# Electric Car Sales Double



## Star

.

Rightwing, sheik lovin', Koch duped, Murdoch readin', carbon suckers need to get over it - alternative energy is on it's way and it's here to stay.
I would think, instead of fighting it, righties would be investing in and making a ton-o-dough in-----in the alternative energy market but-----but far be it from Republicans to invest in an American growth industry.




 
Chevy then





Chevy now​ 


*Electric Car Sales Double* 

Jul 23, 2013

This is a good time to be in the business of selling electric vehicles.

Once moribund, sales of electric cars have more than doubled in the U.S. during the first six months of 2013 compared to the same time period in 2012. Americans have purchased 41,447 of plug-in electric vehicles since January. Thirty-six percent of all the electric cars on the road today have been bought in the previous six months.

The sales figures mark a bold turnaround. It was only February when President Obama backtracked from a stated goal of putting more than 1 million electric cars on the road by 2015. While the recent sales surge won't revive those early hopes -- EV sales still represent only 1.23 percent of the total market -- they are a firm sign of encouragement.

"It highlights the fact you can't look at one month or two months of data," said Patrick Davis, director of the vehicle technology office at the Department of Energy.

"It's the nature of the vehicle market for growth to initially seem slow," he said. "As a matter of fact, through the years, when you look at the introduction of new technologies, whether it's front-wheel drive or airbags or whatever, it happens slow at first and then sort of takes off. Growth happens very quickly."

In some areas of the country, the Nissan Leaf electric vehicle is selling so well that dealerships are running out of inventory.

The automaker reported sales of 2,225 Leafs in June, more than quadruple the 535 sold in the same month one year ago. Through the first half of 2013, sales of the Leaf have jumped 214.6 percent.

*The once-beleaguered Chevy Volt is selling even better*. General Motors sold 2,698 Volts in June, an increase of 59.2 percent compared to the same month on year prior.


<snip> 
.


----------



## westwall

Oh goody!  47,000 sold in January....compared to the paltry sum of what 15.22 MILLION regular cars.  Growth industry?  Yeah, I guess.  I wouldn't call it booming though.....





US Auto Sales (Monthly)


----------



## Old Rocks

And more and more auto manufactures adding EVs to their line. Home solar prices declining rapidly, even as the choice in EVs increases. And as the advances in batteries continues, and the price per kWhr declines, the EV will be more attractive to a much larger part of the market.


----------



## Old Rocks

Of course, just double is only 47,000. 94,000 next year. 188,000 in two years, ect. LOL, the numbers get big very quickly.


----------



## Star

Old Rocks said:


> Of course, just double is only 47,000. 94,000 next year. 188,000 in two years, ect. LOL, the numbers get big very quickly.


 
Spot on Old Rocks and-----and I'm guessing the truthiness of this part of the article flew right over westwall's head; "It's the nature of the vehicle market for growth to initially seem slow," he said. "As a matter of fact, through the years, when you look at the introduction of new technologies, whether it's front-wheel drive or airbags or whatever, it happens slow at first and then sort of takes off. Growth happens very quickly."





 
Kroger's is committed to charging stations at all their stores ​ 
.​


----------



## westwall

Keep dreaming boys.  And it _is_ good to dream.  However, so long as the cost of EV's is as high as it is forget huge growth.  They are the playthings of the well to do and will be for many a year.

Just save the hyperbole.


----------



## Oddball

Star said:


> .
> 
> Rightwing, sheik lovin', Koch duped, Murdoch readin', carbon suckers need to get over it - alternative energy is on it's way and it's here to stay.


Electricity isn't an "alternative energy", nincompoop.


----------



## Mad Scientist

Old Rocks said:


> Of course, just double is only 47,000. 94,000 next year. 188,000 in two years, ect. LOL, the numbers get big very quickly.


So how is all that Electricity to charge all those batteries gonna' be generated? Unicorn Farts?


----------



## whitehall

If a factory sells 500 units in a year and somehow keeps from going bankrupt and sells 2,000 units the next year you could say they quadrupled their sales but they still only sold 2,000 units. Ford sold 84,000 Edsels in 1957 and they called it a failure.


----------



## Star

Oddball said:


> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Rightwing, sheik lovin', Koch duped, Murdoch readin', carbon suckers need to get over it - alternative energy is on it's way and it's here to stay.
> 
> 
> 
> Electricity isn't an "alternative energy", nincompoop.
Click to expand...

 

If you want to play semantic games about how electricity is produced, go play with yourself. 




Tidal Power​ 


​ 


Wave Power​ 


​ 


Solar Power​ 


​ 

Wind Power​ 


​ 

Hydroelectricity​ 


​ 


Radiant Energy​ 


​ 

Geothermal Power​ 


​ 

Biomass​ 


​ 

Compressed Natural Gas​ 


​ 

Nuclear Power​ 



.​


----------



## Oddball

Star said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Rightwing, sheik lovin', Koch duped, Murdoch readin', carbon suckers need to get over it - alternative energy is on it's way and it's here to stay.
> 
> 
> 
> Electricity isn't an "alternative energy", nincompoop.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to play semantic games about how electricity is produced, go play with yourself.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant.

Electricity has been around for over a century...The only things that it is any alternative to are wood-fired stoves and beasts of burden.

But you go ahead and keep pretending that heavy metals and toxic electrolytes -along with all the hazmat disposal liabilities that come with them- are a superior trade-off to hydrocarbon fuel.....Because they're not for the vast majority of consumers who lack 7-figure bank accounts.


----------



## Star

Oddball said:


> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Electricity isn't an "alternative energy", nincompoop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to play semantic games about how electricity is produced, go play with yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Irrelevant.
> 
> Electricity has been around for over a century...The only things that it is any alternative to are wood-fired stoves and beasts of burden.
> 
> But you go ahead and keep pretending that heavy metals and toxic electrolytes -along with all the hazmat disposal liabilities that come with them- are a superior trade-off to hydrocarbon fuel.....Because they're not for the vast majority of consumers who lack 7-figure bank accounts.
Click to expand...

 

If-----if you had paid closer attention to your education-----your education at a time when Lincoln's 
land-grant universities were offering an education at reasonable tuition, you too could have a seven figure bank account by this time of your life (is that a lot? I think I remember you whining that a quarter mil a year ain't much). Of course-----of course you're overlooking, new products start out high, remember the cost of your first cell phone, mine was a little over $600 bucks. So check it out dude/dudette, the cost of EV's is already starting to drop; "The base price of the 2014 Focus EV will be $35,200, down from $39,200 on the outgoing 2013 model. Factoring in a $7,500 federal tax credit, a customer could now buy a Focus EV for $27,700; in California, where there are added incentives, that cost is $25,200. 

Nissan Motor Nissan Motor started the price war back in January, when it when it cut the starting price on its slow-selling LEAF to $28,800 and offered a $199 monthly lease. Honda Motor HMC -0.23% slashed the lease price on its plug-in Honda Fit from $389 to $259 a month and included a free home charging station. General Motors GM -0.16% cut the price of its Chevrolet Volt by $4,000-$5,000 and is offering a $199 per month lease on its newly launched Chevy Spark EV. The Fiat 500e EV, which goes on sale later this summer, also has a $199-per-month lease.

Just a few weeks ago, Ford insisted it didnt need to match price cuts by Chevrolet, Nissan, Honda and Fiat because EVs are just a small part of its fuel-efficient lineup, said Joe Hinrichs, Fords president of The Americas. Unlike some other manufacturers, he said, Ford is not dependent on electric car sales to meet the governments stricter fuel economy standards. The carmaker has seven models that get more than 40 miles per gallon and later this year, it will add a 1.0-liter engine to its expanding EcoBoost powertrain lineup. Also, the Michigan factory where it makes the Focus EV is among its most flexible, building other versions of the Focus as well as the C-MAX hybrid and C-MAX Energi, a plug-in hybrid. That flexibility allows Ford to match production to demand, Hinrichs said.

So far this year, Ford has sold just 900 Focus EVs. It sold 685 in 2012. By comparison, Ford has sold more than 20,000 C-MAX hybrids and plug-in hybrids so far in 2013. Theres no sense building cars that people dont want.

But Ford couldnt afford to be out of sync with the competition, either. Nissan saw an 18 percent jump in LEAF sales after the price cut.

The new starting (price) of $35,200 keeps us competitive in the marketplace and is an important part of our commitment to provide customers with a range of electrified vehicles to choose from, a spokeswoman said."

Car manufacturers are all-in-----all-in or left behind!

.


----------



## Oddball

Don't give a shit...I can still pick up a very nice low-mileage Subaru for 10K- 12K....Can drive it all day, too.

Don't need your grossly overpriced status symbol hobby car for rich liberoidal assholes.

Don't need to nag gubmint to install charging stations for me to keep it going, either.


----------



## Doubletap

Alternative Energy: Hope the sun shines, hope the wind blows.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro

So they sold four this year instead of two?


----------



## Star

Oddball said:


> Don't give a shit...I can still pick up a very nice low-mileage Subaru for 10K- 12K....Can drive it all day, too.
> 
> Don't need your grossly overpriced status symbol hobby car for rich liberoidal assholes.
> 
> Don't need to nag gubmint to install charging stations for me to keep it going, either.


 

Really? You really "Don't give a shit" about your fellow Americans-----your fellow Americans jobs, 
American industry and-----and you "Don't give a shit" about how America will meet it's future energy needs? Really?-----really, you didn't have to tell us that you hate America and Americans - we already knew.

Stop and think about it, if you would have paid attention in school, worked hard, or got lucky you'd be able to afford a better lifestyle than buying junk cars--blame yourself.
.


