# Electric Cars Great....Indoors



## PoliticalChic

Oh, nooooo!

Not more bad news for our Warmist pals!


Yup.....AAA tested electric cars and found they perform poorly in cold weather......

....and in hot weather.



1. "The average electric vehicle battery range for each full charge in AAA's test was 105 miles at 75 degrees Fahrenheit.

2.  That dropped 57% to 43 miles when the temperature was held steady at 20 degrees. 

3. Warm temperatures were not as stressful but still delivered a lower average of 69 miles per full charge at 95 degrees, AAA said.



4. The AAA Automotive Research Center in Southern California found that the average range of an electric car dropped 57% in very cold weather  at 20 degrees Fahrenheit  and by 33% in extreme heat, a temperature of 95 degrees.

5. .....we did not expect the degradation we saw," said Greg Brannon, AAA's director of automotive engineering.....a 2013 Nissan Leaf, a 2012 Mitsubishi iMIEV and a 2014 Ford Focus Electric Vehicle....

a. ...The three vehicles chosen were selected because they're the most widely available electric cars in the USA,...




6. ....two of the vehicles, ... were equipped with dedicated management of the battery temperature. 
"We were expecting that difference would yield differences in the optimal range of the vehicles in extreme temperatures," he said. "It did not."


7. Among AAA's recommendations: storing the electric car in a garage; monitoring recharge times in colder weather; preheating or cooling the car while it's plugged in to reduce battery drain, and using electric seat heaters to keep warm."
AAA: Range of electric cars cut in cold, hot weather





So.....as long as the temperature is 75 degrees.....you're fine.

Only driving indoors is the answer......




Or......hope for global warming.


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> So.....as long as the temperature is 75 degrees.....you're fine.
> 
> Only driving indoors is the answer......



So when I've been driving mine outside to take the kids to school when it was 0F outside...I wasn't supposed to? Somehow I didn't accurately notice how...not...fine...I was?

Yikes...someone should have told me my wonderful commuting experience was supposed to be something else, based on their vast experience of never having owned one.


----------



## HenryBHough

Friend recently moved from Fairbanks, Alaska to a small town in Indiana.  She had her Toyota Pious (as she called it) put in a box and transported in the moving van.  She bought the car to save money driving her kids to school.  It did save her money!  She drove them from home to the school daily until mid-October.  After that she'd drive them halfway there and kick 'em out to walk the rest of the way so she'd have enough battery left to get the car home to recharge so she could pick them up from the halfway point when school closed.

She didn't move exclusively so she could do the round trip each day all year but she won't deny it was a factor in the decision.


----------



## mamooth

Given that the Prius has a gasoline engine, that story makes no sense.


----------



## HenryBHough

mamooth said:


> Given that the Prius has a gasoline engine, that story makes no sense.




It does if you're so adamant about saving the planet that you don't put gas in it.  I never said she wasn't an enviro-loon of a zealotry that puts yours and most liberals to shame!


----------



## Mr. H.

Speed Raceway | Indoor Go Karts PA & NJ Locations

Indoor electric go-kart racing.


----------



## PoliticalChic

RGR said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> So.....as long as the temperature is 75 degrees.....you're fine.
> 
> Only driving indoors is the answer......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So when I've been driving mine outside to take the kids to school when it was 0F outside...I wasn't supposed to? Somehow I didn't accurately notice how...not...fine...I was?
> 
> Yikes...someone should have told me my wonderful commuting experience was supposed to be something else, based on their vast experience of never having owned one.
Click to expand...







Are you arguing with me about the efficacy of electric cars, or making excuses for your own gullibility?


Take up the argument with the scientists and engineers at the AAA.


----------



## PoliticalChic

HenryBHough said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> Given that the Prius has a gasoline engine, that story makes no sense.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does if you're so adamant about saving the planet that you don't put gas in it.  I never said she wasn't an enviro-loon of a zealotry that puts yours and most liberals to shame!
Click to expand...




In fact, more than half of the Prius buyers surveyed this spring by CNW Marketing Research of Bandon, Ore., said the main reason they purchased their car was that it makes a statement about me. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/business/04hybrid.html


----------



## rightwinger

Drill baby drill

We don't need no lectric cars


----------



## westwall

Mr. H. said:


> Speed Raceway | Indoor Go Karts PA & NJ Locations
> 
> Indoor electric go-kart racing.








That looks like fun!


----------



## westwall

rightwinger said:


> Drill baby drill
> 
> We don't need no lectric cars







It keeps the lights on...


----------



## rightwinger

Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?

Drill baby drill


----------



## westwall

rightwinger said:


> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill






Critical thinkers don't.  What we root for is the most efficient, cheapest form of energy possible so that the poor can afford it.  No "renewable" energy source has been able to do that.  I USE solar and water power for some of my energy needs.  We were off the grid when I first built this house and that's where solar does best OFF GRID.

What I despise is giving huge quantities of public money to friends of politicians to pad their wallets while pushing an inferior product on the public.  I hate the fact that oil is used to run cars, I really do..  it can be used for so many better purposes.  But there has been no meaningful advancement in decades in alternate powered vehicles.

I love the new Tesla, I don't like the fact that poor peoples tax money is being used to produce a vehicle that only rich people can afford to buy however.  You're all about fairness yet you seem to think it's A-OK to take money from poor folks to benefit rich folks.

That just seems weird.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill






"Solyndra Scandal
Key coverage of the investigation into Solyndra, the Silicon Valley startup that collapsed, leaving taxpayers liable for $535 million in federal guarantees ."
Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post


Why do Leftists continue to throw taxpayer funds into the bottomless pit of failure....

...unless it is simply a way to reward their donors....


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Solyndra Scandal
> Key coverage of the investigation into Solyndra, the Silicon Valley startup that collapsed, leaving taxpayers liable for $535 million in federal guarantees ."
> Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post
> 
> 
> Why do Leftists continue to throw taxpayer funds into the bottomless pit of failure....
> 
> ...unless it is simply a way to reward their donors....
Click to expand...


Yup

And a hundred years ago oil went through those same growing pains. It was a new energy source looking for a use. 
But the US Government invested billions in transportation infrastructure that made a car more practical than a horse


----------



## westwall

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Solyndra Scandal
> Key coverage of the investigation into Solyndra, the Silicon Valley startup that collapsed, leaving taxpayers liable for $535 million in federal guarantees ."
> Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post
> 
> 
> Why do Leftists continue to throw taxpayer funds into the bottomless pit of failure....
> 
> ...unless it is simply a way to reward their donors....
Click to expand...







Because they are corrupt.  Just look who the beneficiaries of that money were.  Pelosi, Feinstein and their friends and family.  It was legalized theft of poor peoples tax money all to benefit the rich and powerful in California politics.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Solyndra Scandal
> Key coverage of the investigation into Solyndra, the Silicon Valley startup that collapsed, leaving taxpayers liable for $535 million in federal guarantees ."
> Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post
> 
> 
> Why do Leftists continue to throw taxpayer funds into the bottomless pit of failure....
> 
> ...unless it is simply a way to reward their donors....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup
> 
> And a hundred years ago oil went through those same growing pains. It was a new energy source looking for a use.
> But the US Government invested billions in transportation infrastructure that made a car more practical than a horse
Click to expand...






Now,now.....are you pretending that you missed the implication that Leftists invest in these failures simply to kick back taxpayer funds to their supporters????



Let's take a trip down memory lane.....



1.	On March 3, 2007 USA Today ran a piece on then-Senator Obama regarding two stocks in his portfolio. Obama was running for President and his critics were stating that the Senator may have been *involved in insider trading, cronyism, using his position for personal gain, *etc. Basically the media ran this story for a day, and then kissed it goodbye. Could you imagine the outrage if these same set of circumstances involved a Republican running for President?               
Obama the Investor ? Brian Sussman


2.	And, from the original AP story: WASHINGTON  Democratic presidential candidate Barack *Obama said Wednesday he was not aware he had invested in two companies backed by some of his top donors *and said he had done nothing to aid their business with the government. The Illinois senator faced questions about more than $50,000 in investments he made right after taking office in 2005 in two speculative companies, AVI Biopharma and Skyterra Communications.


3.	Obama purchased $5,000 in shares for AVI, which was developing a drug to treat avian flu. Two weeks after buying the stock, as the disease was spreading in Asia, *Obama pushed for more federal funding* to fight the disease, but he said he did not discuss the matter with any company officials.



