Wicks system. His reply was something along the lines of "Thomas Edison's house now turned museum still has light bulbs burning from one hundred years ago. G.E. and Phillips can't make any money selling you incandescent light bulbs if they don't burn out."
getting back more on topic....
Again, with my tin foil hat still firmly attached, I am not so sure that I can now buy into that notion, at least as not as much as I used to that we have to be dependent on the A-rabs for oil. Said another way...I am beginning to think that we have been mis-informed or fed propaganda that we need to have our military in the middle east because of oil.
here is just one recent article about finding oil here in the States:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100224/ap_on_bi_ge/us_tribal_oil
Here in Illinois, we have a huge refinery complex in Wood River. Conoco-Phillips/British Petroleum are kinda in a partnership to expand that facility because they are going to take oil sand in Canada, get the sand out of the oil, then pipe line it all south. At some point in say like Nebraska or Kansas, that pipeline will branch off. One leg going to the east to Wood River.
And if I recall correctly, the other leg of the pipeline will continue south to Texas to another refinery down there.
Oh, yeah, the pipeline has to be made out of stainless (which they are importing from India... ::) ) ...so if you know anybody who can weld stainless and they are looking for a job...there ya go...
-
I am not so sure your idea that green stuff wears out sooner....I guess it all depends on who builds it.
It's not that it wears out "sooner", but it wears out before you can recoup the savings, because the technology is still much too expensive to realize any cost savings. We have 300+ days per year of sunshine here in Arizona. I looked into solar. If I covered my patio roof with solar panels, and went to a solar hot water heating system, I was looking at a minimum of $14,000.00 for the cheapest system. Even with tax incentives it didn't make financial sense. Especially when you factor in one good hail storm and no more solar panels, and homeowners insurance is smart enough not to cover it any more than if you have a pit bull and it bites the mail man. Either way, you're on your own. Babies being born today will see all of this stuff. We won't. NASA had fuel cells on the Apollo Moon Missions. It will be 30 more years before you see them in cars that cost less than 6 digits. If I had to buy a new car today I'd get a Jetta Turbo Diesel. 40 MPG city. I can live with that, and buy more guns with the savings. Bill T.
-
Here in the US, we use water...and again IIRC, we also use boron rods to control the reaction...I guess until the water and the rest of the cooling system is up to speed.
Close enough....I was gonna make a long diatribe but this says it better. And yes, PWR and BWR reactors use boron and control rods to modulate the fission process. Nuclear Fuel Services (my old employer) reprocesses fuel for the Navy PWR reactors. One of our success stories in the industry.
Pressurized water reactors, like thermal reactor designs, require the fast fission neutrons to be slowed down (a process called moderation or thermalization) in order to interact with the nuclear fuel and sustain the chain reaction. In PWRs the coolant water is used as a moderator by letting the neutrons undergo multiple collisions with light hydrogen atoms in the water, losing speed in the process. This "moderating" of neutrons will happen more often when the water is denser (more collisions will occur). The use of water as a moderator is an important safety feature of PWRs, as any increase in temperature causes the water to expand and become less dense; thereby reducing the extent to which neutrons are slowed down and hence reducing the reactivity in the reactor. Therefore, if reactivity increases beyond normal, the reduced moderation of neutrons will cause the chain reaction to slow down, producing less heat. This property, known as the negative temperature coefficient of reactivity, makes PWR reactors very stable.
In contrast, the RBMK reactor design used at Chernobyl, which uses graphite instead of water as the moderator and uses boiling water as the coolant, has a large positive thermal coefficient of reactivity, that increases heat generation when coolant water temperatures increase. This makes the RBMK design less stable than pressurized water reactors. In addition to its property of slowing down neutrons when serving as a moderator, water also has a property of absorbing neutrons, albeit to a lesser degree. When the coolant water temperature increases, the boiling increases, which creates voids. Thus there is less water to absorb thermal neutrons that have already been slowed down by the graphite moderator, causing an increase in reactivity. This property is called the void coefficient of reactivity, and in an RBMK reactor like Chernobyl, the void coefficient is positive, and fairly large, causing rapid transients. This design characteristic of the RBMK reactor is generally seen as one of several causes of the Chernobyl accident
-
Electric cars have been around in some form or another for over 100 years.
They just don't work as well and can't seem to get over the hurdles that have always been holding them back.
-
In spite of our reactor "Knowledge" over the Soviet Russians, (Or whatever you want to call them now), we still managed to damn near melt down Three Mile Island. I live 30 miles from the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant. The largest in the country. I'm not worried about Al Qaeda, just the guys who work there. Bill T.