----------



## Oddball

Star said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't give a shit...I can still pick up a very nice low-mileage Subaru for 10K- 12K....Can drive it all day, too.
> 
> Don't need your grossly overpriced status symbol hobby car for rich liberoidal assholes.
> 
> Don't need to nag gubmint to install charging stations for me to keep it going, either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? You really "Don't give a shit" about your fellow Americans-----your fellow Americans jobs,
> American industry and-----and you "Don't give a shit" about how America will meet it's future energy needs? Really?-----really, you didn't have to tell us that you hate America and Americans - we already knew.
> 
> Stop and think about it, if you would have paid attention in school, worked hard, or got lucky you'd be able to afford a better lifestyle than buying junk cars--blame yourself.
> .
Click to expand...

There are lots of American jobs all over the nation, building conventional piston engined cars...Lots of jobs to be had maintaining, repairing and producing fuel for them, too.

WTF are you blabbering about?


----------



## westwall

Star said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't give a shit...I can still pick up a very nice low-mileage Subaru for 10K- 12K....Can drive it all day, too.
> 
> Don't need your grossly overpriced status symbol hobby car for rich liberoidal assholes.
> 
> Don't need to nag gubmint to install charging stations for me to keep it going, either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really? You really "Don't give a shit" about your fellow Americans-----your fellow Americans jobs,
> American industry and-----and you "Don't give a shit" about how America will meet it's future energy needs? Really?-----really, you didn't have to tell us that you hate America and Americans - we already knew.
> 
> Stop and think about it, if you would have paid attention in school, worked hard, or got lucky you'd be able to afford a better lifestyle than buying junk cars--blame yourself.
> .
Click to expand...






We won't meet the demand with alternative energy systems for a host of reasons.  First off they are nowhere near as efficient and as the windmill debacle becomes obvious in the next ten years you will see them disappear, and that doesn't even take into account the massacre of birds both endangered and common, or the under water Cuisinart that will kill untold numbers of fish and marine mammals.


----------



## Politico

Murdoch rightwing blah blah. What the hell are you treehugger Leftytoons smoking? No one is against electric cars.


----------



## flacaltenn

Star said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Rightwing, sheik lovin', Koch duped, Murdoch readin', carbon suckers need to get over it - alternative energy is on it's way and it's here to stay.
> 
> 
> 
> Electricity isn't an "alternative energy", nincompoop.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to play semantic games about how electricity is produced, go play with yourself.
Click to expand...


Really don't know what problem you think you are solving here.. Other than throwing your political jihad mottos all over the place... 

If we all got into our coal-fired battery wagons and drove at 60mph, we'd all be drawing the equiv. electricity that an average house uses every hour ---- each 2.6 minutes that we drive. THAT NUMBER -- aint gonna change with battery capacity or even much with battery efficiency.. 

*Should we all be sucking up a house hour's worth of electricity every 2.6 minutes Star? *

I think EVs are nifty.. But the future of EVs is in fuel cells and hydrogen --- NOT plug-in batterywagons.. 

Oddball already told ya that this is NOT about alternative energy.. The picture book of energy sources that you gave us is chock full of patently BAD IDEAS for alternative energy. 

You like geothermal --- but probably don't like fracking right? Geothermal is where we LEARNED to frack.. And it's enviro impact is several times GREATER than an oil pump.. Not even RENEWABLE by rigorous definition.. The wells cool out and need to be redrilled.

Biomass? Seriously? Burning garbage? How do you burn garbage cleanly if you don't believe that coal can burned cleanly?? 

Tidal ?? You for real?? Ever see the plans for sectioning off multiple square miles of tidal basins like huge back-filled dams and the impact on shorelife? Pretty much creating a dead zone.. That is not environmentalism unless you're a complete hypocrit.. 

Roughly -- you're not solving anything with 1/2 of that list.. Or with just multiplying EVs by government subsidy and/or edict..

*Tell us PLEASE --- what problem do you THINK you're solving?*

 Have you figured in the timescale and costs of EXPANDING the grid distribution and generation to every nooky cranny of the nation?


----------



## Old Rocks

Politico said:


> Murdoch rightwing blah blah. What the hell are you treehugger Leftytoons smoking? No one is against electric cars.



See above,razz:


----------



## westwall

flacaltenn said:


> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Electricity isn't an "alternative energy", nincompoop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to play semantic games about how electricity is produced, go play with yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really don't know what problem you think you are solving here.. Other than throwing your political jihad mottos all over the place...
> 
> If we all got into our coal-fired battery wagons and drove at 60mph, we'd all be drawing the equiv. electricity that an average house uses every hour ---- each 2.6 minutes that we drive. THAT NUMBER -- aint gonna change with battery capacity or even much with battery efficiency..
> 
> *Should we all be sucking up a house hour's worth of electricity every 2.6 minutes Star? *
> 
> I think EVs are nifty.. But the future of EVs is in fuel cells and hydrogen --- NOT plug-in batterywagons..
> 
> Oddball already told ya that this is NOT about alternative energy.. The picture book of energy sources that you gave us is chock full of patently BAD IDEAS for alternative energy.
> 
> You like geothermal --- but probably don't like fracking right? Geothermal is where we LEARNED to frack.. And it's enviro impact is several times GREATER than an oil pump.. Not even RENEWABLE by rigorous definition.. The wells cool out and need to be redrilled.
> 
> Biomass? Seriously? Burning garbage? How do you burn garbage cleanly if you don't believe that coal can burned cleanly??
> 
> Tidal ?? You for real?? Ever see the plans for sectioning off multiple square miles of tidal basins like huge back-filled dams and the impact on shorelife? Pretty much creating a dead zone.. That is not environmentalism unless you're a complete hypocrit..
> 
> Roughly -- you're not solving anything with 1/2 of that list.. Or with just multiplying EVs by government subsidy and/or edict..
> 
> *Tell us PLEASE --- what problem do you THINK you're solving?*
> 
> Have you figured in the timescale and costs of EXPANDING the grid distribution and generation to every nooky cranny of the nation?
Click to expand...






No, he and they haven't.


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> Politico said:
> 
> 
> 
> Murdoch rightwing blah blah. What the hell are you treehugger Leftytoons smoking? No one is against electric cars.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See above,razz:
Click to expand...






Wrong again.  I would LOVE to see a viable EV.  I also want the thing to WORK and not be MORE environmentally damaging that that which it is supposed to replace.  So far they FAIL on all counts.


----------



## Old Rocks

According to you. Not to the majority of people that are buying them.


----------



## westwall

flacaltenn said:


> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> 
> Electricity isn't an "alternative energy", nincompoop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to play semantic games about how electricity is produced, go play with yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really don't know what problem you think you are solving here.. Other than throwing your political jihad mottos all over the place...
> 
> If we all got into our coal-fired battery wagons and drove at 60mph, we'd all be drawing the equiv. electricity that an average house uses every hour ---- each 2.6 minutes that we drive. THAT NUMBER -- aint gonna change with battery capacity or even much with battery efficiency..
> 
> *Should we all be sucking up a house hour's worth of electricity every 2.6 minutes Star? *
> 
> I think EVs are nifty.. But the future of EVs is in fuel cells and hydrogen --- NOT plug-in batterywagons..
> 
> Oddball already told ya that this is NOT about alternative energy.. The picture book of energy sources that you gave us is chock full of patently BAD IDEAS for alternative energy.
> 
> You like geothermal --- but probably don't like fracking right? Geothermal is where we LEARNED to frack.. And it's enviro impact is several times GREATER than an oil pump.. Not even RENEWABLE by rigorous definition.. The wells cool out and need to be redrilled.
> 
> Biomass? Seriously? Burning garbage? How do you burn garbage cleanly if you don't believe that coal can burned cleanly??
> 
> Tidal ?? You for real?? Ever see the plans for sectioning off multiple square miles of tidal basins like huge back-filled dams and the impact on shorelife? Pretty much creating a dead zone.. That is not environmentalism unless you're a complete hypocrit..
> 
> Roughly -- you're not solving anything with 1/2 of that list.. Or with just multiplying EVs by government subsidy and/or edict..
> 
> *Tell us PLEASE --- what problem do you THINK you're solving?*
> 
> Have you figured in the timescale and costs of EXPANDING the grid distribution and generation to every nooky cranny of the nation?
Click to expand...







Absolutely correct.  What would be awesome is if they could figure out Tesla's system to electrify the Earths magnetic field then all you would need is an antenna to power your car.
Can you imagine how cool that would be?  No need for all these damned power lines and expensive grid network.  THAT would revolutionize the energy systems of this planet.


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> According to you. Not to the majority of people that are buying them.







Not according to me, according to simple fact.


----------



## flacaltenn

Old Rocks said:


> Politico said:
> 
> 
> 
> Murdoch rightwing blah blah. What the hell are you treehugger Leftytoons smoking? No one is against electric cars.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See above,razz:
Click to expand...


