Electric Vehicle Bunkum Fraud And Waste

[Uncle Vernon]

What does not work?[/quoute]
The question should have been what does not work to a level of practical utility.

Hybrids have measurable reduction in gas consumption albeit not in all situations.

Measurable against what? There are few if any hybrids that don't entail a lot of usage compromises. Several IC conventional IC models are offering better (lower) consumption for the same task than the hybrids.

Wind power works.

When it's windy, it does?  Great when wind and demand coincide, no so convenient at other times.

Solar power works.

Sure it does and it proven a boon for standalone sites, remote panels etc. But as a replacement for grid electricity it does not work  efficiently unless a high degree of subsidisation is applied.

  None are drop-in replacements for all use cases

And yet they are sold as universal panaceas. Chucking rocks and bent sticks at kangaroos works too, it's far more economical uses all natural and organic material too, but unless you wish to be hungry most of the time you may prefer a rifle.

but if you'd recall, the internal combustion engine was not a drop-in replacement for the horse and buggy either (not enough roads, not enough gas stations, military might not global enough, etc.)

Ah yes but the IC engine was not thrust upon the public, people were allowed to draw their own conclusions. The economics added up, even the crude examples of early times offered greater utility of distance, economy, load carrying etc. I'm all for alternatives, I'm all for progress, a better mousetrap etc.  What I'm not for is being told some piece of expensive underperfoming discomfort is the future and that I must adopt it. Screw that, that is neither science, engineering or progress, that is just the cynical marketing hype of myopic fanatics.

[vk6zgo]

Well, I suppose the good thing about EVs is they are untaxable when charged by solar, wind or other sources (renewable or not), IF you do it yourself.

The government will find another way to tax them, though.

Well actually,all vehicles on the road are taxed when you licence them.
The Brits are more realistic :-You will see cars advertised as "taxed",meaning registered for use on the road.

[SgtRock]

Greetings EEVBees:

--First of all, let me say that I find myself in complete accord with, the recent statements by EEVblog's distinguished elder statesman and chairman emeritus of the Australian Avuncular Curmudgeon Society and Storm Window Company, Uncle Vernon, who is the long lost brother, by a different Mother of USA Country Hall of Fame Recording Star Don Williams. See picture.



--There have been a number of statements made in this thread of late that would give Maxwell and Clausius the vapors. If not outright bite the furniture hissy fits. Please allow me to address a few of them:

1) "The typical efficiency of an electric motor and battery system is nearly 95%."

--As with a magician, you must watch the other hand. Lets see, in most cases, coal is mined and transported to the Power Plant. Then, it is burned to to make steam to drive steam turbines. The steam turbines drive generators, which power step up transformers. High voltage transmission lines then transmit the electricity to step down transformers. It is then sent to a charging station where batteries are charged. There are losses at each of these steps. But, yes a clever driver can get his car to the bottom of the hill without wasting any gas at all, nearly.

2) "However the problem with automobiles is that the car company's only make what they can sell because they are in this for a profit."

--Yes if only car companies would make cars they cannot sell, and make sure to lose money while they are doing it. But wait a minute! General Motors, Fisker, and Tesla are all doing this very thing, right now. But, using taxpayer money of course.

3) "Yes, we should not try anything until all issues have optimized solutions."

--Translation: Some mean people, who do not like puppies and kitties, are against using taxpayer money to fund companies like Solyndra to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, so that they can then, go bankrupt.

4) "Eco stuff is so great, make things that don't work powered by wishful thinking and still appear virtuous."

--How did such a sensible quote get in here? Happy accident, I guess. Well said Rufus.

5) "Hybrids have measurable reduction in gas consumption albeit not in all situations.  Wind power works.  Solar power works."

--Yes, Hybrids replace some gas consumption with coal consumption. This is where I came in. Wind power works in small isolated installations. But, Big Government sponsored Bird Bopping Egg Beaters are a proven dead loser gobbling lots and lots of Feed In Tariffs from hard pressed rate payers. Solar, the same story as Wind, except now poor rate payers get to buy the rich gal a new solar roof.