-
In spite of our reactor "Knowledge" over the Soviet Russians, (Or whatever you want to call them now), we still managed to damn near melt down Three Mile Island. I live 30 miles from the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant. The largest in the country. I'm not worried about Al Qaeda, just the guys who work there. Bill T.
With Homer and Smithers on the job you're golden. ;D
FQ13
-
In spite of our reactor "Knowledge" over the Soviet Russians, (Or whatever you want to call them now), we still managed to damn near melt down Three Mile Island. I live 30 miles from the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Plant. The largest in the country. I'm not worried about Al Qaeda, just the guys who work there. Bill T.
Don't worry Bill, it Palo Verde goes, you're gone anyway and all your worries are over. IIRC, Palo Verde was a pretty well run site but I've been out of the biz for a while now.
I lived about a mile from Millstone Pt in CT. We called it the "vaporized" zone.
Remember, death is painless. Radiation sickness is a bitch....
-
The Russian dry reactors are an accident looking to happen, even without the lackluster performance of their technicians. Wet reactors are vastly safer, and Three Mile Island proved it because it DIDN'T melt down, and virtually all of the radiation was contained in the building, and what was released was the result of human error.
Pebble-bed reactors are a much more promising technology and far safer than any other current technology and shows great promise. Of course the watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) are moving heaven and earth to stop it. The Wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor) is surprisingly unbiased, though they do make too much of the graphite flammability issue IMO.
I do want to make clear, I am not saying that there is no hope for getting us the petrochemical monkey off our backs, far from it. I like Bio-diesel a lot, there are super efficient diesels out there right now that get 70+ MPG on #2 diesel and you get around 20% more mileage out of bio. Also, unlike ethanol it can be made out of non-food crops (like the system that uses municipal waste-water to grow algae which can be processed into bio-diesel) with current technology instead of the someday technology of cellulose conversion (though I don't disparage good research). The problem is the auto companies won't bring them into the country because our wonderful government taxes and regulates the hell out of them and makes it uneconomical. Also, bio-diesel gels at around 15 degrees F so it is limited during the winter months, but I think we could find ways around this. The problem is the government sticking their thumbs in the pie. We had PNGV in our facility for a while, the 6 billion dollar Clinton era boondoggle to build an 80+ MPG car. Of course the bureaucrats kept putting arbitrary limits on what they could do (like Aluminum instead of steel construction, which increased the weight due to the need for a steel frame, which was a payoff to ALCOA). Getting the government (and the corporate scum) out of the way would allow real solutions to arise, instead of new ways to maintain the profits of multinational corporations.
Government is a problem masquerading as it's own solution. If real people were allowed to find real solutions to our problems we would be far better off, the government and corporations only want to increase their profits and power-base.
-
Perhaps in this time of crisis, we can get the Fantastic Johnny C. to come out of retirement, and head up the green jobs post vacated by Van Jones ? One can only hope. Bill T.
http://www.youtube.com/user/billt460#p/f/9/x6V5mYx9Yxc
"Come On Baby Shake That Thing".
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUXoCrlBgdc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5_9Gi7w19Y&feature=related
Too bad Edward Teller is so old. He was able to blow a 1.3 mile wide crater in the bottom of the Pacific. Surely he could get us some cheap electricity. Bill T.
-
"Electric CARs" is the wrong approach.
Resources need to be put into finding an "electric PICK UP TRUCK".
Find an ECONOMICLY, practical fully electric Peterbuilt.
Models of electric vehicle now on the market are to small and basically useless. Like the horseless carriage. They serve to high light weaknesses such as battery technology.
One thing I dislike about Nuke plants, as well as the current system, is the centralization of something that could be essentially free to every one .
Think about the technology available today. If you can generate enough electricity, to charge a cell phone battery,you can have satellite communications , which means access to the internet. Think about "Any person willing to purchase and maintain the equipment" has otherwise free rein of the worlds knowledge, porn, and Nigerian cash transfers.
Sounds Lib as heck right ? ;D
Communication spawns trade the way Demons spawn Imps.
Mrs. Nigerian saw some things on TV that caught her EYE ;D So in an effort to satisfy the affectionate wheedling (Make the noise go away ;D ) He turns to the local version of "Hi Tech". The infamous Barrister Burundi with your $100 million. Don't laugh, they keep at because they make millions and they buy all kinds of things, what they want to buy , we have to make, this creates , or at least saves, jobs, which leads to more tax revenue
On the other hand decentralization has its more prosaic argument , limitation of physical damage, The North East Blackout's would not have happened with a decentralized power grid a squirrel gets into the system and fries it and takes out one small node. the problem is contained.