Did ya miss this statement up there?  ^^^^^^

quote flacaltenn:



> I think EVs are nifty


 .... but


----------



## flacaltenn

westwall said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to play semantic games about how electricity is produced, go play with yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really don't know what problem you think you are solving here.. Other than throwing your political jihad mottos all over the place...
> 
> If we all got into our coal-fired battery wagons and drove at 60mph, we'd all be drawing the equiv. electricity that an average house uses every hour ---- each 2.6 minutes that we drive. THAT NUMBER -- aint gonna change with battery capacity or even much with battery efficiency..
> 
> *Should we all be sucking up a house hour's worth of electricity every 2.6 minutes Star? *
> 
> I think EVs are nifty.. But the future of EVs is in fuel cells and hydrogen --- NOT plug-in batterywagons..
> 
> Oddball already told ya that this is NOT about alternative energy.. The picture book of energy sources that you gave us is chock full of patently BAD IDEAS for alternative energy.
> 
> You like geothermal --- but probably don't like fracking right? Geothermal is where we LEARNED to frack.. And it's enviro impact is several times GREATER than an oil pump.. Not even RENEWABLE by rigorous definition.. The wells cool out and need to be redrilled.
> 
> Biomass? Seriously? Burning garbage? How do you burn garbage cleanly if you don't believe that coal can burned cleanly??
> 
> Tidal ?? You for real?? Ever see the plans for sectioning off multiple square miles of tidal basins like huge back-filled dams and the impact on shorelife? Pretty much creating a dead zone.. That is not environmentalism unless you're a complete hypocrit..
> 
> Roughly -- you're not solving anything with 1/2 of that list.. Or with just multiplying EVs by government subsidy and/or edict..
> 
> *Tell us PLEASE --- what problem do you THINK you're solving?*
> 
> Have you figured in the timescale and costs of EXPANDING the grid distribution and generation to every nooky cranny of the nation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely correct.  What would be awesome is if they could figure out Tesla's system to electrify the Earths magnetic field then all you would need is an antenna to power your car.
> Can you imagine how cool that would be?  No need for all these damned power lines and expensive grid network.  THAT would revolutionize the energy systems of this planet.
Click to expand...


can't do that man.. The lefties would be worried about the radiation effects making their babies all snaggletoothed.    Remember the Precautionary Principle...


----------



## Old Rocks

Interesting, the top end, and low end of the market selling about the same number of cars at present;

Monthly Plug-In Sales Scorecard


----------



## Old Rocks

flacaltenn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really don't know what problem you think you are solving here.. Other than throwing your political jihad mottos all over the place...
> 
> If we all got into our coal-fired battery wagons and drove at 60mph, we'd all be drawing the equiv. electricity that an average house uses every hour ---- each 2.6 minutes that we drive. THAT NUMBER -- aint gonna change with battery capacity or even much with battery efficiency..
> 
> *Should we all be sucking up a house hour's worth of electricity every 2.6 minutes Star? *
> 
> I think EVs are nifty.. But the future of EVs is in fuel cells and hydrogen --- NOT plug-in batterywagons..
> 
> Oddball already told ya that this is NOT about alternative energy.. The picture book of energy sources that you gave us is chock full of patently BAD IDEAS for alternative energy.
> 
> You like geothermal --- but probably don't like fracking right? Geothermal is where we LEARNED to frack.. And it's enviro impact is several times GREATER than an oil pump.. Not even RENEWABLE by rigorous definition.. The wells cool out and need to be redrilled.
> 
> Biomass? Seriously? Burning garbage? How do you burn garbage cleanly if you don't believe that coal can burned cleanly??
> 
> Tidal ?? You for real?? Ever see the plans for sectioning off multiple square miles of tidal basins like huge back-filled dams and the impact on shorelife? Pretty much creating a dead zone.. That is not environmentalism unless you're a complete hypocrit..
> 
> Roughly -- you're not solving anything with 1/2 of that list.. Or with just multiplying EVs by government subsidy and/or edict..
> 
> *Tell us PLEASE --- what problem do you THINK you're solving?*
> 
> Have you figured in the timescale and costs of EXPANDING the grid distribution and generation to every nooky cranny of the nation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely correct.  What would be awesome is if they could figure out Tesla's system to electrify the Earths magnetic field then all you would need is an antenna to power your car.
> Can you imagine how cool that would be?  No need for all these damned power lines and expensive grid network.  THAT would revolutionize the energy systems of this planet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> can't do that man.. The lefties would be worried about the radiation effects making their babies all snaggletoothed.    Remember the Precautionary Principle...
Click to expand...


Don't know how to do that yet, and don't know what effects it would have on all too many things if we did.


----------



## mamooth

BMW introduces its electric, and offers with it free use of a standard gas-powered SUV several times a year. A very good idea, as people tend to buy vehicles based on worst-case usage. If a free gas vehicle is available for occasional long road trips, people are more likely to get an electric as their only car.

BMW Electric Offered With Spare SUV to Ease Range Anxiety - Bloomberg


----------



## westwall

Finally, a comparison between two supercars, one electric and one ICE from the SAME company so we aren't comparing apples and oranges, we're comparing two apples.  The ICE version won....1:19.0 to 1:21.7

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl10m4mibbg]TOP GEAR Exclusive #StigCam: Mercedes SLS AMG Black Series vs Electric, s20 Ep 4 BBC AMERICA - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## ScienceRocks

Not bad for a tech that is still growing into its own.  Wait another 8-10 years and the electric car will be kicking its ass.


----------



## westwall

Matthew said:


> Not bad for a tech that is still growing into its own.  Wait another 8-10 years and the electric car will be kicking its ass.







Maybe....  You forget they are upgrading the ICE cars too..


----------



## Politico

Matthew said:


> Not bad for a tech that is still growing into its own.  Wait another 8-10 years and the electric car will be kicking its ass.



Well for about 10 miles at least.


----------



## Old Rocks

The Tesla's are kicking ass at present. The Tesla S performance, 4.2, 0 to 60 mph, 134 mph top end, is excellent, and the quality is equal or better than any car in it's class. Total battery change can be done in 90 seconds, so upgrading to a much higher capacity battery as they are developed will not be a problem in the future. One can expect to see their 250 mile range Tesla converted to a 500 to 1000 mile range vehicle in the near future.


----------



## Old Rocks

westwall said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not bad for a tech that is still growing into its own.  Wait another 8-10 years and the electric car will be kicking its ass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe....  You forget they are upgrading the ICE cars too..
Click to expand...


And the cost of fuel continues to rise. While the cost of a home PV system continues to fall. And hook a small generator on a trailer behind your EV, and you have unlimited range. Until the ongoing battery development creates EV's with 500 to 1000 mile range. And that will sooner rather than later.


----------



## Star

Old Rocks said:


> The Tesla's are kicking ass at present. The Tesla S performance, 4.2, 0 to 60 mph, 134 mph top end, is excellent, and the quality is equal or better than any car in it's class. Total battery change can be done in 90 seconds, so upgrading to a much higher capacity battery as they are developed will not be a problem in the future. One can expect to see their 250 mile range Tesla converted to a 500 to 1000 mile range vehicle in the near future.


 

westwall wants Tesla -an American Company- to fail but-----but already Tesla has a 300 mile range on a one hour charge (IOW, about the same as a 15 gal, 20 MPG gas powered car) and-----and the cost is projected to cost about $35K (before rebates, credits and coupons) in 2014 and-----and a comparable gas powered sedan will cost about $57 bucks in fuel to travel 300 miles (15 gal X $3.80/gal = $57/tankful) OTOH, the Tesla will cost about 11¢/hour of charging (1 hour charge/fuel = 300 miles) 


Give it up carbon suckers, every year alternative energies take over a higher and higher percentage of the energy market. Seems to me the smart thing to do would be, invest in this growth industry, 
i.e. live cleaner, make money-----win-win.

To see how screwed up Republican/carbon suckers are, check out this 
website *Your Questions Answered | Tesla Motors*
.


----------



## Indofred

Ijust can't see the objections to an electric car.
Yes, they're still expensive - new tech usually is.
Yes, they're less efficient at the moment - New tech commonly is.
Yes, there are fewer places you can refuel - new tech again.

All these arguments could easily have applied to petrol powered cars of old but they're very common now.
Electric cars may well be the future but we have to give them a chance and there is no reason at all to post pointless shit in some attempt to make them sound as if they'll never be any good.
If they aren't, the projects will simply fail.

However, more and better vehicles are coming along every day so I suspect they'll become a normal part of life in the not so distant future.


----------



## whitehall

Is it honest for the administration to keep fossil fuel prices high and force the middle class to shell out more to keep warm during the winter months? Does the radical (rich) leftie establishment concede that the Obama administration's policies are artificially increasing fossil fuel prices in order to advance an unproven agenda of freaking windmills and sun junk?


----------



## Indofred

I visited a test house at a local university last week.

No electricity cable going into the house but it had air conditioning, fans, TV and everything else you'd expect in any standard building.

The lighting was very low power but highly efficient low voltage LEDs and the rest of the kit was the lowest power units available.
The electricity was generated by solar and wind with battery backup.

Electricity bill - Zero, nothing, not a sausage.
Pollution - the same - none.

The set up costs were terrible but that's experimental units for you. Common technology becomes cheap as this will in time.

The same will apply to electric cars as time goes on but we may well see solar panels charging the car so less or no need to plug it in.


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> The Tesla's are kicking ass at present. The Tesla S performance, 4.2, 0 to 60 mph, 134 mph top end, is excellent, and the quality is equal or better than any car in it's class. Total battery change can be done in 90 seconds, so upgrading to a much higher capacity battery as they are developed will not be a problem in the future. One can expect to see their 250 mile range Tesla converted to a 500 to 1000 mile range vehicle in the near future.







Let's see it in a race.  How about the 24 hours of Le Mans?  That would be a good test of the technology.


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not bad for a tech that is still growing into its own.  Wait another 8-10 years and the electric car will be kicking its ass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe....  You forget they are upgrading the ICE cars too..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And the cost of fuel continues to rise. While the cost of a home PV system continues to fall. And hook a small generator on a trailer behind your EV, and you have unlimited range. Until the ongoing battery development creates EV's with 500 to 1000 mile range. And that will sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...







  Thanks to government interference at the behest of the investors in all those battery companies!  I wonder how big a kickback Obama is getting?