6)"...but if you'd recall, the internal combustion engine was not a drop-in replacement for the horse and buggy..."

--Yes, luckily the government stepped in with a 25 percent tax on horses, horse feed, wagons and buggies, in order to buy horseless carriages for wealthy people.

--So lets all close our eyes and, cross our fingers just as hard as we can, and hum the "The Whiffin Poof Song" into the rain barrel, until the Magic Energy Fairy comes and makes all those mean people, who don't like kitties and puppies, quit saying mean things about pie in the sky and free lunches.

“Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people."
W. C. Fields (William Claude Dunkenfield) 1880 1946

Best Regards
Clear Ether

[vk6zgo]

Greetings EEVBees:

--First of all, let me say that I find myself in complete accord with, the recent statements by EEVblog's distinguished elder statesman and chairman emeritus of the Australian Avuncular Curmudgeon Society and Storm Window Company, Uncle Vernon, who is the long lost brother, by a different Mother of USA Country Hall of Fame Recording Star Don Williams. See picture.



--There have been a number of statements made in this thread of late that would give Maxwell and Clausius the vapors. If not outright bite the furniture hissy fits. Please allow me to address a few of them:

1) "The typical efficiency of an electric motor and battery system is nearly 95%."

--As with a magician, you must watch the other hand. Lets see, in most cases, coal is mined and transported to the Power Plant. Then, it is burned to to make steam to drive steam turbines. The steam turbines drive generators, which power step up transformers. High voltage transmission lines then transmit the electricity to step down transformers. It is then sent to a charging station where batteries are charged. There are losses at each of these steps. But, yes a clever driver can get his car to the bottom of the hill without wasting any gas at all, nearly.

2) "However the problem with automobiles is that the car company's only make what they can sell because they are in this for a profit."

--Yes if only car companies would make cars they cannot sell, and make sure to lose money while they are doing it. But wait a minute! General Motors, Fisker, and Tesla are all doing this very thing, right now. But, using taxpayer money of course.

well,actually,Sarge,GM has demonstrated an enviable capability to do just that over many years,without any help from the taxpayers,otherwise,where did all those imports come from-----Corvair,Anyone?

3) "Yes, we should not try anything until all issues have optimized solutions."

--Translation: Some mean people, who do not like puppies and kitties, are against using taxpayer money to fund companies like Solyndra to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, so that they can then, go bankrupt.

4) "Eco stuff is so great, make things that don't work powered by wishful thinking and still appear virtuous."

--How did such a sensible quote get in here? Happy accident, I guess. Well said Rufus.

5) "Hybrids have measurable reduction in gas consumption albeit not in all situations.  Wind power works.  Solar power works."

--Yes, Hybrids replace some gas consumption with coal consumption. This is where I came in. Wind power works in small isolated installations. But, Big Government sponsored Bird Bopping Egg Beaters are a proven dead loser gobbling lots and lots of Feed In Tariffs from hard pressed rate payers. Solar, the same story as Wind, except now poor rate payers get to buy the rich gal a new solar roof.

6)"...but if you'd recall, the internal combustion engine was not a drop-in replacement for the horse and buggy..."

--Yes, luckily the government stepped in with a 25 percent tax on horses, horse feed, wagons and buggies, in order to buy horseless carriages for wealthy people.

--So lets all close our eyes and, cross our fingers just as hard as we can, and hum the "The Whiffin Poof Song" into the rain barrel, until the Magic Energy Fairy comes and makes all those mean people, who don't like kitties and puppies, quit saying mean things about pie in the sky and free lunches.

“Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people."
W. C. Fields (William Claude Dunkenfield) 1880 1946

Best Regards
Clear Ether

Really,though,Sarge,I don't disagree with you,--It's just that you & Unc do like to go over the top  a bit!

[PeteInTexas]

Greetings EEVBees:

--First of all, let me say that I find myself in complete accord with, the recent statements by EEVblog's distinguished elder statesman and chairman emeritus of the Australian Avuncular Curmudgeon Society and Storm Window Company, Uncle Vernon, who is the long lost brother, by a different Mother of USA Country Hall of Fame Recording Star Don Williams. See picture.