4.	Obama also had more than $50,000 in shares of *Skyterra, a company that had just received federal permission to create a nationwide wireless network that combined satellite and land-based communications systems.  Among the companys top investors were donors who raised more than $150,000 for Obamas* political committees, the New York Times reported Wednesday.

a. 'Skyterra' doesnt ring a bell? Well, how about under its new name: LightSquared?  Reston-based satellite company SkyTerra Communications Inc.  re-emerged July 20 as LightSquared, 
SkyTerra, now LightSquared, enters the national 4G race - Washington Business Journal

b. 	The liberal Daily Beast reports on a broadband project backed by* a frequent Obama White House visitor and donor *that has Pentagon officials concerned over potential military GPS interference. The Obama FCC took the lead in intervening on the donor, billionaire hedge fund manager Philip Falcones, behalf and granting his company called LightSquared one of those coveted *Obama waivers from existing law. *Then Obama officials reportedly pressured a general to alter his testimony about the companys impact on military satellite transmissions. Michelle Malkin | » LightSquared: The next Obama pay-for-play morass?



5.	*Obama said he didnt invest in a qualified blind trust* because it wouldnt enable him to limit which companies he invested in, such as those in the tobacco industry and other areas that he did not want to support. USATODAY.com - Obama faces questions on his investments





Just another Chicago thug-thief.

Wipe that egg off your face.


----------



## westwall

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Solyndra Scandal
> Key coverage of the investigation into Solyndra, the Silicon Valley startup that collapsed, leaving taxpayers liable for $535 million in federal guarantees ."
> Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post
> 
> 
> Why do Leftists continue to throw taxpayer funds into the bottomless pit of failure....
> 
> ...unless it is simply a way to reward their donors....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup
> 
> And a hundred years ago oil went through those same growing pains. It was a new energy source looking for a use.
> But the US Government invested billions in transportation infrastructure that made a car more practical than a horse
Click to expand...







Actually, it didn't.  Prior to petroleum whale oil, and coal oil were the predominant sources of indoor lighting fuel.  Both had enormous problems, not the least of which was the three foot deep cloud of smoke in your home when you were using your lights (why do you think old houses had twelve foot ceilings) and of course the grotesque number of whales being killed for their oil.

Kerosene came along and it was cheaper, cleaner (by far), and easier to use.  And, just so you know, petroleum products have been in use for over 2000 years.


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yikes...someone should have told me my wonderful commuting experience was supposed to be something else, based on their vast experience of never having owned one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you arguing with me about the efficacy of electric cars, or making excuses for your own gullibility?
Click to expand...


I have no argument about efficiency, but those who do not use them apparently don't realize how that has nothing to do with their use in modern America suburbia. And I certainly didn't buy mine based on gullibility but the ABILITY to do something the average american commuter CAN'T...which is avoid the corner extortion stores for months at a time.

And of course if I don't buy liquid fuels, I can spend that money on other stuff. Feel free to spend your money on liquid fuels just to move your body around, but that strikes me as where the gullibility lies.



			
				politicalchic said:
			
		

> Take up the argument with the scientists and engineers at the AAA.



Why? I don't use liquid fuels....which is the point of the exercise. What are they going to tell me that i don't already know? Are they going to insist I use more liquid fuels? Are they going to insist that I CAN'T do EXACTLY what I have been  doing for years now? Do they live in a different dimension where their liquid fuels cost is less than the cost of electrical fuels for my car?

Why exactly would I want to argue with them when my electric is doing exactly what was advertised? And costs less? And I don't have to buy liquid fuels?

You don't like electrics? Don't buy them. But those of us using them and those cars meeting our expectations, hell, we don't need to talk to engineers anywhere. The things just work. Just as they are supposed to.

Perhaps your expectations need recalibrated?


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Solyndra Scandal
> Key coverage of the investigation into Solyndra, the Silicon Valley startup that collapsed, leaving taxpayers liable for $535 million in federal guarantees ."
> Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post
> 
> 
> Why do Leftists continue to throw taxpayer funds into the bottomless pit of failure....
> 
> ...unless it is simply a way to reward their donors....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup
> 
> And a hundred years ago oil went through those same growing pains. It was a new energy source looking for a use.
> But the US Government invested billions in transportation infrastructure that made a car more practical than a horse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now,now.....are you pretending that you missed the implication that Leftists invest in these failures simply to kick back taxpayer funds to their supporters????
> 
> 
> 
> Let's take a trip down memory lane.....
> 
> 
> 
> 1.	On March 3, 2007 USA Today ran a piece on then-Senator Obama regarding two stocks in his portfolio. Obama was running for President and his critics were stating that the Senator may have been *involved in insider trading, cronyism, using his position for personal gain, *etc. Basically the media ran this story for a day, and then kissed it goodbye. Could you imagine the outrage if these same set of circumstances involved a Republican running for President?
> Obama the Investor ? Brian Sussman
> 
> 
> 2.	And, from the original AP story: WASHINGTON  Democratic presidential candidate Barack *Obama said Wednesday he was not aware he had invested in two companies backed by some of his top donors *and said he had done nothing to aid their business with the government. The Illinois senator faced questions about more than $50,000 in investments he made right after taking office in 2005 in two speculative companies, AVI Biopharma and Skyterra Communications.
> 
> 
> 3.	Obama purchased $5,000 in shares for AVI, which was developing a drug to treat avian flu. Two weeks after buying the stock, as the disease was spreading in Asia, *Obama pushed for more federal funding* to fight the disease, but he said he did not discuss the matter with any company officials.
> 
> 
> 
> 4.	Obama also had more than $50,000 in shares of *Skyterra, a company that had just received federal permission to create a nationwide wireless network that combined satellite and land-based communications systems.  Among the companys top investors were donors who raised more than $150,000 for Obamas* political committees, the New York Times reported Wednesday.
> 
> a. 'Skyterra' doesnt ring a bell? Well, how about under its new name: LightSquared?  Reston-based satellite company SkyTerra Communications Inc.  re-emerged July 20 as LightSquared,
> SkyTerra, now LightSquared, enters the national 4G race - Washington Business Journal
> 
> b. 	The liberal Daily Beast reports on a broadband project backed by* a frequent Obama White House visitor and donor *that has Pentagon officials concerned over potential military GPS interference. The Obama FCC took the lead in intervening on the donor, billionaire hedge fund manager Philip Falcones, behalf and granting his company called LightSquared one of those coveted *Obama waivers from existing law. *Then Obama officials reportedly pressured a general to alter his testimony about the companys impact on military satellite transmissions. Michelle Malkin | » LightSquared: The next Obama pay-for-play morass?
> 
> 
> 
> 5.	*Obama said he didnt invest in a qualified blind trust* because it wouldnt enable him to limit which companies he invested in, such as those in the tobacco industry and other areas that he did not want to support. USATODAY.com - Obama faces questions on his investments
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just another Chicago thug-thief.
> 
> Wipe that egg off your face.
Click to expand...


PC strikes again...trying to derail her own thread

Is there some reason you believe oil companies are not corrupting our political process?

Has your head been in the sand about what has happened in the last 100 years with Big Oil?


----------



## elektra

Electric cars are an extremely expensive luxury, nothing more. If even half the people in one city owned an electric car it would create a shortage of electricity. 

Yet imagine if you got the contract to provide all those charging stations, it would be billions of dollars. 
Further, each car would literally need two charging stations, with another one at work, so someone will have to build all those charging stations wherever people work, billions of dollars. 

everything that renewables or green energy proposes is backed by Heavy Industry, Chemical Plants, Blast furnaces that use massive amounts of Fossil Fuel.