----------



## westwall

Star said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Tesla's are kicking ass at present. The Tesla S performance, 4.2, 0 to 60 mph, 134 mph top end, is excellent, and the quality is equal or better than any car in it's class. Total battery change can be done in 90 seconds, so upgrading to a much higher capacity battery as they are developed will not be a problem in the future. One can expect to see their 250 mile range Tesla converted to a 500 to 1000 mile range vehicle in the near future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall wants Tesla -an American Company- to fail but-----but already Tesla has a 300 mile range on a one hour charge (IOW, about the same as a 15 gal, 20 MPG gas powered car) and-----and the cost is projected to cost about $35K (before rebates, credits and coupons) in 2014 and-----and a comparable gas powered sedan will cost about $57 bucks in fuel to travel 300 miles (15 gal X $3.80/gal = $57/tankful) OTOH, the Tesla will cost about 11¢/hour of charging (1 hour charge/fuel = 300 miles)
> 
> 
> Give it up carbon suckers, every year alternative energies take over a higher and higher percentage of the energy market. Seems to me the smart thing to do would be, invest in this growth industry,
> i.e. live cleaner, make money-----win-win.
> 
> To see how screwed up Republican/carbon suckers are, check out this
> website *Your Questions Answered | Tesla Motors*
> .
Click to expand...







Wrong again.  I want TESLA to succeed.  But I want it to succeed on its own merits.  Musk is a billionaire and yet he has received over 450 million from the public treasury.....paid for by people who will NEVER be able to afford one of his toys.  Once again the poor are paying for the rich...doesn't that bother you even a little bit?  You're a good socialist...it should bug the heck out of you..

No I want them to succeed and succeed big...but I want them to do it the old fashioned way.  On merit.


----------



## flacaltenn

Star said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Tesla's are kicking ass at present. The Tesla S performance, 4.2, 0 to 60 mph, 134 mph top end, is excellent, and the quality is equal or better than any car in it's class. Total battery change can be done in 90 seconds, so upgrading to a much higher capacity battery as they are developed will not be a problem in the future. One can expect to see their 250 mile range Tesla converted to a 500 to 1000 mile range vehicle in the near future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall wants Tesla -an American Company- to fail but-----but already Tesla has a 300 mile range on a one hour charge (IOW, about the same as a 15 gal, 20 MPG gas powered car) and-----and the cost is projected to cost about $35K (before rebates, credits and coupons) in 2014 and-----and a comparable gas powered sedan will cost about $57 bucks in fuel to travel 300 miles (15 gal X $3.80/gal = $57/tankful) OTOH, the Tesla will cost about 11¢/hour of charging (1 hour charge/fuel = 300 miles)
> 
> 
> Give it up carbon suckers, every year alternative energies take over a higher and higher percentage of the energy market. Seems to me the smart thing to do would be, invest in this growth industry,
> i.e. live cleaner, make money-----win-win.
> 
> To see how screwed up Republican/carbon suckers are, check out this
> website *Your Questions Answered | Tesla Motors*
> .
Click to expand...


So using the equivalent of 120 households of electricity to charge that Tesla in an hour has no implications for you?? Why am I being harrassed to pull 1W chargers out of the wall, while some millionaire tanks his trophy car with 120,000 Watts? 

Where is that 120,000 Watts gonna come from?
What problem do you THINK you are solving here?


----------



## RGR

flacaltenn said:


> So using the equivalent of 120 households of electricity to charge that Tesla in an hour has no implications for you??



Now my that is a silly metric. As houses become more efficient, pretty soon you'll be able to declare " so using the equivalent of A MILLION households of electricity!!" and yet nothing changed except building codes requiring smart construction, better insulation, some PVs on the roof. 

And guess what, as those houses use less, you can dump that electricity into the cars because the house won't need it any more!

This is great!



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> Why am I being harrassed to pull 1W chargers out of the wall, while some millionaire tanks his trophy car with 120,000 Watts?



So that the electricity which once was WASTED on the house can now be put to a good use...putting it into your Volt! Or Leaf! No one is REQUIRING you only buy top of the line, why do you think GM made both the Chevy and Cadillac brands? Chevy for the working stiff, Cadillac for the rich folks! So when Tesla gets bought by GM, they'll be able to do the same thing to the EV market, Volts for the working guys, and Tesla sports cars for the sports car rich folks! 

It is a PERFECT business model!



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> Where is that 120,000 Watts gonna come from?



All those houses which don't need it anymore...obviously!



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> What problem do you THINK you are solving here?



The "idiot soccer mom burning liquid fuels to move her and little johnie down to the practice field while wasting a precious chemical feedstock" problem...again...OBVIOUSLY.

The sooner we put a stop to driving involving liquid fuels, the sooner we save the planet, become green, eco-fascists will stop burning down ski resorts, the world will be happier! Cheer up FlaCalTenn, the world will need electricity, we will just do better things with it!


----------



## GHook93

Old Rocks said:


> Of course, just double is only 47,000. 94,000 next year. 188,000 in two years, ect. LOL, the numbers get big very quickly.



How many car owners are there in the US? 180 mil? 190 mil? 200 mil? Either way you cut it the electric car has a long way to go, but I am excited sales are up. Electric cars are the wave of the future and the way the world can say FUCK YOU to OPEC, the Middle East and Russia!


----------



## flacaltenn

RGR said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> So using the equivalent of 120 households of electricity to charge that Tesla in an hour has no implications for you??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now my that is a silly metric. As houses become more efficient, pretty soon you'll be able to declare " so using the equivalent of A MILLION households of electricity!!" and yet nothing changed except building codes requiring smart construction, better insulation, some PVs on the roof.
> 
> And guess what, as those houses use less, you can dump that electricity into the cars because the house won't need it any more!
> 
> This is great!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why am I being harrassed to pull 1W chargers out of the wall, while some millionaire tanks his trophy car with 120,000 Watts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So that the electricity which once was WASTED on the house can now be put to a good use...putting it into your Volt! Or Leaf! No one is REQUIRING you only buy top of the line, why do you think GM made both the Chevy and Cadillac brands? Chevy for the working stiff, Cadillac for the rich folks! So when Tesla gets bought by GM, they'll be able to do the same thing to the EV market, Volts for the working guys, and Tesla sports cars for the sports car rich folks!
> 
> It is a PERFECT business model!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where is that 120,000 Watts gonna come from?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All those houses which don't need it anymore...obviously!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What problem do you THINK you are solving here?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The "idiot soccer mom burning liquid fuels to move her and little johnie down to the practice field while wasting a precious chemical feedstock" problem...again...OBVIOUSLY.
> 
> The sooner we put a stop to driving involving liquid fuels, the sooner we save the planet, become green, eco-fascists will stop burning down ski resorts, the world will be happier! Cheer up FlaCalTenn, the world will need electricity, we will just do better things with it!
Click to expand...


It's NOT a stupid metric -- It's realistic H.S. math that's being ignored.

The Leaf and the Tesla roadster may have different battery capacities, but their efficiencies of operation are approx the same. The leaf goes 75 miles on about 30KWhrs.

That's 0.4KWhr/mile.. Every 2.5 mi you drive -- you use the equivalent of an hours worth of energy from America's average household. At 60 mph, you are burning an hours worth of home electricity every 2.5 minutes... 

((Average hourly household is about 1KWhr to make the math easier.))

Now that doesn't take into account charging rates and the energy you need to push them to shorter times. A Tesla with a 300mi range -- has about a 120KWhr battery farm. 

You charge that in an hour and the POWER REQUIRED FROM THE GRID is 120KWatts.
For an hour.. That's 120 households.

You lie like Tesla does about doing that in 15 minutes --- and you'd need generation capabilities of 480KWatts.. ((and a blast shelter)) See where this is going? Fast charging taxes the grid more than slow charging. 

These are meaningful numbers that are wholly being ignored in the public discussion. 
And saying that all this is gonna come from household savings is a cop-out to continue ignoring the implications.. 

That 75miles on a Leaf uses just over a DAY'S worth of your household energy. You're not gonna make that up pulling chargers out of the wall when not in use or going to heat pumps that no longer work when it's freezing outside..


----------



## RGR

flacaltenn said:


> That's 0.4KWhr/mile.. Every 2.5 mi you drive -- you use the equivalent of an hours worth of energy from America's average household. At 60 mph, you are burning an hours worth of home electricity every 2.5 minutes...



Well then what I said makes perfect sense, the more efficient the houses become, the more electricity we can pump into our cars! Certainly I have always thought it was neater doing burnouts in a car than mowing the lawn and doing things in the house, so we should put our efforts into the things we enjoy!



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> You lie like Tesla does about doing that in 15 minutes --- and you'd need generation capabilities of 480KWatts.. ((and a blast shelter)) See where this is going? Fast charging taxes the grid more than slow charging.



I don't charge my Volt fast. Slow and steady at 120V does it for me. So does that make me better, in the eyes of the utility?



			
				flacltenn said:
			
		

> That 75miles on a Leaf uses just over a DAY'S worth of your household energy. You're not gonna make that up pulling chargers out of the wall when not in use or going to heat pumps that no longer work when it's freezing outside..



So if homes use half as much, every two homes which do this can then support charging a Tesla without any other changes? Again, I don't see the downside here? Certainly not 1 in 2 houses will have a Tesla, therefore we don't even need to cut house consumption in half, but only by 10% to create a Tesla charging capability for every 10 homes!

That sounds pretty reasonable...?