--There have been a number of statements made in this thread of late that would give Maxwell and Clausius the vapors. If not outright bite the furniture hissy fits. Please allow me to address a few of them:

1) "The typical efficiency of an electric motor and battery system is nearly 95%."

--As with a magician, you must watch the other hand. Lets see, in most cases, coal is mined and transported to the Power Plant. Then, it is burned to to make steam to drive steam turbines. The steam turbines drive generators, which power step up transformers. High voltage transmission lines then transmit the electricity to step down transformers. It is then sent to a charging station where batteries are charged. There are losses at each of these steps. But, yes a clever driver can get his car to the bottom of the hill without wasting any gas at all, nearly.

2) "However the problem with automobiles is that the car company's only make what they can sell because they are in this for a profit."

--Yes if only car companies would make cars they cannot sell, and make sure to lose money while they are doing it. But wait a minute General Motors, Fisker, and Tesla are all doing this very thing, right now. But, using taxpayer money of course.

3) "Yes, we should not try anything until all issues have optimized solutions."

--Translation: Some mean people, who do not like puppies and kitties, are against using taxpayer money to fund companies like Solyndra to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, so that they can then, go bankrupt.

4) "Eco stuff is so great, make things that don't work powered by wishful thinking and still appear virtuous."

--How did such a sensible quote get in here? Happy accident, I guess. Well said Rufus.

5) "Hybrids have measurable reduction in gas consumption albeit not in all situations.  Wind power works.  Solar power works."

--Yes, Hybrids replace some gas consumption with coal consumption. This is where I came in. Wind power works in small isolated installations. But, Big Government sponsored Bird Bopping Egg Beaters are a proven dead loser gobbling lot and lots of Feed In Tariffs from hard pressed rate payers. Solar, the same story as Wind, except now poor rate payers get to buy the rich gal a new solar roof.

6)"...but if you'd recall, the internal combustion engine was not a drop-in replacement for the horse and buggy..."

Yes, luckily the government stepped in with a 25 percent tax on horses, horse feed, wagons and buggies, in order to buy horseless carriages for wealthy people.

--So lets all close or eyes and, cross our fingers just as hard as we can, and hum the "The Whiffin Poof Song" into the rain barrel, until the Magic Energy Fairy comes and makes all those mean people, who don't like kitties and puppies, quit saying mean things about pie in the sky and free lunches.

“Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people."
W. C. Fields (William Claude Dunkenfield) 1880 1946

Best Regards
Clear Ether

Greetings Sgt:

Do you understand that if demand for a good increases, its price increases and that alternate or even substitute goods become an economic necessity?

Do you understand that if supply for a good decreases, its price increases and that alternate or even substitute goods become an economic necessity?

If the good in question is unleaded gasoline, what do you think is the "switching cost" to alternates or substitutes from an individual, state, and global perspective?

Can the transition to alternates or substitutes be made without undue inconveniences to the modern lifestyle?

[SgtRock]

Dear PeteInTexas:

--I take it from your recent post that you are trying to go the long way around to mention the "Law of Supply and Demand". When demand for a good increases, the price only increases if the supply does not increase. That is why LCD TV,s no longer cost $5,000. When supply of a good decreases the price only increases if the demand does not decrease. Presently the supply of petroleum and natural gas is increasing. You can also get a price increase if the value of any given currency decreases in relation to the value of the commodity. I.E. the dollar is worth less so petroleum appears to be worth more in dollars, while its value in gold has changed much, much less.