So what is the source for this new need for electricity? I guess we shut down all Industry, live off the Baby Boomer's wealth by being a medical service economy, and we then can just power electric cars and fantasy.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup
> 
> And a hundred years ago oil went through those same growing pains. It was a new energy source looking for a use.
> But the US Government invested billions in transportation infrastructure that made a car more practical than a horse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now,now.....are you pretending that you missed the implication that Leftists invest in these failures simply to kick back taxpayer funds to their supporters????
> 
> 
> 
> Let's take a trip down memory lane.....
> 
> 
> 
> 1.	On March 3, 2007 USA Today ran a piece on then-Senator Obama regarding two stocks in his portfolio. Obama was running for President and his critics were stating that the Senator may have been *involved in insider trading, cronyism, using his position for personal gain, *etc. Basically the media ran this story for a day, and then kissed it goodbye. Could you imagine the outrage if these same set of circumstances involved a Republican running for President?
> Obama the Investor ? Brian Sussman
> 
> 
> 2.	And, from the original AP story: WASHINGTON  Democratic presidential candidate Barack *Obama said Wednesday he was not aware he had invested in two companies backed by some of his top donors *and said he had done nothing to aid their business with the government. The Illinois senator faced questions about more than $50,000 in investments he made right after taking office in 2005 in two speculative companies, AVI Biopharma and Skyterra Communications.
> 
> 
> 3.	Obama purchased $5,000 in shares for AVI, which was developing a drug to treat avian flu. Two weeks after buying the stock, as the disease was spreading in Asia, *Obama pushed for more federal funding* to fight the disease, but he said he did not discuss the matter with any company officials.
> 
> 
> 
> 4.	Obama also had more than $50,000 in shares of *Skyterra, a company that had just received federal permission to create a nationwide wireless network that combined satellite and land-based communications systems.  Among the companys top investors were donors who raised more than $150,000 for Obamas* political committees, the New York Times reported Wednesday.
> 
> a. 'Skyterra' doesnt ring a bell? Well, how about under its new name: LightSquared?  Reston-based satellite company SkyTerra Communications Inc.  re-emerged July 20 as LightSquared,
> SkyTerra, now LightSquared, enters the national 4G race - Washington Business Journal
> 
> b. 	The liberal Daily Beast reports on a broadband project backed by* a frequent Obama White House visitor and donor *that has Pentagon officials concerned over potential military GPS interference. The Obama FCC took the lead in intervening on the donor, billionaire hedge fund manager Philip Falcones, behalf and granting his company called LightSquared one of those coveted *Obama waivers from existing law. *Then Obama officials reportedly pressured a general to alter his testimony about the companys impact on military satellite transmissions. Michelle Malkin | » LightSquared: The next Obama pay-for-play morass?
> 
> 
> 
> 5.	*Obama said he didnt invest in a qualified blind trust* because it wouldnt enable him to limit which companies he invested in, such as those in the tobacco industry and other areas that he did not want to support. USATODAY.com - Obama faces questions on his investments
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just another Chicago thug-thief.
> 
> Wipe that egg off your face.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> PC strikes again...trying to derail her own thread
> 
> Is there some reason you believe oil companies are not corrupting our political process?
> 
> Has your head been in the sand about what has happened in the last 100 years with Big Oil?
Click to expand...







".......trying to derail her own thread."


Get over it.

Just admit I rubbed your face in it, and you have no way to control what I post.




But I do love making you squirm.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now,now.....are you pretending that you missed the implication that Leftists invest in these failures simply to kick back taxpayer funds to their supporters????
> 
> 
> 
> Let's take a trip down memory lane.....
> 
> 
> 
> 1.	On March 3, 2007 USA Today ran a piece on then-Senator Obama regarding two stocks in his portfolio. Obama was running for President and his critics were stating that the Senator may have been *involved in insider trading, cronyism, using his position for personal gain, *etc. Basically the media ran this story for a day, and then kissed it goodbye. Could you imagine the outrage if these same set of circumstances involved a Republican running for President?
> Obama the Investor ? Brian Sussman
> 
> 
> 2.	And, from the original AP story: WASHINGTON  Democratic presidential candidate Barack *Obama said Wednesday he was not aware he had invested in two companies backed by some of his top donors *and said he had done nothing to aid their business with the government. The Illinois senator faced questions about more than $50,000 in investments he made right after taking office in 2005 in two speculative companies, AVI Biopharma and Skyterra Communications.
> 
> 
> 3.	Obama purchased $5,000 in shares for AVI, which was developing a drug to treat avian flu. Two weeks after buying the stock, as the disease was spreading in Asia, *Obama pushed for more federal funding* to fight the disease, but he said he did not discuss the matter with any company officials.
> 
> 
> 
> 4.	Obama also had more than $50,000 in shares of *Skyterra, a company that had just received federal permission to create a nationwide wireless network that combined satellite and land-based communications systems.  Among the companys top investors were donors who raised more than $150,000 for Obamas* political committees, the New York Times reported Wednesday.
> 
> a. 'Skyterra' doesnt ring a bell? Well, how about under its new name: LightSquared?  Reston-based satellite company SkyTerra Communications Inc.  re-emerged July 20 as LightSquared,
> SkyTerra, now LightSquared, enters the national 4G race - Washington Business Journal
> 
> b. 	The liberal Daily Beast reports on a broadband project backed by* a frequent Obama White House visitor and donor *that has Pentagon officials concerned over potential military GPS interference. The Obama FCC took the lead in intervening on the donor, billionaire hedge fund manager Philip Falcones, behalf and granting his company called LightSquared one of those coveted *Obama waivers from existing law. *Then Obama officials reportedly pressured a general to alter his testimony about the companys impact on military satellite transmissions. Michelle Malkin | » LightSquared: The next Obama pay-for-play morass?
> 
> 
> 
> 5.	*Obama said he didnt invest in a qualified blind trust* because it wouldnt enable him to limit which companies he invested in, such as those in the tobacco industry and other areas that he did not want to support. USATODAY.com - Obama faces questions on his investments
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just another Chicago thug-thief.
> 
> Wipe that egg off your face.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PC strikes again...trying to derail her own thread
> 
> Is there some reason you believe oil companies are not corrupting our political process?
> 
> Has your head been in the sand about what has happened in the last 100 years with Big Oil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ".......trying to derail her own thread."
> 
> 
> Get over it.
> 
> Just admit I rubbed your face in it, and you have no way to control what I post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I do love making you squirm.
Click to expand...


Lets see how you try to derail your own thread

You start a thread on electic cars and divert it to Solar Energy and "Chicago Thugs"

You off your meds today?


----------



## editec

> Electric Cars Great....Indoors
> Oh, nooooo!
> 
> Not more bad news for our Warmist pals!



Environmentalists understand that Electric CARS are in no way a solution to global weirding.

Of course none of us expect YOU to know what environmentalists understand, PC.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> PC strikes again...trying to derail her own thread
> 
> Is there some reason you believe oil companies are not corrupting our political process?
> 
> Has your head been in the sand about what has happened in the last 100 years with Big Oil?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ".......trying to derail her own thread."
> 
> 
> Get over it.
> 
> Just admit I rubbed your face in it, and you have no way to control what I post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I do love making you squirm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Lets see how you try to derail your own thread
> 
> You start a thread on electic cars and divert it to Solar Energy and "Chicago Thugs"
> 
> You off your meds today?
Click to expand...






Great!


Another opportunity to put you in your place!


You posted this: :"....a new energy source looking for a use."



And I definitively showed that Liberals were hardly aiming programs at " a new energy source looking for a use..."


....but were using it as a corrupt way to steal taxpayer funds to give to their donors.



How ya' like that, boyyyyeeeee?



C'mon....you set 'em up....

...I'll knock 'em down.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> ".......trying to derail her own thread."
> 
> 
> Get over it.
> 
> Just admit I rubbed your face in it, and you have no way to control what I post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I do love making you squirm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see how you try to derail your own thread
> 
> You start a thread on electic cars and divert it to Solar Energy and "Chicago Thugs"
> 
> You off your meds today?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great!
> 
> 
> Another opportunity to put you in your place!
> 
> 
> You posted this: :"....a new energy source looking for a use."
> 
> 
> 
> And I definitively showed that Liberals were hardly aiming programs at " a new energy source looking for a use..."
> 
> 
> ....but were using it as a corrupt way to steal taxpayer funds to give to their donors.
> 
> 
> 
> How ya' like that, boyyyyeeeee?
> 
> 
> 
> C'mon....you set 'em up....
> 
> ...I'll knock 'em down.
Click to expand...


Maybe this will help you. It is worth a try


----------



## PoliticalChic

editec said:


> Electric Cars Great....Indoors
> Oh, nooooo!
> 
> Not more bad news for our Warmist pals!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Environmentalists understand that Electric CARS are in no way a solution to global weirding.
> 
> Of course none of us expect YOU to know what environmentalists understand, PC.
Click to expand...





Time for your tutorial.

1. 'Environmentalism' is simply one more iteration of Marxism.....a way to dictate regulations based on make-believe crises.


a. When the Soviet Union fell, many fellow travelers migrated to the environmental movement. So much so, that the movement is often referred to as the Watermelon Movement: green on the outside, red on the inside.


b. Delingpole does an excellent job of cutting through he jargon and presenting the essentials. But where the book really shines is exposing the politics behind this manufactured crisis. From a review of Watermelons: The Green Movement's True Colors


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lets see how you try to derail your own thread
> 
> You start a thread on electic cars and divert it to Solar Energy and "Chicago Thugs"
> 
> You off your meds today?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great!
> 
> 
> Another opportunity to put you in your place!
> 
> 
> You posted this: :"....a new energy source looking for a use."
> 
> 
> 
> And I definitively showed that Liberals were hardly aiming programs at " a new energy source looking for a use..."
> 
> 
> ....but were using it as a corrupt way to steal taxpayer funds to give to their donors.
> 
> 
> 
> How ya' like that, boyyyyeeeee?
> 
> 
> 
> C'mon....you set 'em up....
> 
> ...I'll knock 'em down.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe this will help you. It is worth a try
Click to expand...






A sign that you have no way to compete.


Take your defeat with grace.