-
The original question asked was, "Who killed the electric car?". I believe Warhawke hit the proverbial nail on the head:
Government is a problem masquerading as it's own solution.
Until everyone gets that very pertinent fact nailed into their collective noggins we can talk ad nauseum about foreign oil cabals and domestic corporate conspiracies but none of these have the power to tax and destroy freedom. That is why our forefathers distrusted it so much.
Focus on the real problem.
-
I just came across this today and thought it would work here well. I lifted it from one of the columnist at Daily Caller(http://dailycaller.com/ (http://dailycaller.com/)). You really need check it out.
I want an electric car for the awesome torque, but am worried that my friends will think I’m trying to make some kind of lame, self-aggrandizing “green” statement about myself. What should I do? — Jake
I’ve been there, Jake. When I went through my ethical eating phase, back in early 2010, I put up with a lot of grief from the Cro-Magnon types that I call friends. They didn’t cotton to my new conscientious lifestyle. But I ignored them, because I knew in my heart that right is right. If I don’t eat veal, then how are those poor, cramped baby calves ever supposed to escape those hideous crates? Yes, there were plenty of times when I felt like eating pork, or maybe a steak, and didn’t need the pasta carb-load that comes with the scaloppini. But sometimes we have to deny our appetites, to ignore the taunts of others, and to listen to that still, small voice that says, “It’s time to do better.”
Then again, you don’t seem to care about doing your part to halt global cooling by driving a gas guzzler. Ethics clearly aren’t your motivator, as they are mine. So let me just lay it out plainly: electric cars are goofy. Sure, I like the idea of bankrupting OPEC. And it would be really refreshing to hear cries of “blood for sand” instead of “blood for oil,” during our next Middle Eastern adventure. But let me run three terrifying words by you: Ed Begley Jr. He drives an electric car. Do you want to be thought of as an EBJ? Or do you ever want to get laid again? True fact: in blind taste tests, women will choose men who smell of fossil fuels over a guy who uses an electricity-generating bicycle to make toast, ten out of ten times. If you enjoy making sweet love to a special lady, stick with your Honda.
-
Let's see...
The Prius has brake problems...the rest of Toyota products (not all yet named, but you can bet it's common thoughout since that's the kind of part that can be used universally) have accelerator problems...so much for Japanese wunderkars. When the cost differential is so great that it takes 7 years to recoup that differential, the other ecological factors (mining for the materials, drilling for the materials, manufacturing) make the car no green solution. It's just PR.
Both the supply side (generation) and the consumer side (electric cars) are still awaiting to be born. When someone invents a way to effectively generate and STORE electricity, the electricly powered vehicle will truly be here. Until then, petroleum fuels are still the most efficient. It's just too bad we have to buy them from a culture that only wants us all dead or returned to an 11th century culture.
My response to this...Buy a Corvette. 430 hp and 17-25 mpg and 0-60 in under 6 seconds on a U.S. made car. No other supercar INTHE WORLD can currently match that. And you can get it other colors than black and gray.
-
I'm not concerned at all about being green.
Green is just an agenda, in my opinion, to affect a means to some end.
I am concerned about telling the hadji's to eff off.
If that means pooping up some parts of the North American environment, just short of having chromium in the drinking water (think Erin Brokovich) or something similar to that, I'd be all for it.
With what? 50 million Americans unemployed...Obama chose instead to do a federal land grab of some 10 million acres across 9 states. My gut feeling is telling me that there is probably oil or some other vital resource under those lands.
It would be worth it to not have our economy manipulated by camel jockeys. It would also be worth it to have our military sons and daughters brought back home (and then placed on the Mexico border or at our international airports...but that's probably better talked about in another thread at another time).
-
It's not that it wears out "sooner", but it wears out before you can recoup the savings, because the technology is still much too expensive to realize any cost savings.............. If I had to buy a new car today I'd get a Jetta Turbo Diesel. 40 MPG city. I can live with that, and buy more guns with the savings. Bill T.
That's the rub...cost. Governments can be good at big things that business can't support...I mean, if you had a great idea and you would have to spend your own money (never mind where you get it from) for 20 years or so would you be willing to work on it without a paycheck? This is where I think there are good social progams...research programs.
The current technology is too expensive...but only because it is too inefficient. If you could spend the same amount, get more for your dollar, and have it last a couple of decades then OK, which is where research into materials, material properties and base research supported by a government that does not have to turn a profit on a project or starve comes in.