--As I have stated previously the rule of thumb for mined commodities is "A doubling of price increases the exploitable reserves by a factor of ten" At present the price of crude oil has more to do with, politics and finance than raw aggregate demand. Let me explain: If there is a real physical shortage of petroleum and natural gas (the two being somewhat mutually fungible" it would be very difficult to summon up more over night. But suppose for a moment that supply is limited by, OPEC, a War in Nigeria, Russia sitting on supplies like OPEC, and production falling off in Mexico and Venesuala due to their approaching failed state status.  Add to all of this the US banning drilling on both coasts, the Gulf of Mexico and the Arctic, while withholding drilling leases and holding out Canadian Pipeline Oil. If those withholding supply leave it go on too long, then of course alternative supplies and commodities become competitive. That is why they periodically relax control and prices fall suddenly. Look at all the sharp spikes in the historical constant dollar price of petroleum.

--The marketplace is one of those things that generally benefits from government neglect. If the government ran the Farmer's Market then green peppers would be 5 cents apiece but the supply would equal zero. You cannot set prices, they have to set themselves. This is what Adam Smith calls the "Unseen Hand".

--When and if alternative vehicles and alternative energy sources become commercially viable, no force on earth (except government) can stop them from coming to market. 

"Before I came here I was confused about this subject. Having listened to your lecture I am still confused. But on a higher level."
Enrico Fermi 1901 1954

Best Regards
Clear Ether

[SgtRock]

Greetings EEVBees:

--This just in. I started this thread with a mention of the half billion plus US loan to Fisker Automotive. Now an excellent, fact based article, has been picked up and published by the American Spectator.
See the below link.

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/14/why-is-the-government-subsidiz

"Why Is the Government Subsidizing a $104,000 Car? By William Tucker 2.14.12
Is Fisker Automotive the next Solyndra? Maybe, but that misses the larger point."

"The first $193 million went to save the floundering Karma venture, while the next $336 million would launch the NINA, a "people's" version of the Karma that would sell for $45,000 -- only $39,000 with federal tax credits."

"Meanwhile, back in Finland, Fisker was having a little trouble meeting its Karma production schedules. Although promised for 2009, the first models did not roll off the assembly line until July 2011. Instead of the 1,300 supposedly already under wraps, the first delivery to the United States consisted of 239 cars. Six months later, when a leak in the cooling system that might cause battery fires prompted a recall, an inventory discovered fewer than 50 cars sold. The rest were still sitting on the lots. To compensate for poor sales, Fisker upped the price to $116,000."

"The seating foam is made from soy-based bio fiber, the carpet backing composed of recycled post-consumer materials, and the trim sourced from 'fallen, sunken and rescued wood,' including some that has spent the last 300 years resting at the bottom of Lake Michigan."

"About the Author: William Tucker is the author of Terrestrial Energy: How Nuclear Power Will Lead the Green Revolution and End America's Energy Odyssey.

--Keep humming into that rain barrel.

"Wish in one hand and, whiz in the other, and see which one fills up first."
Gator Dundee 1948 -

Best Regards
Clear Ether

[PeteInTexas]

Dear PeteInTexas:

--I take it from your recent post that you are trying to go the long way around to mention the "Law of Supply and Demand". When demand for a good increases, the price only increases if the supply does not increase. That is why LCD TV,s no longer cost $5,000. When supply of a good decreases the price only increases if the demand does not decrease. Presently the supply of petroleum and natural gas is increasing. You can also get a price increase if the value of any given currency decreases in relation to the value of the commodity. I.E. the dollar is worth less so petroleum appears to be worth more in dollars, while its value in gold has changed much, much less.

Surely, you are not claiming gas prices will trend cheaper into the future?!

--As I have stated previously the rule of thumb for mined commodities is "A doubling of price increases the exploitable reserves by a factor of ten" At present the price of crude oil has more to do with, politics and finance than raw aggregate demand. Let me explain: If there is a real physical shortage of petroleum and natural gas (the two being somewhat mutually fungible" it would be very difficult to summon up more over night. But suppose for a moment that supply is limited by, OPEC, a War in Nigeria, Russia sitting on supplies like OPEC, and production falling off in Mexico and Venesuala due to their approaching failed state status.  Add to all of this the US banning drilling on both coasts, the Gulf of Mexico and the Arctic, while withholding drilling leases and holding out Canadian Pipeline Oil. If those withholding supply leave it go on too long, then of course alternative supplies and commodities become competitive. That is why they periodically relax control and prices fall suddenly. Look at all the sharp spikes in the historical constant dollar price of petroleum.