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Great!
> 
> 
> Another opportunity to put you in your place!
> 
> 
> You posted this: :"....a new energy source looking for a use."
> 
> 
> 
> And I definitively showed that Liberals were hardly aiming programs at " a new energy source looking for a use..."
> 
> 
> ....but were using it as a corrupt way to steal taxpayer funds to give to their donors.
> 
> 
> 
> How ya' like that, boyyyyeeeee?
> 
> 
> 
> C'mon....you set 'em up....
> 
> ...I'll knock 'em down.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe this will help you. It is worth a try
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A sign that you have no way to compete.
> 
> 
> Take your defeat with grace.
Click to expand...


It seems you hae a difficult time staying focused. Did you squirm a lot as a child?


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe this will help you. It is worth a try
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A sign that you have no way to compete.
> 
> 
> Take your defeat with grace.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems you hae a difficult time staying focused. Did you squirm a lot as a child?
Click to expand...





I skewered you again....


----------



## westwall

RGR said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yikes...someone should have told me my wonderful commuting experience was supposed to be something else, based on their vast experience of never having owned one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you arguing with me about the efficacy of electric cars, or making excuses for your own gullibility?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have no argument about efficiency, but those who do not use them apparently don't realize how that has nothing to do with their use in modern America suburbia. And I certainly didn't buy mine based on gullibility but the ABILITY to do something the average american commuter CAN'T...which is avoid the corner extortion stores for months at a time.
> 
> And of course if I don't buy liquid fuels, I can spend that money on other stuff. Feel free to spend your money on liquid fuels just to move your body around, but that strikes me as where the gullibility lies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> politicalchic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Take up the argument with the scientists and engineers at the AAA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why? I don't use liquid fuels....which is the point of the exercise. What are they going to tell me that i don't already know? Are they going to insist I use more liquid fuels? Are they going to insist that I CAN'T do EXACTLY what I have been  doing for years now? Do they live in a different dimension where their liquid fuels cost is less than the cost of electrical fuels for my car?
> 
> Why exactly would I want to argue with them when my electric is doing exactly what was advertised? And costs less? And I don't have to buy liquid fuels?
> 
> You don't like electrics? Don't buy them. But those of us using them and those cars meeting our expectations, hell, we don't need to talk to engineers anywhere. The things just work. Just as they are supposed to.
> 
> Perhaps your expectations need recalibrated?
Click to expand...






So long as your drive is under a 100 miles you should be fine.  I don't drive often, but when I do, my average drive distance is around 380 miles.  No electric out there will allow me to drive that distance in a single day.  I can drive down to Menlo park, do my thing and drive back home, 19,000 feet in elevation climb and 220 miles one way (440 round trip obviously) all on a single tank of gas, then I can refuel, and drive down to Reno for a nice dinner.  An electric would not be ready till the next day.

EV's are great for short range commuting but they are nowhere near as versatile as an ICE vehicle.


----------



## rightwinger

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Solyndra Scandal
> Key coverage of the investigation into Solyndra, the Silicon Valley startup that collapsed, leaving taxpayers liable for $535 million in federal guarantees ."
> Solyndra Scandal | Full Coverage of Failed Solar Startup - The Washington Post
> 
> 
> Why do Leftists continue to throw taxpayer funds into the bottomless pit of failure....
> 
> ...unless it is simply a way to reward their donors....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup
> 
> And a hundred years ago oil went through those same growing pains. It was a new energy source looking for a use.
> But the US Government invested billions in transportation infrastructure that made a car more practical than a horse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it didn't.  Prior to petroleum whale oil, and coal oil were the predominant sources of indoor lighting fuel.  Both had enormous problems, not the least of which was the three foot deep cloud of smoke in your home when you were using your lights (why do you think old houses had twelve foot ceilings) and of course the grotesque number of whales being killed for their oil.
> 
> Kerosene came along and it was cheaper, cleaner (by far), and easier to use.  And, just so you know, petroleum products have been in use for over 2000 years.
Click to expand...


Big Oil did not become Big Oil because of indoor lighting.......it was the internal combustion engine


----------



## westwall

rightwinger said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup
> 
> And a hundred years ago oil went through those same growing pains. It was a new energy source looking for a use.
> But the US Government invested billions in transportation infrastructure that made a car more practical than a horse
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, it didn't.  Prior to petroleum whale oil, and coal oil were the predominant sources of indoor lighting fuel.  Both had enormous problems, not the least of which was the three foot deep cloud of smoke in your home when you were using your lights (why do you think old houses had twelve foot ceilings) and of course the grotesque number of whales being killed for their oil.
> 
> Kerosene came along and it was cheaper, cleaner (by far), and easier to use.  And, just so you know, petroleum products have been in use for over 2000 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Big Oil did not become Big Oil because of indoor lighting.......it was the internal combustion engine
Click to expand...








Of course it was.  The ICE is probably the most significant technological advance that mankind has ever enjoyed.  It has allowed more people to travel faster, safer, and with less wear and tear on the body than any other method.  It allows us to feed billions of people, move product from point A to point B faster and more efficiently than ever before and finally they have given poor people the most valuable possession they own......time.

Time to do leisurely things like read, watch TV, play with the kids, or just simply relax, once only the purview of the wealthy.


----------



## emilynghiem

Not to fear, PoliChic
A former GM manager started his own company
(featuring local parts, labor, manufacturing)
Elio Motors: Ultra High Mileage Vehicle

based on a car he designed with 3 wheels
that gets 84 MPG and costs 6800 (where owners
can pay off the car in place of paying more for more fillups)



PoliticalChic said:


> Oh, nooooo!
> 
> Not more bad news for our Warmist pals!
> 
> Yup.....AAA tested electric cars and found they perform poorly in cold weather......
> 
> ....and in hot weather......
> So.....as long as the temperature is 75 degrees.....you're fine.
> 
> Only driving indoors is the answer......
> 
> Or......hope for global warming.



or communicating, teleconferencing, and even doing group therapy by internet.
And not having to leave your house at all.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> Electric cars are an extremely expensive luxury, nothing more.



When they cost about the same (or in many cases LESS) than the average price for a new car in Americathen nothey are no more a luxury than a new ICE powered car. Nothing more.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> If even half the people in one city owned an electric car it would create a shortage of electricity.



ohand no one is going to want to sell more electricity to make more money so they won't ever want to build more power generation infrastructure? Please.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> Yet imagine if you got the contract to provide all those charging stations, it would be billions of dollars.



So those of us who own these machines charge them at home. In my case, without a charging station. Where do people get this stuff? 



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> Further, each car would literally need two charging stations, with another one at work, so someone will have to build all those charging stations wherever people work, billions of dollars.



The ones I use at work are already built. And are attached to acres of solar panels as well, so they have built in generation capacity. And that fuel is free. Where do you live that modern amenities aren't available to you, in terms of a garage to charge your car in, or work that doesn't provide charging opportunities as well?



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> So what is the source for this new need for electricity? I guess we shut down all Industry, live off the Baby Boomer's wealth by being a medical service economy, and we then can just power electric cars and fantasy.



At the office, they use acres of solar panels. And no one had to shut down any industry to make it happen. Where do people get these silly ideas? I waited like a YEAR after the panels went in before they installed the charging stations and began handing out the fuel, people pretending this ongoing transition requires these crazy choices is justsilly.


----------



## RGR

westwall said:


> Perhaps your expectations need recalibrated?
> 
> 
> 
> So long as your drive is under a 100 miles you should be fine.  I don't drive often, but when I do, my average drive distance is around 380 miles.  No electric out there will allow me to drive that distance in a single day.
Click to expand...


You sound like someone who would not fall into the 75% of Americans who commute less than 40 miles a day then. So electric certainly wouldn't be what fits your needs. 

Fortunately, you are in a small minority, and all those other folks who don't drive as far could certainly take advantage of electrics just like I do. Admittedly, an EV may not work as a primary car for most, but as the around town car they work great. None of this "indoor only" nonsense for sure..but as usual, such things are being claimed by folks who have never owned one of these before.



			
				westwall said:
			
		

> EV's are great for short range commuting but they are nowhere near as versatile as an ICE vehicle.



Range isn't the main priority to those commuting 40 miles or less a day. And certainly, ICE vehicles are versatile. But my EV in terms of OpEx is far lower than the ICE powered machines, and certainly it is a stress reliever when I no longer have to stop in at the "support your local jihadist" store at the corner to pay their extortion money for something so mundane as personal transport.


----------



## HenryBHough

So an individual buys an all-electric car with a 40-mile (warm weather) range and commutes 30 miles to work.  Usually he/she/it will get there.  Probably almost always.  But how will said "person" get home?

Oh wait, the employer, being a greenie, will provide plug-ins for employees with electric buggies.  Free!

Next the union (being a greenie it would be a union shop, wouldn't it?) will demand that employees not using the free plug-ins get a cash payment in the interest of equality.