----------



## flacaltenn

RGR said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's 0.4KWhr/mile.. Every 2.5 mi you drive -- you use the equivalent of an hours worth of energy from America's average household. At 60 mph, you are burning an hours worth of home electricity every 2.5 minutes...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well then what I said makes perfect sense, the more efficient the houses become, the more electricity we can pump into our cars! Certainly I have always thought it was neater doing burnouts in a car than mowing the lawn and doing things in the house, so we should put our efforts into the things we enjoy!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You lie like Tesla does about doing that in 15 minutes --- and you'd need generation capabilities of 480KWatts.. ((and a blast shelter)) See where this is going? Fast charging taxes the grid more than slow charging.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't charge my Volt fast. Slow and steady at 120V does it for me. So does that make me better, in the eyes of the utility?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That 75miles on a Leaf uses just over a DAY'S worth of your household energy. You're not gonna make that up pulling chargers out of the wall when not in use or going to heat pumps that no longer work when it's freezing outside..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So if homes use half as much, every two homes which do this can then support charging a Tesla without any other changes? Again, I don't see the downside here? Certainly not 1 in 2 houses will have a Tesla, therefore we don't even need to cut house consumption in half, but only by 10% to create a Tesla charging capability for every 10 homes!
> 
> That sounds pretty reasonable...?
Click to expand...


When the public discussion starts accounting for the real numbers involved -- it starts to be reasonable.. 

You're not gonna be able to control "fast charging" other than commercial providers charging a premium for the boost. If this plan goes forward as concieved, fast charging will astronomically effect the grid demand during peak commute hours. 

And you're way too optimistic about cutting household use in half.. I'm already stuck with a govt designed heat pump that is useless and curly bulbs that are now obsolete and make my home look like Kmart lighting. 

You ridden that "conservation" pony pretty far down the trail pardner..


----------



## mamooth

flacaltenn said:


> You're not gonna be able to control "fast charging" other than commercial providers charging a premium for the boost. If this plan goes forward as concieved, fast charging will astronomically effect the grid demand during peak commute hours.



In a world where grid improvements and smart charging are impossible, sure. But we're talking about the real world, not your fantasy world where every car is replaced by an electric tomorrow.



> And you're way too optimistic about cutting household use in half.. I'm already stuck with a govt designed heat pump that is useless and curly bulbs that are now obsolete and make my home look like Kmart lighting.



Was there any point to that raving? Again, the real world is what matters, and efficiency standards in the real world have worked very well.


----------



## Old Rocks

westwall said:


> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Tesla's are kicking ass at present. The Tesla S performance, 4.2, 0 to 60 mph, 134 mph top end, is excellent, and the quality is equal or better than any car in it's class. Total battery change can be done in 90 seconds, so upgrading to a much higher capacity battery as they are developed will not be a problem in the future. One can expect to see their 250 mile range Tesla converted to a 500 to 1000 mile range vehicle in the near future.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall wants Tesla -an American Company- to fail but-----but already Tesla has a 300 mile range on a one hour charge (IOW, about the same as a 15 gal, 20 MPG gas powered car) and-----and the cost is projected to cost about $35K (before rebates, credits and coupons) in 2014 and-----and a comparable gas powered sedan will cost about $57 bucks in fuel to travel 300 miles (15 gal X $3.80/gal = $57/tankful) OTOH, the Tesla will cost about 11¢/hour of charging (1 hour charge/fuel = 300 miles)
> 
> 
> Give it up carbon suckers, every year alternative energies take over a higher and higher percentage of the energy market. Seems to me the smart thing to do would be, invest in this growth industry,
> i.e. live cleaner, make money-----win-win.
> 
> To see how screwed up Republican/carbon suckers are, check out this
> website *Your Questions Answered | Tesla Motors*
> .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again.  I want TESLA to succeed.  But I want it to succeed on its own merits.  Musk is a billionaire and yet he has received over 450 million from the public treasury.....paid for by people who will NEVER be able to afford one of his toys.  Once again the poor are paying for the rich...doesn't that bother you even a little bit?  You're a good socialist...it should bug the heck out of you..
> 
> No I want them to succeed and succeed big...but I want them to do it the old fashioned way.  On merit.
Click to expand...


Once again you lie by failing to include the whole story. Tesla has paid back that loan in full, including interest. It was a damned good investment. We now have this nation producing the premier electric car. 

When they started building the transcontinental railroad, who do you think provided the money? Yes, the government does help introduce technologies that we need to get off of the ground. From aviation to interstate highways.


----------



## RGR

flacaltenn said:


> When the public discussion starts accounting for the real numbers involved -- it starts to be reasonable..



Some of us are already doing just that! And really enjoying our freedom from funding the jihadists of the world as well!



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> You're not gonna be able to control "fast charging" other than commercial providers charging a premium for the boost. If this plan goes forward as concieved, fast charging will astronomically effect the grid demand during peak commute hours.



Maybe. Or during off-peak hours when they charge at home. In either case, I imagine all of this will get worked out just the same way gasoline distribution to tens of thousands of distribution points spanning America and Canada in some period of time.



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> And you're way too optimistic about cutting household use in half.. I'm already stuck with a govt designed heat pump that is useless and curly bulbs that are now obsolete and make my home look like Kmart lighting.



I recommend membership on the local planning commission to make sure codes get done right! And the beauty of conservation is, they can demand you install any old thing, but they can't make you turn it on! So do your part, refuse to use the heat pump, open some windows and breath the still free air!

And buy an EV to stop funding jihadists!



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> You ridden that "conservation" pony pretty far down the trail pardner..



Maybe. But then I've also lived it, and if some half assed non-handy gizmo geek like me can get it done without undue stress, no reason most other people can't as well.


----------



## PredFan

Yup. Sold one last year, sold two this year. Double sales! Yay!


----------



## Star

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> westwall wants Tesla -an American Company- to fail but-----but already Tesla has a 300 mile range on a one hour charge (IOW, about the same as a 15 gal, 20 MPG gas powered car) and-----and the cost is projected to cost about $35K (before rebates, credits and coupons) in 2014 and-----and a comparable gas powered sedan will cost about $57 bucks in fuel to travel 300 miles (15 gal X $3.80/gal = $57/tankful) OTOH, the Tesla will cost about 11¢/hour of charging (1 hour charge/fuel = 300 miles)
> 
> 
> Give it up carbon suckers, every year alternative energies take over a higher and higher percentage of the energy market. Seems to me the smart thing to do would be, invest in this growth industry,
> i.e. live cleaner, make money-----win-win.
> 
> To see how screwed up Republican/carbon suckers are, check out this
> website *Your Questions Answered | Tesla Motors*
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again. I want TESLA to succeed. But I want it to succeed on its own merits. Musk is a billionaire and yet he has received over 450 million from the public treasury.....paid for by people who will NEVER be able to afford one of his toys. Once again the poor are paying for the rich...doesn't that bother you even a little bit? You're a good socialist...it should bug the heck out of you..
> 
> No I want them to succeed and succeed big...but I want them to do it the old fashioned way. On merit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again you lie by failing to include the whole story. Tesla has paid back that loan in full, including interest. It was a damned good investment. We now have this nation producing the premier electric car.
> 
> When they started building the transcontinental railroad, who do you think provided the money? Yes, the government does help introduce technologies that we need to get off of the ground. From aviation to interstate highways.
Click to expand...

 


Just a guess but-----but I'm guessing most EV's have GPS-----GPS invented by government 
research, not to mention the research ordered by the Dick Nixon into highway aerodynamics which is used to improve fuel efficiency and-----and of course the internet we're using to tell Republicans their anti-American government rants make them nuttier than fruitcakes was in it's infancy funded by-----funded by... wait for it-----government. And if you're wearing scratch resistant glasses while surfing the internet -- thank the government. 

Self described Republicans are-----are obviously, ideologically challenged. 
.


----------



## westwall

Star said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again. I want TESLA to succeed. But I want it to succeed on its own merits. Musk is a billionaire and yet he has received over 450 million from the public treasury.....paid for by people who will NEVER be able to afford one of his toys. Once again the poor are paying for the rich...doesn't that bother you even a little bit? You're a good socialist...it should bug the heck out of you..
> 
> No I want them to succeed and succeed big...but I want them to do it the old fashioned way. On merit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you lie by failing to include the whole story. Tesla has paid back that loan in full, including interest. It was a damned good investment. We now have this nation producing the premier electric car.
> 
> When they started building the transcontinental railroad, who do you think provided the money? Yes, the government does help introduce technologies that we need to get off of the ground. From aviation to interstate highways.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a guess but-----but I'm guessing most EV's have GPS-----GPS invented by government
> research, not to mention the research ordered by the Dick Nixon into highway aerodynamics which is used to improve fuel efficiency and-----and of course the internet we're using to tell Republicans their anti-American government rants make them nuttier than fruitcakes was in it's infancy funded by-----funded by... wait for it-----government. And if you're wearing scratch resistant glasses while surfing the internet -- thank the government.
> 
> Self described Republicans are-----are obviously, ideologically challenged.
> .
Click to expand...






Of course your problem is I'M NOT A REPUBLICAN!  I'M a DEMOCRAT!  You're just as factually challenged as olfraud I see.


----------



## flacaltenn

RGR said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> When the public discussion starts accounting for the real numbers involved -- it starts to be reasonable..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some of us are already doing just that! And really enjoying our freedom from funding the jihadists of the world as well!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're not gonna be able to control "fast charging" other than commercial providers charging a premium for the boost. If this plan goes forward as concieved, fast charging will astronomically effect the grid demand during peak commute hours.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe. Or during off-peak hours when they charge at home. In either case, I imagine all of this will get worked out just the same way gasoline distribution to tens of thousands of distribution points spanning America and Canada in some period of time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you're way too optimistic about cutting household use in half.. I'm already stuck with a govt designed heat pump that is useless and curly bulbs that are now obsolete and make my home look like Kmart lighting.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I recommend membership on the local planning commission to make sure codes get done right! And the beauty of conservation is, they can demand you install any old thing, but they can't make you turn it on! So do your part, refuse to use the heat pump, open some windows and breath the still free air!
> 
> And buy an EV to stop funding jihadists!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You ridden that "conservation" pony pretty far down the trail pardner..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe. But then I've also lived it, and if some half assed non-handy gizmo geek like me can get it done without undue stress, no reason most other people can't as well.
Click to expand...