"Drill baby drill!" this will save us.

BTW, the fact "serious money" thinks tar sands and fracking are commercially viable means we are literally reaching the bottom of the oil barrel.

--The marketplace is one of those things that generally benefits from government neglect. If the government ran the Farmer's Market then green peppers would be 5 cents apiece but the supply would equal zero. You cannot set prices, they have to set themselves. This is what Adam Smith calls the "Unseen Hand".

You will be amazed to know how much the "free market" rely on government intervention.  Why do you think corporations spend billions lobbying and buying elections?  Do you really believe Mitt Romney's various super pacs don't want any ROI?  A truly free market would look like Somalia.

--When and if alternative vehicles and alternative energy sources become commercially viable, no force on earth (except government) can stop them from coming to market. 

Then why are you, Sgt, disparaging hybrid technology and the people that chose it.  You obviously concede that there can be a time when alternative and alternative energy sources are viable.  Well, wake up!  The economic reality for a growing number of people is such that that time is here.

[Uncle Vernon]

You obviously concede that there can be a time when alternative and alternative energy sources are viable.  Well, wake up!  The economic reality for a growing number of people is such that that time is here.

What metric do you use to validate this so called hybrid economy? You could drive the distance equivalent of here to the moon on the fuel you can purchase with the sticker price premiums Hybrids currently demand.

You and Al Gore can bang on and over emphasise all you want on peak oil but even at our current rising fuel cost, petrol is still a comparatively cheap source of energy. No one (well no one sane) is saying it's an endless resource. But the save the plant lobby is way overplaying their hand.

Current hybrids are a joke, suitable only for Doctor's wives and nutjobs looking to bore a crowd silly explaining how they payed more for less. There is no historical precedent for the world ever accepting such an outcome. Sure equations change over time fuel economy matter now while once it was unimportant. Buying a Prius and boring half the planet about why buzzboxes are supposed to be good is no kind of solution to anything other than some car makers bottom line.

There is lots that can be developed to improve current technologies and to adopt newer ones. The current wave of hybids have nothing to do with any of this, they are just good marketing to satiate nut jobs and their elected representatives. 



 

[PeteInTexas]

You obviously concede that there can be a time when alternative and alternative energy sources are viable.  Well, wake up!  The economic reality for a growing number of people is such that that time is here.

...You could drive the distance equivalent of here to the moon on the fuel you can purchase with the sticker price premiums Hybrids currently demand...

Did you factor in the value of the fuel NOT used?

[Uncle Vernon]

Did you factor in the value of the fuel NOT used?

Sure enough did!  Do the sums!!

[PeteInTexas]

You and Al Gore can bang on and over emphasise all you wan ton peak oil but even at our current rising fuel cost, petrol is still a comparatively cheap source of energy.

If you don't foresee petrol cost decreasing, don't you think you need to start working on alternatives?  Have you thought about what it would take for economies, lifestyles, to switch to a different source, cost wise and attitude wise?  Its not like switching from croissant to bagels in the morning.

[Uncle Vernon]

If you don't foresee petrol cost decreasing, don't you think you need to start working on alternatives?

Me personally. No I don't see the need for me to be working on anything. If you mean do we as a community need to consider alternatives. Yes of course we should. What has development of alternatives got to do with dumping underdone and inneffective product on the marketplace?

Have you thought about what it would take for economies, lifestyles, to switch to a different source, cost wise and attitude wise?

Sure have. I though long enough to know that paying more to get less is no kind of alternative at all!

Its not like switching from croissant to bagels in the morning.

No it's far more complicated, like selecting between Ford, Mazda, Kia and Toyota. The hybrid option in that selection costs way over the odds is far from the best performer and is not the lowest consumer per KM of fuel. 

