Who Killed the Electric Car?

In article >, SnoMan > wrote:

>Also the average rate
>for electricity is over 10 cent a KW so it would cost about 15 bucks
>to charge it or more (likely a lot more)

How do you figure that? At 10 cents / kwh, 100 kwh costs ten bucks. At fifteen
cents, 15 bucks. To be "a lot more" than $15, you'd need to be paying "a lot
more" than 15 cents / kwh for your electricity. Maybe you are. I'm not.

>As a comparison there is the
>equivlant of about 38KW in a gallon of gas.

And as an even better comparison, that $10-15 for 200 miles worth of
electricity works out to five to seven and a half cents a mile. In a car that
gets 30 mpg, it takes 6 2/3 gallons to go 200 miles. At $2.25 / gallon, that's
$15, or -- you guessed it -- seven and a half cents a mile. Obviously, if the
price of gas continue to increase, it will cost more, "likely a lot more".

As far as I'm concerned, with the costs being roughly equal, I'd much rather
power my commute with electricity that's generated by burning American coal,
than by burning gasoline that comes from imported oil.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:30:04 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

>In article >, SnoMan > wrote:
>
>>Also the average rate
>>for electricity is over 10 cent a KW so it would cost about 15 bucks
>>to charge it or more (likely a lot more)
>
>How do you figure that? At 10 cents / kwh, 100 kwh costs ten bucks. At fifteen
>cents, 15 bucks. To be "a lot more" than $15, you'd need to be paying "a lot
>more" than 15 cents / kwh for your electricity. Maybe you are. I'm not.

You left out efficency losses in charging and discharging batteries.
It will take a lot more than 100KW for wall scoket to yeild 100 KW of
usable power from battery pack. Also check out you electric bill and
you will likely find that you are paying a lot more than 10 cent a KW.
Plus if everyone starts doing this them power grids will be overloaded
and the upgrade will cost mega bucks which will equal higher electric
costs too
>
>>As a comparison there is the
>>equivlant of about 38KW in a gallon of gas.
>
>And as an even better comparison, that $10-15 for 200 miles worth of
>electricity works out to five to seven and a half cents a mile. In a car that
>gets 30 mpg, it takes 6 2/3 gallons to go 200 miles. At $2.25 / gallon, that's
>$15, or -- you guessed it -- seven and a half cents a mile. Obviously, if the
>price of gas continue to increase, it will cost more, "likely a lot more".


In theory but then do not forget about battery pack replacement which
will set you back about 10 grand for a 100KW pac that may last 50K
miles or so in heavy usage which adds about 20 cnt a mile so it is now
27 cents a mile to drive or 54 dallrs for 200 miles verse 22.0 for
same distance with gas at 20 MPG ot 11.25 at 40 MPG. (BTW, at 40 MPG
gas is cheaper to drive just on energy cost alone and only take a few
minutes to recharge it with fuel)
>
>As far as I'm concerned, with the costs being roughly equal, I'd much rather
>power my commute with electricity that's generated by burning American coal,
>than by burning gasoline that comes from imported oil.


Not really because the invironmental cost are even worse because you
are shifting from one polution source to another. Last I heard coal
plants are about 35% efficent so 65% is wasted and tons of CO2
released. Nuculear power lants would make it more doable
environmentally. The real longer term future lies in electric cars
powered by fuel cells that are zero emissions and extract nearly all
the energy from fuel used in them rather than wasting two thirds of
it. A gas engine is maybe 30 to 33% efficent at best today and a
diesel 35 to 38% which means the rest is wasted. Eliminate this wast
and our energy problems are over as it would cut fuel energy needed
for transporttion by over 50% while greatly reducing CO2 green house
gasses. Lots of ideas look good on paper like electric cars or corn
based fuels (BTW a ethanol poweedr vehicle emitts 40 to 50% more CO2
than a gas powered one) but when you add it all up there is no simple
soultion. It will take change and the first of which is for Detriot to
stop promotting big high profit iron and focus on truely more efficent
cars not just concept ones.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com

In article >, SnoMan > wrote:
>On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:30:04 GMT, (Doug Miller)
>wrote:
>
>>In article >, SnoMan
> > wrote:
>>
>>>Also the average rate
>>>for electricity is over 10 cent a KW so it would cost about 15 bucks
>>>to charge it or more (likely a lot more)
>>
>>How do you figure that? At 10 cents / kwh, 100 kwh costs ten bucks. At fifteen
>
>>cents, 15 bucks. To be "a lot more" than $15, you'd need to be paying "a lot
>>more" than 15 cents / kwh for your electricity. Maybe you are. I'm not.
>
>You left out efficency losses in charging and discharging batteries.