Also...on the diesel...since the government raised the tax on diesel I don't know if we'll see a plethora of diesel vehicles. I agree we should, I have an F250 diesel, but with the price of diesel (lower cost to refine, less waste in refining) being artifcially higher because of the government it may be a stretch. I think diesel is the right answer to offer the public to vote on with their pocketbooks.
In spite of our reactor "Knowledge" over the Soviet Russians, (Or whatever you want to call them now), we still managed to damn near melt down Three Mile Island. ........
As was well known in nuke circles and since has come out in the literature, there were by regulation supposed to be three coolant systems 100% operational at the time of Three Mile Island. The issue was there was one installed in service, one installed with being fully in service and third on order not hooked up. The operation at the time was illegal since the three systems were not operational.
Next, all the braintrust diagnosed the problem as problem A and applied solution B...thankfully the problem was B not A.
They did not want to scram the reactor initially to prevent cooling the beryllium alloy reactor shell too quickly which produces stress cracks and reduces the useful life. So...they switched over to the 2nd coolant system only to find out it was not fully operational...thence came the meltdown.
The hydrogen bubble that was the big deal...really was since at temperature hydrogen is highly reactive with the zirconium tubes the uranium is encased in so...actions that increased the bubble size increased the disaster by consuming the zirconium and allowing the uranium to pool up and increase the reaction. This one nearly got away from us.
Yes...indeed Bill, be concerned for the operators of the plants.
-
This seems to be becoming a soap box for energy policy and how it is determined in these United States. Again, the question was asked, "Who killed the electric car?" The simple answer, i.e. Occam's razor is the market. The market dictates. If there was an actual market demand for an efficient electric car there would be one. Save me the big oil this or the conspiracy that. The market gets what the market demands. Here is an example that most are unwilling to admit to. There is a burgeoning market for illegal drugs of all sorts. Other than their prohibition, there are no government constraints on these illegal drugs. Yet if I want to purchase drug A, B, or C I can walk out the door and do so. Why is that? Demand.
-
If there was an actual market demand for an efficient electric car there would be one. The market gets what the market demands.
Good point. See my "Good News" thread. Bill T.
-
A-ha...therein lies the rub.
Most people don't know that there are electric cars out there.
How many people have even heard of Tesla motors?
Before I just happened to have stumbled across that documentary just by flipping through the cable channels, I would have never ever heard of the General Motors EV1. I mean...I never did catch a commercial during the nightly national news plugging GM's new electric car. Did you?
Or how many have even seen the electric drag racing car "White Zombie" on YouTube? (I think I linked that video in my OP.)
So if they don't know about it, then how can they demand it?
Conversely....look at all the crap that is sold in late night infomercials.
The EZ cracker for example:
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-CB2MVZgt5Y/0.jpg)
Obviously, they have to pay for the advertising, so they must be selling some of them, so....they created a supply, and through advertising they somehow created a demand for them...somehow.... ???
-
Most people don't know that there are electric cars out there.
How many people have even heard of Tesla motors?
Or how many have even seen the electric drag racing car "White Zombie" on YouTube? (I think I linked that video in my OP.)
So if they don't know about it, then how can they demand it?
Trust me, They Know About It, They just don't want it because it's an over engineered, over priced piece of crap, compared to what's on the market today. Look, the Tesla is nothing more than an overpriced, Jay Leno toy. Just like his Turbine powered motorcycle. What's a couple hundred grand to Jay, right? Show me an electric car that will go 300 miles without an extension cord, with a 100,000 mile warranty on the batteries, that costs under $30,000.00, and I'll buy it. Provided it won't raise my electric bill more than my gasoline bill is each and every month. This stuff is coming, but it just isn't here yet. Until it is, (at least 30 more years), you're just going to have to get used to making the rag heads rich. I don't like it anymore than you do. but for now there is no other option that is AFFORDABLE!!! Bill T.
-
billt beat me to it. Another way to look at it using your egg cracker deal.
(BTW is there anyone that is that uncoordinated/lazy?)
There is a market for useless crap that you can purchase after watching an infomercial. Billy Mays and his counterparts make a truck load of $$$$ marketing it, but it is there because there is a market for it. They are just filling the need.
The electric car may have a small market at present. If they wish to increase market share, they will need to follow the path set out by billt in his prior post.