[SgtRock]

Dear UV:

--You may be wasting your time, trying to reason with the EV crowd. They are statists and utilitarians. They believe in more and more government control. They also believe that the facts are what ever the need to be in order to promote more government control. First they say the are going to drive a Hybrid to save money. Then when it is pointed out that Hybrids generally do not save money, then, they switch over to the argument about how they are saving the planet, unlike those mean, mean, people who do not love puppies, and kitties, and EV's.

--Besides, they say EV's cause less air pollution. When it is pointed out that air pollution is created by coal fired generating plants, then they switch over to making incomprehensible arguments about supply and demand, and claiming the Somalia is the best example of a capitalist economy, like there are a lot of free market capitalists operating in Somalia.

--Then they are back to claiming that EV's do not use fuel. "Did you factor in the value of the fuel NOT used?" Disregarding the burning of fuel at the generating plant, a point they decided to evade last week. They just cannot get 2 plus 2 equals 4 not 11, through their "holier than thow" heads. If "2 and 2" evades them, then you can be sure that thermodynamics, conservation of energy, and the impossibility of "perpetual motion" is way, way off of their radar. Hence my remark about Clausius and Maxwell getting the vapors and having "bite the furniture" hissy fits.

--No mater how many times you tell them:

"I am not against EV's and hybrids, and PV solar, what I am against it the government taking money away from people of modest means to fund these money losing toys for relatively affluent people. Sell all of this stuff you want, just do not ask mom and pop to pay for it."

--They never respond to the point made. It is always some namby pamby hogwash about how ICE's were not drop in replacements for the horse, like if you are not for government subsidies going to rich people, you are ignorant and against progress. No proven facts, no sources quoted, just more sanctimonious finger wagging.

--No point made, ever really registers with them, ten minutes from now they will be making the claim, again, that there is no air pollution created in powering EVs. Wait and see. 

"He was born ignorant, and has been losing ground ever since."
Fred Allen 1894 1956

Best Regards
Clear Ether

[G7PSK]

The most environmentally friendly car other than the one up on blocks is an old clunker as the amount of energy used to manufacture cars has gone up exponentially. what you save in better fuel economy is far offset by manufacturing.

[harnon]

I think we can all agree that internal combustion engines are the best we have at the moment, but they are HORRENDOUSLY inefficient.

The most environmentally friendly car other than the one up on blocks is an old clunker as the amount of energy used to manufacture cars has gone up exponentially. what you save in better fuel economy is far offset by manufacturing.

To my knowledge, manufacturing emissions and resources have decreased significantly over time for almost all modern car manufacturers.  I don't really have a source for this other than anecdotal discussions with managers at car manufacturing plants.  The use of recycled materials is also much more significant now than it was - the EU has a directive of something like only 5% of a car's mass to go to landfill by 2015

More anecdotal stats, although you could verify it with some rough calculations, are that about 80% of a vehicles energy is required after it rolls off the factory floor.  It follows that you can save a pile of energy and cost by making vehicles more efficient.  How much money you save depends on how expensive that energy is!

Then when it is pointed out that Hybrids generally do not save money

I'm a big fan of EV technology, but agree that all of these technologies have their place.  I've been part of some trials with hybrid delivery trucks, and found that for delivering heavy products you actually emit more with a hybrid as the batteries take up usable payload mass and you need more journeys. 

For light products, emissions and costs are substantially reduced and there IS a rapid monetary payoff.  The equation changes if you are driving a lot of country miles (e.g. interstate trucking) where CNG/LNG become more viable alternatives purely on a cost basis. 

For most passenger cars where they aren't running as many miles there probably isn't going to be a financial payoff but then again I don't think thats why most people buy hybrids.

The most interesting advances that I have seen recently are simple mechanical solutions - stop start engines (already in cars), mechanical flywheels (in F1 race cars and prototyped by some manufacturers) and simple aerodynamics can save a fair chunk of fuel at a modest cost increase.

They believe in more and more government control.

Huh? I think governments have poured far more money into bailing out big car manufacturers than a few electric vehicle projects.  i.e. billions here and millions here just to name the most recent examples.