No, I didn't -- because you already figured them into that 100KW estimate,
remember?

>It will take a lot more than 100KW for wall scoket to yeild 100 KW of
>usable power from battery pack. Also check out you electric bill and
>you will likely find that you are paying a lot more than 10 cent a KW.

Guess again.

>Plus if everyone starts doing this them power grids will be overloaded
>and the upgrade will cost mega bucks which will equal higher electric
>costs too

Offset by lower gasoline bills...
>>
>>>As a comparison there is the
>>>equivlant of about 38KW in a gallon of gas.
>>
>>And as an even better comparison, that $10-15 for 200 miles worth of
>>electricity works out to five to seven and a half cents a mile. In a car that
>>gets 30 mpg, it takes 6 2/3 gallons to go 200 miles. At $2.25 / gallon, that's
>>$15, or -- you guessed it -- seven and a half cents a mile. Obviously, if the
>>price of gas continue to increase, it will cost more, "likely a lot more".
>
>
>In theory but then do not forget about battery pack replacement which
>will set you back about 10 grand for a 100KW pac that may last 50K
>miles or so in heavy usage which adds about 20 cnt a mile so it is now
>27 cents a mile to drive or 54 dallrs for 200 miles verse 22.0 for
>same distance with gas at 20 MPG ot 11.25 at 40 MPG. (BTW, at 40 MPG
>gas is cheaper to drive just on energy cost alone and only take a few
>minutes to recharge it with fuel)

Entirely speculation on your part, and you ignore the cost of repairs and
maintenance on gasoline-powered vehicles.
>>
>>As far as I'm concerned, with the costs being roughly equal, I'd much rather
>>power my commute with electricity that's generated by burning American coal,
>>than by burning gasoline that comes from imported oil.
>
>Not really because the invironmental cost are even worse because you
>are shifting from one polution source to another. Last I heard coal
>plants are about 35% efficent

You need to get out more...

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article > ,
says...

Sigh?
If you are going to follow up on a snoball reply please take off the
extra RE's since he doesn't know what the hell he's doing.


Generaly reply-

Gas isn't the only thing that will increase in price over time. The ever
higher demand for electricity is increasing your electric bill as well.
And with inefficient inductive charging systems they use run the cost up
more. And when the states no longer get enough funds from the taxes
collected from gasoline guess what they will start taxing more next?

People bring up the "tiny little" Telsa "gokart" all the time but they
never mention the PRICE and that just ****es me off? Every time they
brag about the range they never mention the fact that you can't haul
jacksh** in it! (Even a Corvette has more capacity and cost way less!)
Nor do they mention what the range is with the A/C and radio on or at
the very least a heater to defrost the windshield! Have any of you
considered how much of a load creature comforts create? The $25,000
dollar battery IIRC may only get you and you alone 250 miles on a good
day on a open highway. Far from something you can brag about! Even less
so when you try to apply any of this to a sedan in the real world. You
ever think the last 50 miles of charge would probably be too dangerous
to safely merge on a highway?

I've seen people make the claim that battery technology and battery
prices would be so much better today had we kept up on battery powered
cars. I got news for you. Batteries are not going to get any cheaper or
better any time soon. We have laptops, wireless phones, PDA's, and a
countless number of other battery powered items and they haven't done
jack to curb prices or make leaps in battery technology. We have 12v car
batteries in every car and you still can't touch a 650cca china made
battery for less than 40 bucks. Battery prices never go down; they go up
just like gas prices.