Then the IRS steps in when the cash-compensated employees report their income and lands with both feet on the ones with the free electricity because it's income.  The employer, unless he/she/it (just for PC compliance do I use that) has a damn good accountant the benefit was not assigned a cash value and reported as income.

All the freeloading employees get audited.  The employer gets audited.  Some of them get to pay fines though probably none get jail time unless they back-talk to the IRS goon squad.

Who wins?

Why the whistle-blowing employee who properly declared and paid tax on the "equality" cash payment!  A percentage of all that's collected from those environmentally friendly tax-dodging others.

Good for him!  Or Her!  Or It.


----------



## RGR

rightwinger said:


> Big Oil did not become Big Oil because of indoor lighting.......it was the internal combustion engine



Another oil ignorant. Standard Oil, the original big oil, acquiring properties and refineries throughout the Middle East of the late 19th century (OH,PA,WV), made kerosene for lighting. 

Standard Oil was broken up (1911) 3 years after Henry Ford built the first Model T, but before he cranked up the volume on them.  Burton didn't come up with the mass production process of gasoline until AFTER Standard Oil was broken up. In part to feed all those Model T's. The one and only Big Oil was already gone..come on peoplegoogle is your friend even if you never have taken a history course in life to understand these things.


----------



## RGR

HenryBHough said:


> So an individual buys an all-electric car with a 40-mile (warm weather) range and commutes 30 miles to work.  Usually he/she/it will get there.  Probably almost always.  But how will said "person" get home?



In my case, I would plug into the charging station. But let us say my employer doesn't have the free charging available, I would make it 10 miles towards the house and then my gas motor comes on. I find this very distressing, so I concentrate heavily on not letting this happen. 



			
				HenryBHough said:
			
		

> Oh wait, the employer, being a greenie, will provide plug-ins for employees with electric buggies.  Free!



Maybe yours won't. Mine does.

I haven't had any of the issues you mention about taxes, unions, or any of those other things. I also shop at Kohl's, in part because they provide charging stations as well. I like to reward those who hand out free fuel to their customers, it is a great fringe benefit, and I like to support forward thinking companies.


----------



## HenryBHough

RGR said:


> In my case, I would plug into the charging station. But let us say my employer doesn't have the free charging available, I would make it 10 miles towards the house and then my gas motor comes on. I find this very distressing, so I concentrate heavily on not letting this happen.



What part of "all-electic" escaped your attention?



RGR said:


> I haven't had any of the issues you mention about taxes, unions, or any of those other things. I also shop at Kohl's, in part because they provide charging stations as well. I like to reward those who hand out free fuel to their customers, it is a great fringe benefit, and I like to support forward thinking companies.



Patience on the tax issues.  Especially if Obama's minions are monitoring this forum.  They never met an opportunity to tax or penalize that they didn't simply adore.

As to Khol's, good for them!  A benefit to shoppers like that is not taxable.  Well, unless you consider the small percentage it adds to the cost of every item every shopper pays in the store.  Then it would be the right of every non-free electricity shopper to demand a discount or to leave stuff in the cart and shop elsewhere.  

Not that many will but it wouldn't take a whole lot to catch management's attention.


----------



## RGR

HenryBHough said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my case, I would plug into the charging station. But let us say my employer doesn't have the free charging available, I would make it 10 miles towards the house and then my gas motor comes on. I find this very distressing, so I concentrate heavily on not letting this happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What part of "all-electic" escaped your attention?
Click to expand...


My EV also carries a gasoline engine. If I had a pure EV, like a Leaf, I drive 30 miles to work, and then I drive 30 miles home, and charge it overnight, having more than enough range for a 60 mile roundtrip.

I however treat my Volt like an EV, and just HATE it when the engine comes on, considering it a failure of my proper usage of personal transport.



			
				HenryBHough said:
			
		

> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't had any of the issues you mention about taxes, unions, or any of those other things. I also shop at Kohl's, in part because they provide charging stations as well. I like to reward those who hand out free fuel to their customers, it is a great fringe benefit, and I like to support forward thinking companies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Patience on the tax issues.  Especially if Obama's minions are monitoring this forum.  They never met an opportunity to tax or penalize that they didn't simply adore.
Click to expand...


Oh, some are already trying to figure out what happens when less gasoline taxes are collected. First they encourage using less liquid fuels, and then they are forced to punish those who take their advice. Stupid politicians of any stripe tend to fall for this one.

State gas tax could be replaced by mileage tax



			
				HenryBHough said:
			
		

> As to Khol's, good for them!  A benefit to shoppers like that is not taxable.  Well, unless you consider the small percentage it adds to the cost of every item every shopper pays in the store.  Then it would be the right of every non-free electricity shopper to demand a discount or to leave stuff in the cart and shop elsewhere.
> 
> Not that many will but it wouldn't take a whole lot to catch management's attention.



Could be. But until then, as people, companies and employers continue to offer free fuel for their employee's/customers, sign me up!!


----------



## Politico

PoliticalChic said:


> Oh, nooooo!
> 
> Not more bad news for our Warmist pals!
> 
> 
> Yup.....AAA tested electric cars and found they perform poorly in cold weather......
> 
> ....and in hot weather.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The average electric vehicle battery range for each full charge in AAA's test was 105 miles at 75 degrees Fahrenheit.
> 
> 2.  That dropped 57% to 43 miles when the temperature was held steady at 20 degrees.
> 
> 3. Warm temperatures were not as stressful but still delivered a lower average of 69 miles per full charge at 95 degrees, AAA said.
> 
> 
> 
> 4. The AAA Automotive Research Center in Southern California found that the average range of an electric car dropped 57% in very cold weather  at 20 degrees Fahrenheit  and by 33% in extreme heat, a temperature of 95 degrees.
> 
> 5. .....we did not expect the degradation we saw," said Greg Brannon, AAA's director of automotive engineering.....a 2013 Nissan Leaf, a 2012 Mitsubishi iMIEV and a 2014 Ford Focus Electric Vehicle....
> 
> a. ...The three vehicles chosen were selected because they're the most widely available electric cars in the USA,...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. ....two of the vehicles, ... were equipped with dedicated management of the battery temperature.
> "We were expecting that difference would yield differences in the optimal range of the vehicles in extreme temperatures," he said. "It did not."
> 
> 
> 7. Among AAA's recommendations: storing the electric car in a garage; monitoring recharge times in colder weather; preheating or cooling the car while it's plugged in to reduce battery drain, and using electric seat heaters to keep warm."
> AAA: Range of electric cars cut in cold, hot weather
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....as long as the temperature is 75 degrees.....you're fine.
> 
> Only driving indoors is the answer......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or......hope for global warming.



Oh nooo!!! You think no one knew this before today...........


----------



## HenryBHough

RGR said:


> Could be. But until then, as people, companies and employers continue to offer free fuel for their employee's/customers, sign me up!!




Well of course!  Now remember, with that sort of thinking and a little ingenuity you can also get an Obamaphone, food stamps and even completely free food at your neighborhood food bank.  

Liberals - always on the take.  A birthright?


----------



## Old Rocks

westwall said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Critical thinkers don't.  What we root for is the most efficient, cheapest form of energy possible so that the poor can afford it.  No "renewable" energy source has been able to do that.  I USE solar and water power for some of my energy needs.  We were off the grid when I first built this house and that's where solar does best OFF GRID.
> 
> What I despise is giving huge quantities of public money to friends of politicians to pad their wallets while pushing an inferior product on the public.  I hate the fact that oil is used to run cars, I really do..  it can be used for so many better purposes.  But there has been no meaningful advancement in decades in alternate powered vehicles.
> 
> I love the new Tesla, I don't like the fact that poor peoples tax money is being used to produce a vehicle that only rich people can afford to buy however.  You're all about fairness yet you seem to think it's A-OK to take money from poor folks to benefit rich folks.
> 
> That just seems weird.
Click to expand...


Crap. Once again you are a damnable liar, Walleyes. Tesla has paid back that loan in full. And it was a very wise loan. The premier EV in the world being produced right here in the good ol' US of A.

Tesla Pays Off Its $465 Million 'Loser' Loan - Businessweek

Elon Musks Summer of Revenge Tour continues. His electric-car company, Tesla Motors, just cut the government a $451.8 million check, which means that Tesla has paid off its entire Department of Energy loan plus interest. Following this payment, Tesla (TSLA) will be the only American car company to have fully repaid the government, the company boasted (emphasis Teslas).

Of all his recent moves, this one must be especially sweet for Musk. Critics have long taken swipes at Tesla and its all-electric hippieness for relying on a federal handout. The most public of such barbs arrived from Mitt Romney during the presidential debates, when he described Tesla as a loser alongside Solyndra and Fisker Automotive. Even back then, it seemed a bit silly to lump Teslaa company employing thousands of people at an American car factoryin with that group of green lollygaggers. And now that Tesla has paid its way off the government dole, Romney may have sealed his fate as that rare capitalist-cum-politician rooting against a successful American car company. (Although Sarah Palin has recently threatened to keep him company.)