[SgtRock]

Dear Harnon:

-- Your response to my statement that the statists "...believe in more and more government control." was:

"Huh? I think governments have poured far more money into bailing out big car manufacturers than a few electric vehicle projects.  i.e. billions here and millions here just to name the most recent examples."

--Maybe it is just me, but I do not think the fact that, government told investors and bond holders to go spit, while (using taxpayer money) to give large percentages of the auto companies to unions (who give campaign contributions to you know who), is a good example of the government seeking less control. It does conform to a text book definition of Fascism, as does bailing out banks, in order to increase control.

--If you get to count this kind of activity as a blow for market freedom and against statist government control, I think you just might win the argument. Excuse me, I think I have the vapors, I think I will take a break and BITE SOME FURNITURE, ARRRRG!!!

"I sell here, Sir, what all the world desires to have—POWER."
James Watt 1736 1819

Best Regards
Clear Ether

[harnon]

Dear Harnon:

-- Your response to my statement that the statists "...believe in more and more government control." was:

"Huh? I think governments have poured far more money into bailing out big car manufacturers than a few electric vehicle projects.  i.e. billions here and millions here just to name the most recent examples."

--Maybe it is just me, but I do not think the fact that, government told investors and bond holders to go spit, while (using taxpayer money) to give large percentages of the auto companies to unions (who give campaign contributions to you know who), is a good example of the government seeking less control. It does conform to a text book definition of Fascism, as does bailing out banks, in order to increase control.

I'm actually trying to get to grips with your argument... Maybe I've misunderstood, but I read it as the "government gave some money to make a new electric vehicle, therefore all people who buy electric/hybrid vehicles want more government control."  I was pointing out the flaw with that argument.  Were you trying to make a different point?

[SgtRock]

Dear Harnon:

--Please read the post again. What I am saying is that people who first say that hybrids save money, and then give that argument up, and say they are trying to save the planet, and then say that electric vehicles do not cause pollution, and when that is proven false, then state that EV's save fuel (if you do not count the fuel at the generating plant), are playing some kind of statist game where the exact facts do not matter, what matters is taking money from mom and pop so some rich gal can drive around in a subsidized EV, or hybrid.

--Please notice that I said:

""I am not against EV's and hybrids, and PV solar, what I am against it the government taking money away from people of modest means to fund these money losing toys for relatively affluent people. Sell all of this stuff you want, just do not ask mom and pop to pay for it."

--Somehow you have taken this statement and stood it on its head:

"...therefore all people who buy electric/hybrid vehicles want more government control."

--Clearly the statists who want more government control, are the people who want the government to subsidize EVs, Hybrids, and PV solar and not as you stated "all people who buy electric/hybrid vehicles"

--Nice try, but no cigar. You were doing better with the argument that the government taking over car companies was a good example of the government not asserting government control.


"He was born ignorant, and has been losing ground ever since."
Fred Allen 1894 1956

Best Regards
Clear Ether

[G7PSK]

I think we can all agree that internal combustion engines are the best we have at the moment, but they are HORRENDOUSLY inefficient.

The most environmentally friendly car other than the one up on blocks is an old clunker as the amount of energy used to manufacture cars has gone up exponentially. what you save in better fuel economy is far offset by manufacturing.

To my knowledge, manufacturing emissions and resources have decreased significantly over time for almost all modern car manufacturers.  I don't really have a source for this other than anecdotal discussions with managers at car manufacturing plants.  The use of recycled materials is also much more significant now than it was - the EU has a directive of something like only 5% of a car's mass to go to landfill by 2015

The emissions of the car manufacturer may have gone down,but that is due to them actually buying in more ready made sub assembly which they do not factor in in the energy equations, things like the electronics, the old cars had no or very little in the way of electronics, tailored blanks for panels ( sheet metal that is made up of different thicknesses and specification ,laser cut and welded together ready for pressing) greater use of aluminium and other alloys as well as plastics these all take vast amounts of energy, so when a automaker says that their factory is using less energy its due to having farmed that energy use out to others in a way that twenty years ago the didn't.