The other argument is that you should own a gas car for travel and an
electric car for going to work? Yeah? That's what I want to do, spend
more money in the long and short term paying for the initial cost,
insurance, upkeep, and repairs on two vehicles than I would buying
200,000+ miles worth of gas! Or in the Telsa's initial cost case I could
buy 33333 gallons of gas at 3 bucks a gallon which gives me 800,000
miles of fuel with my large sedans average gas mileage! Do you think you
can put that many miles on a Telsa? Not likely but I know my 3800 can
handle that with very very few repairs. Hell if need be I can drop in a
new engine 10 times over for the cost of one Telsa battery pack, 2 times
for the cost of a hybrid battery.

What about resale value of an electric or a hybrid? Once you exceed the
battery warranty it's worth ZILCH! When it dies, throw it away. A
typical used car with 100k miles tops out about 5000 bucks at best. The
battery in a hybrid alone cost that and after 100k miles it's definitely
due for a new one if it lasted that long. You will probably be sick of
the lack of performance before the warranty is even up but that won't
get you a new battery.

When working with hybrids I charge a premium. I'm not stupid enough, at
least I hope I'm not to get my ass fried by one but if you're stupid
enough to buy one you should be stupid enough to willingly pay a premium
for owning one.
http://www.aa1car.com/library/hybrid_hazards.htm

And ethanol? Ethanol is good for vehicles that are designed for it and
only it. We can't make the switch to it because we won't/can't turn
loose of our gas only cars nor would we benefit paying extra for the
inefficient E85 friendly cars for needed for the long transition.

There is one thing out there that I feel will work and it gets no hype
and that's Biodiesel! Diesel engines will pretty much burn any form of
diesel you feed them. They can even run on vegetable oil. Biodiesel is
very clean and has NO limitations that electrics have!!! Think about it,
every gas station in the country already has a diesel fuel pump. How
could it be any easier to switch over to Biodiesel? Plus you don't run
the risk of being electrocuted...

But that's not all, tired of sending money to Arab nations that hate us?
Well with Biodiesel we can stop sending them money as well as our excess
crops and turn those crops into fuel! So not only do you stop funding
them but you stop feeding them as well! How can you beat that? So might
I suggest we stop flittering away our time and demands for silly f'ing
pos electric cars and get our asses in gear for the unlimited potential
of Biodiesel?

On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 22:08:21 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

>In article >, SnoMan > wrote:
>>On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:30:04 GMT, (Doug Miller)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In article >, SnoMan
>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Also the average rate
>>>>for electricity is over 10 cent a KW so it would cost about 15 bucks
>>>>to charge it or more (likely a lot more)
>>>
>>>How do you figure that? At 10 cents / kwh, 100 kwh costs ten bucks. At fifteen
>>
>>>cents, 15 bucks. To be "a lot more" than $15, you'd need to be paying "a lot
>>>more" than 15 cents / kwh for your electricity. Maybe you are. I'm not.
>>
>>You left out efficency losses in charging and discharging batteries.
>
>No, I didn't -- because you already figured them into that 100KW estimate,
>remember?


Yes you did because I said 15 bucks to charge 100KW of usable
energy in a battery pack at 10 cents a KW and you said 10 (100%
efficent which it is not)

>>It will take a lot more than 100KW for wall scoket to yeild 100 KW of
>>usable power from battery pack. Also check out you electric bill and
>>you will likely find that you are paying a lot more than 10 cent a KW.
>
>Guess again.

Maybe you are not (I am not either) but a lot are paying this and more
especailly in big cities were electric cars are most viable.

>
>>Plus if everyone starts doing this them power grids will be overloaded
>>and the upgrade will cost mega bucks which will equal higher electric
>>costs too
>
>Offset by lower gasoline bills...

Nope, no money saved because it is far cheaper to drive a gas car that
need no expensive battery pack replacement. Heck you can replace a
conventional engine and tranny for less than a big battery pack

>>>
>>>>As a comparison there is the
>>>>equivlant of about 38KW in a gallon of gas.
>>>
>>>And as an even better comparison, that $10-15 for 200 miles worth of
>>>electricity works out to five to seven and a half cents a mile. In a car that
>>>gets 30 mpg, it takes 6 2/3 gallons to go 200 miles. At $2.25 / gallon, that's
>>>$15, or -- you guessed it -- seven and a half cents a mile. Obviously, if the
>>>price of gas continue to increase, it will cost more, "likely a lot more".
>>
>>
>>In theory but then do not forget about battery pack replacement which
>>will set you back about 10 grand for a 100KW pac that may last 50K
>>miles or so in heavy usage which adds about 20 cnt a mile so it is now
>>27 cents a mile to drive or 54 dallrs for 200 miles verse 22.0 for
>>same distance with gas at 20 MPG ot 11.25 at 40 MPG. (BTW, at 40 MPG
>>gas is cheaper to drive just on energy cost alone and only take a few
>>minutes to recharge it with fuel)
>
>Entirely speculation on your part, and you ignore the cost of repairs and
>maintenance on gasoline-powered vehicles.