That's some funny laid back chit right there.. LMAO... 
"you don't have to turn them on.. "... ROFLing. 

You've gotten a lot more tolerable since Gungha hit the Colorado market son.... 
Light one up for me -- will ya?


----------



## GHook93

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Star said:
> 
> 
> 
> westwall wants Tesla -an American Company- to fail but-----but already Tesla has a 300 mile range on a one hour charge (IOW, about the same as a 15 gal, 20 MPG gas powered car) and-----and the cost is projected to cost about $35K (before rebates, credits and coupons) in 2014 and-----and a comparable gas powered sedan will cost about $57 bucks in fuel to travel 300 miles (15 gal X $3.80/gal = $57/tankful) OTOH, the Tesla will cost about 11¢/hour of charging (1 hour charge/fuel = 300 miles)
> 
> 
> Give it up carbon suckers, every year alternative energies take over a higher and higher percentage of the energy market. Seems to me the smart thing to do would be, invest in this growth industry,
> i.e. live cleaner, make money-----win-win.
> 
> To see how screwed up Republican/carbon suckers are, check out this
> website *Your Questions Answered | Tesla Motors*
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again.  I want TESLA to succeed.  But I want it to succeed on its own merits.  Musk is a billionaire and yet he has received over 450 million from the public treasury.....paid for by people who will NEVER be able to afford one of his toys.  Once again the poor are paying for the rich...doesn't that bother you even a little bit?  You're a good socialist...it should bug the heck out of you..
> 
> No I want them to succeed and succeed big...but I want them to do it the old fashioned way.  On merit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Once again you lie by failing to include the whole story. Tesla has paid back that loan in full, including interest. It was a damned good investment. We now have this nation producing the premier electric car.
> 
> When they started building the transcontinental railroad, who do you think provided the money? Yes, the government does help introduce technologies that we need to get off of the ground. From aviation to interstate highways.
Click to expand...


They did it ahead of schedule also.


----------



## westwall

GHook93 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again.  I want TESLA to succeed.  But I want it to succeed on its own merits.  Musk is a billionaire and yet he has received over 450 million from the public treasury.....paid for by people who will NEVER be able to afford one of his toys.  Once again the poor are paying for the rich...doesn't that bother you even a little bit?  You're a good socialist...it should bug the heck out of you..
> 
> No I want them to succeed and succeed big...but I want them to do it the old fashioned way.  On merit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you lie by failing to include the whole story. Tesla has paid back that loan in full, including interest. It was a damned good investment. We now have this nation producing the premier electric car.
> 
> When they started building the transcontinental railroad, who do you think provided the money? Yes, the government does help introduce technologies that we need to get off of the ground. From aviation to interstate highways.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They did it ahead of schedule also.
Click to expand...







And, what do we find when we actually look into the claims?????  Why this.... of course...how very unsurprising.....

"The latest round of Tesla wonderment came when it reported its first quarterly profit earlier this month. TSLA stock darned near doubled in a week.  Musk then borrowed $150 million from Goldman Sachs (shocking!) and floated a cool billion in new stock and long-term debt.  Thats how wethe taxpayerswere repaid.
Tesla didnt generate a profit by selling sexy cars, but rather by selling sleazy emissions credits, mandated by the state of Californias electric vehicle requirements.  The competition, like Honda,  doesnt have a mass market plug-in to meet the mandate and therefore must buy the credits from Tesla, the only company that does. The bill for last quarter was $68 million.

Absent this shakedown of potential car buyers, Tesla would have lost $57 million, or $11,400 per car. As the company sold 5,000 cars in the quarter, though, $13,600 per car was paid by other manufacturers, who are going to pass at least some of that cost on to buyers of their products. Folks in the new car market are likely paying a bit more than simply the direct tax subsidy."


How Tesla Motors Really Makes Money? From Taxpayers | FrontPage Magazine


----------



## Quantum Windbag

They doubled? Does that mean they finally broke into 3 figures?


----------



## Mr. H.

This is cool...

Protean Electric rolls towards making in-wheel electric motors a reality

Yahoo!

_Each motor pushes 100-hp and features a monstrous 739 lb.-ft. of torque&#8212;a figure Protean claim to be the "highest torque density of any of today&#8217;s leading electric drive systems." With a weight of 75 lbs. per motor and a regenerative braking system that recovers 85-percent of kinetic energy, the whole unit fits within a conventional 18-inch wheel._


----------



## bianco

Mr. H. said:


> This is cool...
> 
> Protean Electric rolls towards making in-wheel electric motors a reality
> 
> Yahoo!
> 
> _Each motor pushes 100-hp and features a monstrous 739 lb.-ft. of torquea figure Protean claim to be the "highest torque density of any of todays leading electric drive systems." With a weight of 75 lbs. per motor and a regenerative braking system that recovers 85-percent of kinetic energy, the whole unit fits within a conventional 18-inch wheel._



It certainly is cool.
Aren't engineers just brilliant.


----------



## Mad_Cabbie

I was not big on electric cars ... at first. They are making me eat crow, now!


----------



## Old Rocks

Mr. H. said:


> This is cool...
> 
> Protean Electric rolls towards making in-wheel electric motors a reality
> 
> Yahoo!
> 
> _Each motor pushes 100-hp and features a monstrous 739 lb.-ft. of torquea figure Protean claim to be the "highest torque density of any of todays leading electric drive systems." With a weight of 75 lbs. per motor and a regenerative braking system that recovers 85-percent of kinetic energy, the whole unit fits within a conventional 18-inch wheel._



Electric Mini: 0-60 in 4 Seconds: It Has Motors In Its Wheels : TreeHugger


Justin Thomas
Transportation / Cars
August 30, 2006


A British engineering firm has put together a high-performance hybrid version of BMW's Mini Cooper. The PML Mini QED has a top speed of 150 mph, a 0-60 mph time of 4.5 seconds. The car uses a small gasoline engine with four 160 horsepower electric motors  one on each wheel. The car has been designed to run for four hours of combined urban/extra urban driving, powered only by a battery and bank of ultra capacitors. The QED supports an all-electric range of 200-250 miles and has a total range of about 932 miles (1,500 km). For longer journeys at higher speeds, a small conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) is used to re-charge the battery. In this hybrid mode, fuel economies of up to 80mpg can be achieved.

*Looks like this experimental car is moving into mainstream. Would love to covert my big van to this system. Acres of room underneath for batteries, could be a very long range EV.*


----------



## Old Rocks

Oh boy. Chinese. Fellows, we either start catching up with the Asian nations in graduating engineers and funding innovation, or we start sucking the hind tit for a couple of generations.


----------



## Old Rocks

Nor am I dinging the Chinese. Kudus to them for this development. But I would much rather see our nation at the forefront of technology. And we are rapidly being left in the dust because of our educational system and timidity in experimenting with advanced technology. We invented the net, yet our net is a couple of generations behind that of South Korea. We invented cell phones, yet our system is a couple of generations behind that in Europe. See the pattern?


----------



## Mr. H.

Old Rocks said:


> Oh boy. Chinese. Fellows, we either start catching up with the Asian nations in graduating engineers and funding innovation, or we start sucking the hind tit for a couple of generations.



I just finished watching a PBS doc about Silicon Valley, Robert Noyce, Intel, etc. Very cool. They all managed to attract talent and capital, so what's the problem today?


----------



## Old Rocks

I really don't know. We invented the net. We went to the moon. We invented cell phones. And now, we see people constantly damning people like Elon Musk, who has created a distributed solar utility, a paying private space company, and one of the best cars in the world, which also happens to be an EV. Instead of cheering that we have leadership in that field, they never fail to damn him and his cars. Why? Because it is a leading innovation?

Seems to be an unnerving lack of imaginations at all levels in this nation.


----------



## Old Rocks

Mad_Cabbie said:


> I was not big on electric cars ... at first. They are making me eat crow, now!



Yep. And as the batteries get cheaper, with an order of magnitude more capacity, they are going to get really interesting. Many of the engineering constraints of the ICE will be gone, and the designs can be a lot more imaginative.


----------



## Mr. H.

Old Rocks said:


> I really don't know. We invented the net. We went to the moon. We invented cell phones. And now, we see people constantly damning people like Elon Musk, who has created a distributed solar utility, a paying private space company, and one of the best cars in the world, which also happens to be an EV. Instead of cheering that we have leadership in that field, they never fail to damn him and his cars. Why? Because it is a leading innovation?
> 
> Seems to be an unnerving lack of imaginations at all levels in this nation.



Well with re: to Silicon Valley's products, there was... demand.


----------



## Politico

Mad_Cabbie said:


> I was not big on electric cars ... at first. They are making me eat crow, now!



Not sure why. They have always been cool.


----------



## initforme

WHile I don't see electric cars booming yet, I do like the wave of smaller cars on the market and I see an increase in the numbers of those little huggers on the road even where I live which gets snowfalls of 4 inches plus commonly.  THOSE little cars hug the road like my 4 wheel drive F150.   For college kids, the fuel efficiency is awesome too.  No matter how much oil we produce in this country, the big lie is that the more oil we create ourselves the lower the gas prices.  THat is just a bunch of bunk.  Big oil is going to make their incredible profits and if we produce fifty million times the oil we do now, mark my words, gas prices stay where they are.  So owning one of these little cars might be the wave of the future.