[harnon]

I think we can all agree that internal combustion engines are the best we have at the moment, but they are HORRENDOUSLY inefficient.

The most environmentally friendly car other than the one up on blocks is an old clunker as the amount of energy used to manufacture cars has gone up exponentially. what you save in better fuel economy is far offset by manufacturing.

To my knowledge, manufacturing emissions and resources have decreased significantly over time for almost all modern car manufacturers.  I don't really have a source for this other than anecdotal discussions with managers at car manufacturing plants.  The use of recycled materials is also much more significant now than it was - the EU has a directive of something like only 5% of a car's mass to go to landfill by 2015

The emissions of the car manufacturer may have gone down,but that is due to them actually buying in more ready made sub assembly which they do not factor in in the energy equations, things like the electronics, the old cars had no or very little in the way of electronics, tailored blanks for panels ( sheet metal that is made up of different thicknesses and specification ,laser cut and welded together ready for pressing) greater use of aluminium and other alloys as well as plastics these all take vast amounts of energy, so when a automaker says that their factory is using less energy its due to having farmed that energy use out to others in a way that twenty years ago the didn't.

I suppose its would be hard to find out with any certainty as there probably isn't much data recorded from the "olden days" of vehicle production.  On the flipside, with the distributed nature of modern production chains its very difficult to calculate overall energy usage accurately.   Perhaps I should ask my materials prof who heads up this!

[PeteInTexas]

Greetings EEVBees:

--Yes, Hybrids replace some gas consumption with coal consumption.

I've never seen a hybrid car with a coal burning compartment.    Must be in the 2013 model year.

[Rufus]

Greetings EEVBees:

--Yes, Hybrids replace some gas consumption with coal consumption.

I've never seen a hybrid car with a coal burning compartment.    Must be in the 2013 model year.

Wow, dumb, please don't bother me with technical details, I am far too busy saving the planet.

If it has a (used) charging socket it is burning some coal instead of gasoline. 

[PeteInTexas]

Greetings EEVBees:

--Yes, Hybrids replace some gas consumption with coal consumption.

I've never seen a hybrid car with a coal burning compartment.    Must be in the 2013 model year.

Wow, dumb, please don't bother me with technical details, I am far too busy saving the planet.

If it has a (used) charging socket it is burning some coal instead of gasoline.

We are not talking about all-electric vehicles because those are not hybrids.  We are talking about the Prius and the Volt in particular, hybrids that do not need to be "plugged-in" to charge.

Apparently SgtRock does not know what he is criticizing just like how his quotes need basic fact checks.

[SgtRock]

Greetings EEVBees:

--See below the latest quote from PIT:

"We are not talking about all-electric vehicles because those are not hybrids.  We are talking about the Prius and the Volt in particular, hybrids that do not need to be "plugged-in" to charge.
Apparently SgtRock does not know what he is criticizing just like how his quotes need basic fact checks."

--Indeed, I am sorry, I thought Hybrid Vehicles had a gasoline engine, that used fuel. And, that this engine was used to charge the batteries. I did not know the batteries were charged by magic. Notice that in the above quote PIT manages to avoid using the words "gasoline engine". Why would that be? It would be because he is talking about "Fuel not used". He wanted Uncle Vernon to count the "Fuel not used". So it was pointed out to him that when charging the batteries, the fuel (usually coal) is used at the generating station.

--So now he says the batteries can be charged with out being "plugged-in", like they aren't plugged in to the, inverter, which is powered by the generator, which is powered by the gasoline engine. So there you have it folks, the Hybrid save fuel by using a gasoline engine to charge the batteries so, that electric motors can be used to haul a box of batteries around. Maybe we could put a windmill on the roof to charge the batteries.

--I will say this though, most people, having been proved wrong on every point, would have give up by now, but not our PIT.

--Question for all: Who is doing the most to save money and to save the planet. Me by continuing to drive a 10 year old Hyundai Hatchback, or PIT by buying and driving a brand new Prius?

“Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people."
W. C. Fields (William Claude Dunkenfield) 1880 - 1946

Best Regards
Clear Ether