No it does not, Most cars have a 50K or so warrenty and I have run a
few car well past 200K with routine maintainance which I do myself.
THe big battey pack will wear out and it will be VERY expensive to
replace and it does factor in on operating cost. You might say sell
car before you replace battery pack? Okay but then you will take a
hosing on the sale because nobody is going to pay much for a electric
car that has a battery pack at end of service life so you will loose
your shirt.
>>>
>>>As far as I'm concerned, with the costs being roughly equal, I'd much rather
>>>power my commute with electricity that's generated by burning American coal,
>>>than by burning gasoline that comes from imported oil.
>>
>>Not really because the invironmental cost are even worse because you
>>are shifting from one polution source to another. Last I heard coal
>>plants are about 35% efficent
>
>You need to get out more...


I think you do. I think you are one of those head in the sand looking
for a magic cure that does not realize that for every cause their is a
effect and we are killing our ecosystem and denial will not change it.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 17:42:13 -0500, BläBlä
. s!rcre4p.c0m> wrote:

>If you are going to follow up on a snoball reply please take off the
>extra RE's since he doesn't know what the hell he's doing.

Like you do??? you are pretty clueless about anything involving
physics and science. YOu motto is if you cannot understand it, it must
be wrong and ofciurse you do not even use a viable email with posts
because you need to hide. Qucik throw some stones and duck behind
fence so nobody knows you did it.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com

In article >, SnoMan > wrote:
>On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 22:08:21 GMT, (Doug Miller)
>wrote:
>
>>In article >, SnoMan
> > wrote:
>>>On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:30:04 GMT, (Doug Miller)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article >, SnoMan
>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Also the average rate
>>>>>for electricity is over 10 cent a KW so it would cost about 15 bucks
>>>>>to charge it or more (likely a lot more)
>>>>
>>>>How do you figure that? At 10 cents / kwh, 100 kwh costs ten bucks. At
> fifteen
>>>
>>>>cents, 15 bucks. To be "a lot more" than $15, you'd need to be paying "a lot
>>>>more" than 15 cents / kwh for your electricity. Maybe you are. I'm not.
>>>You left out efficency losses in charging and discharging batteries.
>>
>>No, I didn't -- because you already figured them into that 100KW estimate,
>>remember?
>
> Yes you did because I said 15 bucks to charge 100KW of usable
>energy in a battery pack at 10 cents a KW and you said 10 (100%
>efficent which it is not)

Pay close attention he your figure of 100KW has the inefficiency built in
already.

Remainder snipped... you obviously don't want to hear anything contradicting
your preconceptions.

Bye.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

In article >,
John R Stan says...
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 17:42:13 -0500, BläBlä
> . s!rcre4p.c0m> wrote:
>
> >If you are going to follow up on a snoball reply please take off the
> >extra RE's since he doesn't know what the hell he's doing.
>
> Like you do??? you are pretty clueless about anything involving
> physics and science. YOu motto is if you cannot understand it, it must
> be wrong and ofciurse you do not even use a viable email with posts
> because you need to hide. Qucik throw some stones and duck behind
> fence so nobody knows you did it.
> -----------------
> TheHypoCrite.com

Funny, with a little research one will find that's exactly what
everybody everywhere says about you except with far fewer spelling
errors.
http://tinyurl.com/y4meay
Do you honestly think people are too stupid to see you for what you are?

You will find insults from a blatant hypocrite such as yourself have
little effect on me. Personally I don't think its anyones business who I
am or who anyone else here is. I couldnt care less about anyones
identity here because it is not relevant to any discussions here. If
anyone really needed to reach me they can ping me here because this is
where I am a few times out of the week. Though from what I have seen you
have yet to respond to a lot of repeated point blank questions in other
groups. Odd considering your statement don't you think?