The loan repayment follows a number of recent announcements from Musk, including Teslas first-ever profit, a higher-than-expected sales forecast, a $1 billion fund raising round, and its Model S sedan earning the highest auto test ratings ever from Consumer Reports. The companys share price has soared over the past year, from $25.52 to an $87.24 close on Wednesday. The massive runup in Teslas shares is partly explained by an epic short squeeze, which is the other part of Musks Summer of Revenge


----------



## Old Rocks

HenryBHough said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Could be. But until then, as people, companies and employers continue to offer free fuel for their employee's/customers, sign me up!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well of course!  Now remember, with that sort of thinking and a little ingenuity you can also get an Obamaphone, food stamps and even completely free food at your neighborhood food bank.
> 
> Liberals - always on the take.  A birthright?
Click to expand...


Dumb fuck, how about reality? Here it is;

The Obama Phone?

The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices "Obama Phones," as the e-mail author does. This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.


----------



## HenryBHough

Face it, foul mouth.

There is no such thing as "ACA" - there is only Obamacare.

The free phones are Obamaphones.  I don't care  who started the seeds; it's who spread the fertilizer and watered them with money stolen from honest taxpayers.

The tax on every grandmother and grandfather's pacemaker is Obamatax.

You libs are takers.

Once you acknowledge those realities there is_ some_ hope that a few of you might correct that personal character flaw but chances diminish with each such of the government teat.

Suck on!


----------



## Old Rocks

When I was a boy, 70,000 miles on an auto engine before a rebuild was needed was a good figure. Today, 200,000 + is the norm, some going well beyond that with careful maintenance. Do you loons really think that by 2014, the range on the batteries of even the cheap EV's will only be 50 to 70 miles? I think that the range will likely be closer to 300 to 400 miles. And that the vehicles will be less costly than todays ICE vehicles.

As for taxes for the roads, well, we will either have to take that directly out of general funds, or find a way of tracking the individual cars mileage. I would prefer the general fund, because the other way has the government tracking an individuals use of his vehicle.


----------



## Old Rocks

HenryBHough said:


> Face it, foul mouth.
> 
> There is no such thing as "ACA" - there is only Obamacare.
> 
> The free phones are Obamaphones.  I don't care  who started the seeds; it's who spread the fertilizer and watered them with money stolen from honest taxpayers.
> 
> The tax on every grandmother and grandfather's pacemaker is Obamatax.
> 
> You libs are takers.
> 
> Once you acknowledge those realities there is_ some_ hope that a few of you might correct that personal character flaw but chances diminish with each such of the government teat.
> 
> Suck on!



LOL. So that is why we in the blue states have to support you fellows in the red states. Why is it that the red states also rank last in education as well as income? Could it be that "Conservatives" like you are a bunch of dumb asses? Get out of your single wide, clear the beer cans off of the path, and find a job. This ol' Lib is tired of supporting your lazy ass.


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Critical thinkers don't.  What we root for is the most efficient, cheapest form of energy possible so that the poor can afford it.  No "renewable" energy source has been able to do that.  I USE solar and water power for some of my energy needs.  We were off the grid when I first built this house and that's where solar does best OFF GRID.
> 
> What I despise is giving huge quantities of public money to friends of politicians to pad their wallets while pushing an inferior product on the public.  I hate the fact that oil is used to run cars, I really do..  it can be used for so many better purposes.  But there has been no meaningful advancement in decades in alternate powered vehicles.
> 
> I love the new Tesla, I don't like the fact that poor peoples tax money is being used to produce a vehicle that only rich people can afford to buy however.  You're all about fairness yet you seem to think it's A-OK to take money from poor folks to benefit rich folks.
> 
> That just seems weird.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Crap. Once again you are a damnable liar, Walleyes. Tesla has paid back that loan in full. And it was a very wise loan. The premier EV in the world being produced right here in the good ol' US of A.
> 
> Tesla Pays Off Its $465 Million 'Loser' Loan - Businessweek
> 
> Elon Musks Summer of Revenge Tour continues. His electric-car company, Tesla Motors, just cut the government a $451.8 million check, which means that Tesla has paid off its entire Department of Energy loan plus interest. Following this payment, Tesla (TSLA) will be the only American car company to have fully repaid the government, the company boasted (emphasis Teslas).
> 
> Of all his recent moves, this one must be especially sweet for Musk. Critics have long taken swipes at Tesla and its all-electric hippieness for relying on a federal handout. The most public of such barbs arrived from Mitt Romney during the presidential debates, when he described Tesla as a loser alongside Solyndra and Fisker Automotive. Even back then, it seemed a bit silly to lump Teslaa company employing thousands of people at an American car factoryin with that group of green lollygaggers. And now that Tesla has paid its way off the government dole, Romney may have sealed his fate as that rare capitalist-cum-politician rooting against a successful American car company. (Although Sarah Palin has recently threatened to keep him company.)
> 
> The loan repayment follows a number of recent announcements from Musk, including Teslas first-ever profit, a higher-than-expected sales forecast, a $1 billion fund raising round, and its Model S sedan earning the highest auto test ratings ever from Consumer Reports. The companys share price has soared over the past year, from $25.52 to an $87.24 close on Wednesday. The massive runup in Teslas shares is partly explained by an epic short squeeze, which is the other part of Musks Summer of Revenge
Click to expand...







Bullshit, you contemptible liar.


*Did Tesla really pay back their loan? NOT ACTUALLY.. Taxpayers are STILL paying for it[/B



Did Tesla really pay back their loan? NOT ACTUALLY.. Taxpayers are STILL paying for it | SOMO News: Bipartisan Corruption Snark*


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> When I was a boy, 70,000 miles on an auto engine before a rebuild was needed was a good figure. Today, 200,000 + is the norm, some going well beyond that with careful maintenance. Do you loons really think that by 2014, the range on the batteries of even the cheap EV's will only be 50 to 70 miles? I think that the range will likely be closer to 300 to 400 miles. And that the vehicles will be less costly than todays ICE vehicles.
> 
> As for taxes for the roads, well, we will either have to take that directly out of general funds, or find a way of tracking the individual cars mileage. I would prefer the general fund, because the other way has the government tracking an individuals use of his vehicle.








You're full of crap as usual.  The engines of the 40's and 50's were good for at least 150,000 before they needed major work.  The 60's saw them last up to 250,000 with proper maintenance.

I had a slant 6 235 in a dodge pickup truck that lasted for 440,000 miles.  In fact the truck fell apart before the engine did.  It was my primary work truck and I had well over 200,000 miles on dirt roads and pure off road travel in that thing.

The only thing that I ever had to have major work on was the transmission and the dif.  And water pumps, I went through about 6 of those IIRC.  When I finally junked it, the number 2 cylinder was at about 130 pounds of compression, the rest were at 140 or slightly above.


----------



## flacaltenn

rightwinger said:


> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill



Because it's technology BEING FORCED to market... Sub-optimal engineering solutions. 
That's why every major Korean and many Japanese car companies are shifting R&D to fuel cell vehicles. No range limitations, no charging time issues, no extra demand on the electrical grid. No HUGE weight penalties, no HUGE toxic waste stream and on the positive side, a PERFECT opportunity to use those flaky renewables like wind and solar to make hydrogen as a stored fuel source. 

Some dam thing happened forcing the light bulb mandate prematurely.. Folks got squeezed into sub-optimal CFL solutions. A technology that didn't need development or investment if the STATISTS had waited another 3 or 4 years for LED bulbs..


----------



## PoliticalChic

rightwinger said:


> Drill baby drill
> 
> We don't need no lectric cars






"Bakken oil fields mark* billionth barrel of oil*
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) -- Oil drillers targeting the rich Bakken shale formation in western North Dakota and eastern Montana have produced 1 billion barrels of crude, data from the two states show.

Drillers first targeted the Bakken in Montana in 2000 and moved into North Dakota about five years later using advanced horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques to recover oil trapped in a thin layer of dense rock nearly two miles beneath the surface.

North Dakota has generated 852 million barrels of Bakken crude, and Montana has produced about 151 million barrels through the first quarter of 2014, data show.