----------



## flacaltenn

Mr. H. said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh boy. Chinese. Fellows, we either start catching up with the Asian nations in graduating engineers and funding innovation, or we start sucking the hind tit for a couple of generations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just finished watching a PBS doc about Silicon Valley, Robert Noyce, Intel, etc. Very cool. They all managed to attract talent and capital, so what's the problem today?
Click to expand...


Serious problem.. The core cause of our national slide into technological irrevelence.
I know you didn't want the long version -- but it's my top cause in life right now.. Sat on a regional tech council panel about a year ago -- and here's the bullet items... 

1) Tech investment lost tons of credibility in the mid to late 90s as the "internet boom" grew a bubble. I watch more Jaguar/Ferrari/Rolls dealers spring up per square mile in Silicon Valley than any place outside of Dubai.. Biggest fraudulent transfer of wealth in my lifetime.

2) As a result of the 90s tech bubble, investors learned that HARDWARE based products are largely more expensive and more risky than SOFTWARE based products.. ((kinda contraindicated by the recent evidence, but nonetheless its true))

3) We completely blew up the domestic supply chain for national technology development by off-shoring. It's like an eco-system.. You muck with a couple species and the whole chain is endangered. We HAD the piece parts to build almost ANYTHING. With adequate engineering support from LOCAL manufacturers. I'm talking about the resistors, capacitors, image sensors, motors, switches, packaging, displays, semiconductor parts, printed circuits, etc.. ALL GONE NOW... 

4) We convinced our sons and daughters that the SAFE HAVEN for them during Globalization was to shun the tech and hard sciences and go get an MBA.. The story was that we would "allow" the rest of the world to dirty their hands doing the manufacturing --- but that we needed more logistics, economic modeling, and management to control everything remotely.. NOW -- it's hard to find a Smith or Rogers or Jones enrolled in graduate level science and engineering.

5) The damn MBAs took over the Silicon Valley startups. No more TJ Rogers or Noyce's.. And they "OPTIMIZED" the customer bases for the products. Discovered that 2% of the customers ordered 80% of the product.. So they SLASHED applications engineering and sales and customer support. If you don't IMMEDIATELY WANT 1,000,000 pieces of something --- you're SOL... So much for start-ups with a fabulous idea getting any help from vendors. 

6) As regards Silicon Valley in particular -- the power outages of the 90s, higher taxes and onerous regulation took its toll.. Couldn't get local PCB boards made economically any more. Intel got tired of losing $8Mill in product when the lights went out.. Housing prices went out of sight, traffic got unbearable and many of us LEFT for better environments. 

The ONLY THING that makes a country relevent in a Global Economy is either INNOVATION and TECH or Natural Resources.   We're circling the drain and almost down the tubes. And if WE DON'T get OUR KIDS into the right curriculums, and get capital to flow to the right places --- the lights are gonna go out all over this country..


----------



## Shrimpbox

The technology parts are so neat for the curious, gets you thinking, and am all for it. But technology for nasty batteries gets way more press than technology for diesels. Small diesels from VW and others eat the EVs lunch with 50-60 miles per gallon with almost zero pollution. And poor EVs also have the worst resale values of any vehicles. The market has spoken.


----------



## Old Rocks

westwall said:


> Keep dreaming boys.  And it _is_ good to dream.  However, so long as the cost of EV's is as high as it is forget huge growth.  They are the playthings of the well to do and will be for many a year.
> 
> Just save the hyperbole.



$20,000 EV. 

2014 Chevy Spark EV | Electric Vehicle | Chevrolet


----------



## Old Rocks

Protean Electric Putting Electric Hub Motors into Production Chinese VW Next Year ? News ? Car and Driver | Car and Driver Blog

This past year, we called out 10 of 2013&#8242;s most-promising new technologies, and alongside stuff such as super plastics, fancy batteries, and precipitation-dodging headlights sat the ever-production-elusive electric hub motor. Specifically, we spoke to a Protean Electric design that actually appeared as if it might see the light of day; it turns out that we were on the right track. The Michigan-based company has announced that it will begin producing hub motors next year in China, and that it is building an electric driveline for an EV to be sold by Volkswagen&#8217;s Chinese partner, FAW-Volkswagen.

The new EV, to be based on the FAW-Volkswagen New Bora compact sedan, will utilize a pair of rear-mounted Protean hub motors. Each wheel&#8217;s unit makes 100 horsepower, and all of the control electronics are packaged inside the motors. Of course, the motors&#8217; most important stat is weight&#8212;the more poundage, the more unsprung weight vehicle engineers must contend with&#8212;and Protean claims each one weighs 75 pounds. That&#8217;s a lot of extra unsprung weight to wreak havoc on ride and handling, but Protean previously conducted tests with Lotus Engineering that proved regular folks wouldn&#8217;t notice any difference.

We remain skeptical, but not as skeptical as we are about the benefits of installing hub motors in an entry-level vehicle like the Bora. The hoopla surrounding hub motors&#8212;the reason design students the world over keep doodling them into their designs&#8212;has everything to do with enhanced vehicle packaging. Moving the driveline to the wheels frees up real estate for passengers, cargo, safety cages, and so on, not to mention adding untold flexibility to vehicle architectures.


----------



## Old Rocks

*A lot of very intelligent people working on this.*

NREL: Continuum Magazine - Electric Vehicle Battery Development Gains Momentum

CAEBAT collaboration targets EDV batteries with longer range and lifespan, at a lower cost.
Enlarge image
NREL's modeling, simulation, and testing activities include battery safety assessment, next-generation battery technologies, material synthesis and research, subsystem analysis, and battery second use studies. 
Photo by Dennis Schroeder, NREL

"When people get behind the wheel of an electric car, it should be a great driving experience. Period." Dr. Taeyoung Han, GM technical fellow, said, "Battery performance is vital in meeting drivers' expectations."

Electric-drive vehicles (EDVs) promise to curb greenhouse gas emissions and slash America's need for imported oil. However, designing high-performance, cost-effective, and safe energy storage systems can present considerable challenges.

Batteries, which are typically some of the most expensive EDV components, power the motor and other electrical systems, while storing grid-fed energy as well as kinetic energy from regenerative braking. To appeal to drivers, electric cars need to have a range of 250 to 300 miles between charges, placing greater pressure on the vehicles' battery packs.

At the same time, for EDVs to gain meaningful market share, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has determined that battery costs need to be cut from $400-$600 per kilowatt hour (kWh) to $125/kWh, and battery lifespan needs to be extended to 15 years from its current eight years.

*Increase the storage by a factor of four, cut the cost by half, and the batteries are where they will compete head to head with ICE's and win, hands down.*


----------



## Old Rocks

flacaltenn said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh boy. Chinese. Fellows, we either start catching up with the Asian nations in graduating engineers and funding innovation, or we start sucking the hind tit for a couple of generations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just finished watching a PBS doc about Silicon Valley, Robert Noyce, Intel, etc. Very cool. They all managed to attract talent and capital, so what's the problem today?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Serious problem.. The core cause of our national slide into technological irrevelence.
> I know you didn't want the long version -- but it's my top cause in life right now.. Sat on a regional tech council panel about a year ago -- and here's the bullet items...
> 
> 1) Tech investment lost tons of credibility in the mid to late 90s as the "internet boom" grew a bubble. I watch more Jaguar/Ferrari/Rolls dealers spring up per square mile in Silicon Valley than any place outside of Dubai.. Biggest fraudulent transfer of wealth in my lifetime.
> 
> 2) As a result of the 90s tech bubble, investors learned that HARDWARE based products are largely more expensive and more risky than SOFTWARE based products.. ((kinda contraindicated by the recent evidence, but nonetheless its true))
> 
> 3) We completely blew up the domestic supply chain for national technology development by off-shoring. It's like an eco-system.. You muck with a couple species and the whole chain is endangered. We HAD the piece parts to build almost ANYTHING. With adequate engineering support from LOCAL manufacturers. I'm talking about the resistors, capacitors, image sensors, motors, switches, packaging, displays, semiconductor parts, printed circuits, etc.. ALL GONE NOW...
> 
> 4) We convinced our sons and daughters that the SAFE HAVEN for them during Globalization was to shun the tech and hard sciences and go get an MBA.. The story was that we would "allow" the rest of the world to dirty their hands doing the manufacturing --- but that we needed more logistics, economic modeling, and management to control everything remotely.. NOW -- it's hard to find a Smith or Rogers or Jones enrolled in graduate level science and engineering.
> 
> 5) The damn MBAs took over the Silicon Valley startups. No more TJ Rogers or Noyce's.. And they "OPTIMIZED" the customer bases for the products. Discovered that 2% of the customers ordered 80% of the product.. So they SLASHED applications engineering and sales and customer support. If you don't IMMEDIATELY WANT 1,000,000 pieces of something --- you're SOL... So much for start-ups with a fabulous idea getting any help from vendors.
> 
> 6) As regards Silicon Valley in particular -- the power outages of the 90s, higher taxes and onerous regulation took its toll.. Couldn't get local PCB boards made economically any more. Intel got tired of losing $8Mill in product when the lights went out.. Housing prices went out of sight, traffic got unbearable and many of us LEFT for better environments.
> 
> The ONLY THING that makes a country relevent in a Global Economy is either INNOVATION and TECH or Natural Resources.   We're circling the drain and almost down the tubes. And if WE DON'T get OUR KIDS into the right curriculums, and get capital to flow to the right places --- the lights are gonna go out all over this country..
Click to expand...


Here in the Silicon Forest things are still going well. And we have plenty of power and are installing more wind and solar on a daily basis. With the hydro base, our future is bright, both for the power and the technology.