Now if you really want "your" information up for everyone to see I can
do that for you since from what I can see you aren't very willing to
list any "real" personal information.

This should be easy one for most to figure out - 39.9305 83.9696

You should be thankful I'm adding you back to my kill filter though if I
find you mouthing off again I am going to visit some of these "other
groups" you dart in and duck out of and strick up a chat with all those
"friends" you've made.

In article >,
says...
> In article >, SnoMan > wrote:
> >On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 22:08:21 GMT, (Doug Miller)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>In article >, SnoMan
> > > wrote:
> >>>On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 18:30:04 GMT, (Doug Miller)
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>In article >, SnoMan
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Also the average rate
> >>>>>for electricity is over 10 cent a KW so it would cost about 15 bucks
> >>>>>to charge it or more (likely a lot more)
> >>>>
> >>>>How do you figure that? At 10 cents / kwh, 100 kwh costs ten bucks. At
> > fifteen
> >>>
> >>>>cents, 15 bucks. To be "a lot more" than $15, you'd need to be paying "a lot
> >>>>more" than 15 cents / kwh for your electricity. Maybe you are. I'm not.
> >>>You left out efficency losses in charging and discharging batteries.
> >>
> >>No, I didn't -- because you already figured them into that 100KW estimate,
> >>remember?
> >
> > Yes you did because I said 15 bucks to charge 100KW of usable
> >energy in a battery pack at 10 cents a KW and you said 10 (100%
> >efficent which it is not)
>
> Pay close attention he your figure of 100KW has the inefficiency built in
> already.
>
> Remainder snipped... you obviously don't want to hear anything contradicting
> your preconceptions.
>
> Bye.

Lol. Thats the way to do it. ;-)

On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 16:59:57 GMT, SnoMan > wrote:

>On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 11:27:11 -0500, "marx404" > wrote:
>
>>Actually, the new technology will allow over 200 miles on a single charge,
>>which with the new batteries will take only 6 hrs tops recharging time.
>
>
>Maybe from a 230 volt charger drawing 100 amps which would exceed most
>house panels. there is 728 watts in a HP at 100% efficency but for a
>electric car figuring battery efficency losses and motor/controller
>losses figure at least 1 KW charged in for 0ne HP out (it will likely
>take more than this) This weans to produce say 100 HP to accelerate or
>climba hill at speed you will be using energy at a rate of 100KW a
>hour. When cruising you might get by on 20 to 25KW/hr running cars and
>accessories. Again to go 200 miles your are in the 100KW batery
>capacity range. A charge powered by 230 volt drawing 100 amps would
>add abaout 20KW of energy a hours to batteries after efficency losses
>in charger and battery will take about 90% of theat energy and convert
>it to stored energy so about a 6 hr charge would be needed to charge a
>100KW battery pack with a 23KW charger. ( as a comperison a dryer
>draws about 5KW and a electric range with all burners on high and oven
>on too can use about 8KW) A regular wall outlet can powr at most a 2KW
>before efficency losses so it would take about 3 to 4 days to charge
>it. People want to believe tha you can just plug car into a regular
>outlet and drive bu the energy is not there. Also the average rate
>for electricity is over 10 cent a KW so it would cost about 15 bucks
>to charge it or more (likely a lot more) As a comparison there is the
>equivlant of about 38KW in a gallon of gas.
>-----------------
>TheSnoMan.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_vehicle

Production and conversion BEVs [Battery Electric Vehicles] using NIMH
battery chemistry typically use 0.3 to 0.5 kilowatt-hours per mile
(0.2 to 0.3 kWh/km). Nearly half of this power consumption is due to
inefficiencies in charging the batteries: The manufacturer of the
Li-ion Tesla reports usage of .215 kWh per mile.

- end quote -

I think it is wise to be at least as skeptical of BEV performance
claims as for EPA mileage estimates. Using the upper end of the
energy use claim, 0.5 kWH/mile, and a 40 mile range overnight charging
at 120v should be barely possible.

I would like to see someone really test the Tesla. Drive it like a
sports car. I be after 20 miles it would be a hurtin' cowboy. A
little misjudgment and you are going to be crawling home with grandma
riding your ass in her Civic.