The U.S. Geological Survey has called the Bakken the largest continuous oil accumulation it had ever assessed. The agency, which bases its data largely on information from oil company and state drilling records, said up to 7.4 billion barrels of oil could be recovered from the Bakken and the underlying Three Forks using current technology."
Bakken oil fields mark billionth barrel of oil


----------



## rightwinger

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> We don't need no lectric cars
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Bakken oil fields mark* billionth barrel of oil*
> BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) -- Oil drillers targeting the rich Bakken shale formation in western North Dakota and eastern Montana have produced 1 billion barrels of crude, data from the two states show.
> 
> Drillers first targeted the Bakken in Montana in 2000 and moved into North Dakota about five years later using advanced horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques to recover oil trapped in a thin layer of dense rock nearly two miles beneath the surface.
> 
> North Dakota has generated 852 million barrels of Bakken crude, and Montana has produced about 151 million barrels through the first quarter of 2014, data show.
> 
> The U.S. Geological Survey has called the Bakken the largest continuous oil accumulation it had ever assessed. The agency, which bases its data largely on information from oil company and state drilling records, said up to 7.4 billion barrels of oil could be recovered from the Bakken and the underlying Three Forks using current technology."
> Bakken oil fields mark billionth barrel of oil
Click to expand...


Drill'n oil gives Dick Cheney a hard on


----------



## Skull Pilot

rightwinger said:


> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill



Pointing out realistic problems is not the same a "rooting for failure".  I always asked how is performance of an electric car when running the heat or the AC but no one can answer that question not even a dealer.  We should mandate those performance stats on the sticker 

Shouldn't we?


----------



## PoliticalChic

Skull Pilot said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pointing out realistic problems is not the same a "rooting for failure".  I always asked how is performance of an electric car when running the heat or the AC but no one can answer that question not even a dealer.  We should mandate those performance stats on the sticker
> 
> Shouldn't we?
Click to expand...




Well....the AAA answered it.....

The OP pretty well sums it up.


----------



## Skull Pilot

PoliticalChic said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pointing out realistic problems is not the same a "rooting for failure".  I always asked how is performance of an electric car when running the heat or the AC but no one can answer that question not even a dealer.  We should mandate those performance stats on the sticker
> 
> Shouldn't we?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well....the AAA answered it.....
> 
> The OP pretty well sums it up.
Click to expand...


Yup and funny that the partisan hacks that say they love science and stats and  criticize members of the other party for being "anti-science" call using science and stats "rooting for failure"


----------



## Old Rocks

HenryBHough said:


> So an individual buys an all-electric car with a 40-mile (warm weather) range and commutes 30 miles to work.  Usually he/she/it will get there.  Probably almost always.  But how will said "person" get home?
> 
> Oh wait, the employer, being a greenie, will provide plug-ins for employees with electric buggies.  Free!
> 
> Next the union (being a greenie it would be a union shop, wouldn't it?) will demand that employees not using the free plug-ins get a cash payment in the interest of equality.
> 
> Then the IRS steps in when the cash-compensated employees report their income and lands with both feet on the ones with the free electricity because it's income.  The employer, unless he/she/it (just for PC compliance do I use that) has a damn good accountant the benefit was not assigned a cash value and reported as income.
> 
> All the freeloading employees get audited.  The employer gets audited.  Some of them get to pay fines though probably none get jail time unless they back-talk to the IRS goon squad.
> 
> Who wins?
> 
> Why the whistle-blowing employee who properly declared and paid tax on the "equality" cash payment!  A percentage of all that's collected from those environmentally friendly tax-dodging others.
> 
> Good for him!  Or Her!  Or It.



Damn. Do you never tire of showing off your ignorance? Most of the EV's get 60 to 80 miles per charge. The plugins get 13 to 40. And the premier EV, gets nearly 300 per charge, and is going to bring out another battery next year that will extend that to 400. 

Plus, when you have an EV or a plug in hybrid, the payback time on a solar installation is significantly shortened. But that is what the 'Conservatives' on this board hate. The very idea of the consumer being independent of the big corperations is an anthema to them. We should all pay our daily tribute to the one percent.


----------



## Old Rocks

Skull Pilot said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pointing out realistic problems is not the same a "rooting for failure".  I always asked how is performance of an electric car when running the heat or the AC but no one can answer that question not even a dealer.  We should mandate those performance stats on the sticker
> 
> Shouldn't we?
Click to expand...


Looks like you didn't ask the right people. The numbers are out there for the researching.

Nissan Leaf: Details on the Electric Car - Driver's Seat - WSJ

And unlike a gas-engine, highway speeds dont lead to better efficiency. The car uses virtually no energy from 0-20 mph, but starting around 20, energy is consumed on a steadily rising curve. Nissan has limited the speed to 90 mph, which will prevent people from draining the battery too quickly. Furthermore, the car charges itself by braking, so in heavy, stop-and-go driving, the car could end up with a higher charge than it had when it left the garage.

Last month, Nissan disclosed that the Leaf may get as little as 62 miles on a very cold day with the heat on, but also could get more than 130 in ideal conditions  a fairly wide variance. On the plus side, the electric car has several benefits over standard internal combustion engines. For one thing, because the battery packs are located in the center of the car and there is no heavy engine, it should take corners like a sports car. And speaking of sports car, the acceleration on the Leaf  or any electric car  is very responsive at any speed.

Nissan puts the car on sale in December and intends to sell 20,000 of the five-door hatchbacks in the U.S. in the first year and then vault up to 150,000 in sales in 2013. The company is retrofitting its plant in Smyrna, Tenn. to build the car


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> The U.S. Geological Survey has called the Bakken the largest continuous oil accumulation it had ever assessed. The agency, which bases its data largely on information from oil company and state drilling records, said up to 7.4 billion barrels of oil could be recovered from the Bakken and the underlying Three Forks using current technology."
> Bakken oil fields mark billionth barrel of oil



Do you have a point? Does this in any way negate the point that my Volt has been happily puttering around, OUTSIDE, to and fro, hither, thither and yon, and NOT using any Bakken sourced oil?

Not that there is anything wrong with Bakken sourced oil mind you, but at the end of the day we have lots of it (oil in general), and besides Bakken oil being more expensive than the more traditional oil sources, it isn't very special.


----------



## RGR

Skull Pilot said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pointing out realistic problems is not the same a "rooting for failure".  I always asked how is performance of an electric car when running the heat or the AC but no one can answer that question not even a dealer.  We should mandate those performance stats on the sticker
> 
> Shouldn't we?
Click to expand...


Probably. Being a fan of turning my Volt into an EV, I do my best to not run heat or A/C f I don't need them (lets face it, Colorado isn't usually all that cold or hot unless you live in the mountains themselves, and for a month at the height of summer if you are out on the prairie), and haven't tried a test where I run the heat full blast and then run the battery until it is dead. Or the A/C until the battery dies.

Turns out I bought the thing being a little worried about range anxiety, and I really should have gone full EV, I don't need the gas engine unless I really WANT the ICE on.


----------



## RGR

Old Rocks said:


> Nissan puts the car on sale in December and intends to sell 20,000 of the five-door hatchbacks in the U.S. in the first year and then vault up to 150,000 in sales in 2013. The company is retrofitting its plant in Smyrna, Tenn. to build the car



the things are all over the Denver suburbs. See 3 of them nearly every day when I run one of the kids to school, and when out walking I see my neighbor has one. Going to have to stop and ask him how he likes it, might be worth trading my Volt to finally go all EV, and completely stop visiting those extortion stores on the corner.


----------



## flacaltenn

RGR said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nissan puts the car on sale in December and intends to sell 20,000 of the five-door hatchbacks in the U.S. in the first year and then vault up to 150,000 in sales in 2013. The company is retrofitting its plant in Smyrna, Tenn. to build the car
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the things are all over the Denver suburbs. See 3 of them nearly every day when I run one of the kids to school, and when out walking I see my neighbor has one. Going to have to stop and ask him how he likes it, might be worth trading my Volt to finally go all EV, and completely stop visiting those extortion stores on the corner.
Click to expand...


Lives in Colorado, barely uses the heater..  Out of PRIDE and Self awareness. There's a snowdrift out there somewhere,  ready to test your little BatteryWagon's winter survival ratings..


----------



## HenryBHough

*Fortunately we have fools!*

I shall admit that, for some applications, today's electric vehicles make sense.

For others they do not.

But there ARE those for whom the make no economic sense yet they will buy them out of some arrogant belief that, by so doing, they can "Save The Planet".

God Bless them!

There is no question in my perception that one day electric vehicles will have developed to the point where they are economical.  Now that may take acceptance by the green-squad that nuclear power is safe and reliable. It might take development of means of electrical generation that may not even have yet been discovered. 

But that will come - in the fullness of time.

Were the world to abandon electric vehicles today manufacturers would quit working on improving them and, when power sources are available, there'd be a delay while vehicle technology caught up.

So let us love those fools who are buying EVs for inappropriate applications these days.  They are the "investors" who will pave the way for what may well come.

Hey, it's their money.  So long as they're not hurting anyone other than themselves or their own family economics, let's not just belittle them.  They do that well enough for themselves.