----------



## flacaltenn

Old Rocks said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just finished watching a PBS doc about Silicon Valley, Robert Noyce, Intel, etc. Very cool. They all managed to attract talent and capital, so what's the problem today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Serious problem.. The core cause of our national slide into technological irrevelence.
> I know you didn't want the long version -- but it's my top cause in life right now.. Sat on a regional tech council panel about a year ago -- and here's the bullet items...
> 
> 1) Tech investment lost tons of credibility in the mid to late 90s as the "internet boom" grew a bubble. I watch more Jaguar/Ferrari/Rolls dealers spring up per square mile in Silicon Valley than any place outside of Dubai.. Biggest fraudulent transfer of wealth in my lifetime.
> 
> 2) As a result of the 90s tech bubble, investors learned that HARDWARE based products are largely more expensive and more risky than SOFTWARE based products.. ((kinda contraindicated by the recent evidence, but nonetheless its true))
> 
> 3) We completely blew up the domestic supply chain for national technology development by off-shoring. It's like an eco-system.. You muck with a couple species and the whole chain is endangered. We HAD the piece parts to build almost ANYTHING. With adequate engineering support from LOCAL manufacturers. I'm talking about the resistors, capacitors, image sensors, motors, switches, packaging, displays, semiconductor parts, printed circuits, etc.. ALL GONE NOW...
> 
> 4) We convinced our sons and daughters that the SAFE HAVEN for them during Globalization was to shun the tech and hard sciences and go get an MBA.. The story was that we would "allow" the rest of the world to dirty their hands doing the manufacturing --- but that we needed more logistics, economic modeling, and management to control everything remotely.. NOW -- it's hard to find a Smith or Rogers or Jones enrolled in graduate level science and engineering.
> 
> 5) The damn MBAs took over the Silicon Valley startups. No more TJ Rogers or Noyce's.. And they "OPTIMIZED" the customer bases for the products. Discovered that 2% of the customers ordered 80% of the product.. So they SLASHED applications engineering and sales and customer support. If you don't IMMEDIATELY WANT 1,000,000 pieces of something --- you're SOL... So much for start-ups with a fabulous idea getting any help from vendors.
> 
> 6) As regards Silicon Valley in particular -- the power outages of the 90s, higher taxes and onerous regulation took its toll.. Couldn't get local PCB boards made economically any more. Intel got tired of losing $8Mill in product when the lights went out.. Housing prices went out of sight, traffic got unbearable and many of us LEFT for better environments.
> 
> The ONLY THING that makes a country relevent in a Global Economy is either INNOVATION and TECH or Natural Resources.   We're circling the drain and almost down the tubes. And if WE DON'T get OUR KIDS into the right curriculums, and get capital to flow to the right places --- the lights are gonna go out all over this country..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here in the Silicon Forest things are still going well. And we have plenty of power and are installing more wind and solar on a daily basis. With the hydro base, our future is bright, both for the power and the technology.
Click to expand...


Yeah?  Going great huh... How many new startups per year?  How many gone public in the last decade?  Actually manufacuring stuff up in "the forest??  Beside medicinal bud?

Whats the annual  venture capital outlay for your forest?  If its 10% of the Silicon valley boom years, id be impressed.


----------



## GHook93

Old Rocks said:


> *A lot of very intelligent people working on this.*
> 
> NREL: Continuum Magazine - Electric Vehicle Battery Development Gains Momentum
> 
> CAEBAT collaboration targets EDV batteries with longer range and lifespan, at a lower cost.
> Enlarge image
> NREL's modeling, simulation, and testing activities include battery safety assessment, next-generation battery technologies, material synthesis and research, subsystem analysis, and battery second use studies.
> Photo by Dennis Schroeder, NREL
> 
> "When people get behind the wheel of an electric car, it should be a great driving experience. Period." Dr. Taeyoung Han, GM technical fellow, said, "Battery performance is vital in meeting drivers' expectations."
> 
> Electric-drive vehicles (EDVs) promise to curb greenhouse gas emissions and slash America's need for imported oil. However, designing high-performance, cost-effective, and safe energy storage systems can present considerable challenges.
> 
> Batteries, which are typically some of the most expensive EDV components, power the motor and other electrical systems, while storing grid-fed energy as well as kinetic energy from regenerative braking. To appeal to drivers, electric cars need to have a range of 250 to 300 miles between charges, placing greater pressure on the vehicles' battery packs.
> 
> At the same time, for EDVs to gain meaningful market share, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has determined that battery costs need to be cut from $400-$600 per kilowatt hour (kWh) to $125/kWh, and battery lifespan needs to be extended to 15 years from its current eight years.
> 
> *Increase the storage by a factor of four, cut the cost by half, and the batteries are where they will compete head to head with ICE's and win, hands down.*



We can only hope. The electric car is in it's first generation. Funny I was listening to the history channel about the 100 inventions that changed the world. They mentioned the microwave. I believe they stated it came out in the 30s or 40s. The first microwaves cost $5K!!! That would be way too expensive for todays standard, but imagine that price tag in 30-40s!!!

I digress, first gen is always every expensive and not as efficient as needed. 2nd gen the price comes down and efficiency usu hits means or exceeds current technology. 3rd gen the price becomes competitive to the mainstream market and efficiency blows away current tech.

1st Gen: Price is high and gas motor is better 2010-2016
2nd Gen Estimates: Price around $45-$65K, but average 300 mpc. 2016-2022
3rd Gen Estimates: Price around $20-$30K and have average charge of 400 mpc 2022-2030
Replacement: by 2028 there will be ZERO gas power cars sold at dealerships. Gas stations will be replace with energy stations, with maybe one or two gas pumps at primo prices. 


Funny thing is Natural Gas will be the stationary source fueling the revolution.


----------



## RGR

Shrimpbox said:


> The technology parts are so neat for the curious, gets you thinking, and am all for it. But technology for nasty batteries gets way more press than technology for diesels. Small diesels from VW and others eat the EVs lunch with 50-60 miles per gallon with almost zero pollution. And poor EVs also have the worst resale values of any vehicles. The market has spoken.



My EV doesn't get 50-60 mpg. It gets 300-500 mpg. An EV is a tool, and quite a good one if the job needing done is commuting in and around the average city/suburban environment.

Diesels are fine for road trips and whatnot, but until someone with a better reputation than VW or Chevy starts cranking them out, I'll stick with gasoline and 40mpg on road trips instead (Ford Focus).


----------



## elektra

4 is 2 doubled


----------



## Shrimpbox

I am not against electric vehicles although I have no desire to have one. But when talking about sales no one is speaking about the subsidy for the vehicles. No one is talking about whether the Volt is even close or will ever be to giving a return on investment. It was the most anticipated and most ballyhooed electric vehicle and is so far a bust. Hybrid cars do not seem to be able to keep up in price or performance with your ford.
    VW already makes diesel powered cars(the new bug for one) that gets better gas mileage than your ford, I am not sure about price comparison. But some of my caterpillar mechanics tell me that Cat is developing a diesel that is so clean that you could sit safely in room with engine running.
     Are there different apps that favor different vehicles? Sure. But if you are doing anything that involves getting more than one or two human beings from a to b there is no workable electric alternative.


----------



## RGR

Shrimpbox said:


> I am not against electric vehicles although I have no desire to have one. But when talking about sales no one is speaking about the subsidy for the vehicles. No one is talking about whether the Volt is even close or will ever be to giving a return on investment.



It is a car. Very few people buy ANY car as an investment because...obviously....they tend to depreciate rather than gain in value. The beauty of the Volt is the freedom from the local extortion stores.



			
				Shrimpbox said:
			
		

> It was the most anticipated and most ballyhooed electric vehicle and is so far a bust.



Except for being reliable, getting to and fro from work without requiring a trip to the extortion store, and still being able to drive across the state like a normal car...should the urge strike.

Did you buy one and it was a bust? How unfortunate, mine is quite nice, a little cramped in the back but that is where the kids go anyway and it is better than the old Mustang by a long shot.



			
				Shrimpbox said:
			
		

> Hybrid cars do not seem to be able to keep up in price or performance with your ford.



My Ford Escape hybrid was quite nice, the problem being that the 4X4 system combined with short distances in winter seemed to negate its hybrid efficiency. But when warm the thing was great, took it wheeling in Monument Valley, getting low 30's, but 6 years later now even regular crossover AWDs get that kind of mileage. 

My Camry hybrid was quite a bit better than my Focus on the highway, you could easily pull 41-43 mpg in it, a solid 32mpg around town, which is better than both my old Fiesta and Focus. But they are temptingly close, and without the complexity of the hybrid system.

The Volt beats them all hands down in the mileage department obviously. Beats my 50cc scooter and KLR650 motorcycle as well. A wonderful thing, not needing to put liquid fuel in the tank.



			
				Shrimpbox said:
			
		

> VW already makes diesel powered cars(the new bug for one) that gets better gas mileage than your ford, I am not sure about price comparison.



Test drove a 6sp manual Passat not 3 months ago. Would be a nice road car except for VWs quality reputation, and my "go to lunch in a suit" sedan beats it to death in all those ways we buy cars for (which is to say, who gives a damn about fuel  mileage, right?  )...in the guilty sense. 300HP V6, paddle shifters, nice tires and the ability to use them, decent suspension. Plus the Focus cost about $10G's less than the VW and by the time you factor in increased cost for diesel, a trip from Denver to the Atlantic and back is about the same in fuel costs. No advantage there for the diesel other than I could take the entire family in the Passat, quite roomy and quiet, whereas the Focus is smaller and just as quiet. 



			
				Shrimpbox said:
			
		

> Are there different apps that favor different vehicles? Sure. But if you are doing anything that involves getting more than one or two human beings from a to b there is no workable electric alternative.



Mine works every day of the week, so of course its workable. And far more efficient at 300-500mpg than any diesel I am aware of anywhere on the planet.


----------