-
Besides, I honestly believe if it ever got so bad in this nation, that our commerce was brought to another standstill by some raghead action "boycott" by OPEC, or anyone else who wears bedsheets in 110 degree temperatures, we would intervene militarily. Remember the old bumper sticker from the 70's? "Nuke Their A$$, And Steal Their Gas". That isn't so far fetched. Of course Hussein would let us starve before he did anything of the sort. But conservatives would not! If you think that couldn't happen, then ask yourself why we don't have "Hussein Care" with a 59 vote democratic majority? A third grader can do the math, but Hussein doesn't have the votes. Bribery and all. People in this country aren't so dumb, or weak. The "balls" are still there. We're just not so fast at "unzipping" our fly to show them. Besides, suicide bombers are getting old, weak, and unimpressive. Some of them are actually fun to watch. Should any of us really care if a Shite blows himself up in a Sunni Mosque? To me it is simply fewer muslims. Please explain to me how this is a bad thing??? Bill T.
-
UGGG!!! NOW AN UPDATE...
From another forum, I learned that some other electric cars are having to replace their batteries at about the 100,000 something mile mark.
I guess that wouldn't be so bad, but the cost is in the $7,000 range for the batteries plus close to another $1,000 for the labor.
:o
So...Uggg...no thanks.
For $8K, you might as well go looking for a used gasoline powered car.
Oh...well... :-\
A'yup, ya'll were right. These gasoline powered cars are here to stay for quite some time still.
It still would be nice to the A-rabs to ....well...you know....
I guess maybe my next car or truck will be diesel, so I can try running my own homemade biodiesel through that.
-
UGGG!!! NOW AN UPDATE...
From another forum, I learned that some other electric cars are having to replace their batteries at about the 100,000 something mile mark.
I guess that wouldn't be so bad, but the cost is in the $7,000 range for the batteries plus close to another $1,000 for the labor.
:o
So...Uggg...no thanks.
For $8K, you might as well go looking for a used gasoline powered car.
The other thing the "green society" doesn't want you to know about is how bad the batteries are. Most of them contain Cadmium, and a lot of other heavy metals that make Cancer grow like fleas on a dirty dog. Electric is good, but a lot like Hydrogen. The fuel, (Carbon based), costs more than the electric it produces.
If we really wanted to do something that would make a difference, we would do what Russia does with their airliners. They are towed from the gate to the end of the runway. They then start their engines, and immediately take off. Upon arriving at their destination they pull off the runway, SHUT DOWN and are towed to the gate. Russia saves millions of barrels of oil doing this. Also they never "stack" aircraft. They reroute them to open airports to get them out of the sky as quickly as possible. Remember, a fully loaded 747 burns one gallon per second at cruise. And it is considered a fuel efficient aircraft. That's 60 gallons a minute, 3,600 gallons per hour. If they could save 2% of that it would make driving a Prius look worse than the kid with his finger in the dike! Bill T.
-
UGGG!!! NOW AN UPDATE...
A'yup, ya'll were right. These gasoline powered cars are here to stay for quite some time still.
It still would be nice to the A-rabs to ....well...you know....
I'm sure you're aware that most of the crude we refine here in the US comes from Canada and not from the middle east. We can't even refine much of what comes in from Alaska for domestic uses. I don't know about heating oil and diesel production.
I don't agree or disagree with anything else.
-
Timothy wrote:
I'm sure you're aware that most of the crude we refine here in the US comes from Canada and not from the middle east.
Yeah, I have heard that before.
I might have mentioned before already in this thread about how "we" are going to take oil sand from Canada, float it over water, I guess, to get the sand to separate out to the bottom and for the oil to float on top, and then the oil is going to get spun up in a centrifuge to get even more sand out of it. Then all that oil is supposed to get sent down a new all stainless steel pipeline. At some point the pipeline will branch off to the east and end up at a refinery about an hour's drive from here, where I live.
They are expanding the refinery to be able to distill this new oil.
http://woodriverrefineryexpansion.com/
IIRC, from what I heard, the other branch of the stainless steel pipeline is going to keep on heading south all the way to Texas to another refinery down there.
so...okay...okay...
This is where I will readily admit that I don't know much about how oil prices are set. It seems like about every third time the price per barrel goes up the talking head on the TV will say something like, "OPEC nations agreed to reduce production", thus artificially decreasing supply which as we all know from Econ 101, where it is supposed to intersect with demand, that's how the market price is set, supposedly.
So, that's what little I know about the pricing of oil.
Then couple that with this 60 Minutes segment:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4713382n&tag=related;photovideo
I think I am confused as ever. ???
-
he price of oil products tot he consumer is set by oil futures, not the actual cost of production. Just like a good many things in the country, we have become so effed up that the cost of something has nothing to do with the cost of something. True with cattle ==> steaks, true with oil ==> gasoline.