----------



## RGR

flacaltenn said:


> Lives in Colorado, barely uses the heater..  Out of PRIDE and Self awareness.



A better description would be gizmo-geekery, plus I am a natural quant and look at the number of miles I can squeeze out of a charge as a game. Did the same thing with the hybrids I owned prior.

Here is the thing though, it sits in the garage, garage never makes it below freezing, so the car has a natural warm starting advantage. Not having a garage is undoubtedly a real impediment to owning an EV.

And Denver might be cold on occasion, but it has this wonderful 300+ sunny day a year count that makes it feel warmer than otherwise. Does wonders for warming cars sitting outside as well.

Admittedly I might be a little extreme in my tolerance for real world temps,I'm the guy with the window down and my arm out it down to at least freezing.




			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> There's a snowdrift out there somewhere,  ready to test your little BatteryWagon's winter survival ratings..



I also own a Jeep Wrangler. Not for snow drifts so much as Jeep trailsafter all, it is still Colorado, and the ground clearance on the Volt leaves much to be desired off road.


----------



## flacaltenn

HenryBHough said:


> *Fortunately we have fools!*
> 
> I shall admit that, for some applications, today's electric vehicles make sense.
> 
> For others they do not.
> 
> But there ARE those for whom the make no economic sense yet they will buy them out of some arrogant belief that, by so doing, they can "Save The Planet".
> 
> God Bless them!
> 
> There is no question in my perception that one day electric vehicles will have developed to the point where they are economical.  Now that may take acceptance by the green-squad that nuclear power is safe and reliable. It might take development of means of electrical generation that may not even have yet been discovered.
> 
> But that will come - in the fullness of time.
> 
> Were the world to abandon electric vehicles today manufacturers would quit working on improving them and, when power sources are available, there'd be a delay while vehicle technology caught up.
> 
> So let us love those fools who are buying EVs for inappropriate applications these days.  They are the "investors" who will pave the way for what may well come.
> 
> Hey, it's their money.  So long as they're not hurting anyone other than themselves or their own family economics, let's not just belittle them.  They do that well enough for themselves.



Learned that lesson when I bought that $6K desktop computer with 10Meg hard drive.  Wasnt bragging about it 2 or 3 years later.  No longer an early adopter or investor, because all MY technology problems were pretty much solved years ago...


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Electric cars are an extremely expensive luxury, nothing more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When they cost about the same (or in many cases LESS) than the average price for a new car in Americathen nothey are no more a luxury than a new ICE powered car. Nothing more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If even half the people in one city owned an electric car it would create a shortage of electricity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ohand no one is going to want to sell more electricity to make more money so they won't ever want to build more power generation infrastructure? Please.
> 
> 
> 
> So those of us who own these machines charge them at home. In my case, without a charging station. Where do people get this stuff?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Further, each car would literally need two charging stations, with another one at work, so someone will have to build all those charging stations wherever people work, billions of dollars.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The ones I use at work are already built. And are attached to acres of solar panels as well, so they have built in generation capacity. And that fuel is free. Where do you live that modern amenities aren't available to you, in terms of a garage to charge your car in, or work that doesn't provide charging opportunities as well?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what is the source for this new need for electricity? I guess we shut down all Industry, live off the Baby Boomer's wealth by being a medical service economy, and we then can just power electric cars and fantasy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At the office, they use acres of solar panels. And no one had to shut down any industry to make it happen. Where do people get these silly ideas? I waited like a YEAR after the panels went in before they installed the charging stations and began handing out the fuel, people pretending this ongoing transition requires these crazy choices is justsilly.
Click to expand...




> RGR: When they cost about the same (or in many cases LESS) than the average price for a new car in Americathen nothey are no more a luxury than a new ICE powered car. Nothing more.



less? in many cases? cost? When the cost is not a factor, we are speaking of people buying cars, not trying to buy a car, we are speaking of people who already own one car, many own two, when you speak of people being able to simply add another car to the ones they have, or to trade a 5 year old car in on a new car, that is a luxury. If you buy a car today because of your ideology, while you have a fine running car, that is a luxury.



> RGR: ohand no one is going to want to sell more electricity to make more money so they won't ever want to build more power generation infrastructure? Please.



We have brownouts in California, there are restrictions on water, which is needed to produce energy, we have bills that are "tiered", meaning if you use a certain amount you pay more, so they are trying to get us to use less electricity. They are shutting down nuclear power, green/renewable energy is failing us. We have been building wind mills and turbines faster then Obama prints the money to pay for them, and you think if everyone bought Electric Cars the government is wise enough to plan for this and insure power plants can be built? Green/Renewable has failed, there is no energy. That is why prices rise, because its in short supply, high demand.

Think I can address the rest? ha ha, watch my next reply to you, I think you will be a bit ashamed at your lack of knowledge of which you speak.


----------



## HenryBHough

California!

A great state to be _*from*_........

Except if you are foolish enough to let anyone in your new state find out whence you came.


----------



## elektra

HenryBHough said:


> California!
> 
> A great state to be _*from*_........
> 
> Except if you are foolish enough to let anyone in your new state find out whence you came.



Why would that be, cause bigoted assholes may stereotype us? In your world I should be ridiculed?

You think you have better insight from, "whence", you came? 

At least you have profound wit and am able to insult people at a whim, bravo, well done sir!


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> The ones I use at work are already built. And are attached to acres of solar panels as well, so they have built in generation capacity. And that fuel is free. Where do you live that modern amenities aren't available to you, in terms of a garage to charge your car in, or work that doesn't provide charging opportunities as well?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what is the source for this new need for electricity? I guess we shut down all Industry, live off the Baby Boomer's wealth by being a medical service economy, and we then can just power electric cars and fantasy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At the office, they use acres of solar panels. And no one had to shut down any industry to make it happen. Where do people get these silly ideas? I waited like a YEAR after the panels went in before they installed the charging stations and began handing out the fuel, people pretending this ongoing transition requires these crazy choices is justsilly.
Click to expand...


Well, there it is, you as wrong as wrong gets, is this ignorance or are you a simple liar.

I can not wait to see 1% of the USA go electric car, imagine how great it will be then, I guess it will be the 1%er's selling all those charging stations to the morons.


----------



## emilynghiem

Dear Henry: Thanks for your honest summary of what's going on or wrong here.

Please note
the same or worse could be said of taxpayers forced to pay
TRILLIONS upon TRILLIONS in debt and spending
for Bush's war in Iraq that wasn't directly against
the parties responsible for 9/11

That policy was HIGHLY contested, over both terms and equally politicized as ACA,
and NOT paid for with full consent of taxpayers either!
Destroying as much or more civilian infrastructure in Iraq as was saved,
and costing TRILLIONS more than damages to our infrastructure by Obama.

Apparently, the left has to make the "same mistakes" they criticize on the right
before these lessons are learned.

We are ALL paying the price for our adversarial political system
that turns every attempt at correction into a battle in the media
to discredit valid objections by slamming one party or the other.

We paid more for Bush's war policies and unchecked military contracts.
We lose liberty and more fighting unconstitutional overreaches by federal govt.

And we lost an estimated 24 billion on the federal shutdown blamed on both parties
while the budget was short the same amount needed for Vets, about 24 billion.

So you tell me how you can complain about one side more than the other?

Isn't unchecked corporate welfare just as destructive and wasteful and corrupt
as lack of accountability for social welfare?

The social welfare abuses may be more harmful to citizens' ability to develop self-reliance,
but how can you argue that the corporate abuses of tax dollars isn't even costlier?

Think how much more taxpayers are owed for that!
And think how much of these programs would could support 
if we were reimbursed! Why not set up credits and microlending
against the debts from corporate abuses of govt and taxes,
and use that to fund a sustainable system of replacing welfare
with education and training where recipients PAY BACK their loans?

couldn't we do better than this?



HenryBHough said:


> Face it, foul mouth.
> 
> There is no such thing as "ACA" - there is only Obamacare.
> 
> The free phones are Obamaphones.  I don't care  who started the seeds; it's who spread the fertilizer and watered them with money stolen from honest taxpayers.
> 
> The tax on every grandmother and grandfather's pacemaker is Obamatax.
> 
> You libs are takers.
> 
> Once you acknowledge those realities there is_ some_ hope that a few of you might correct that personal character flaw but chances diminish with each such of the government teat.
> 
> Suck on!


----------



## HenryBHough

elektra said:


> Why would that be, cause bigoted assholes may stereotype us? In your world I should be ridiculed?




That would depend.

If you had departed Californicacia ultimately _applauded_ for your wisdom but only after an initial period of chiding for having taken so long to come to your senses.  So, yes, that might be considered a sort of ridicule.  Temporary, though, unless (being of exceptionally think skin) you chose not to take it gracefully and returned.  There is a rather unfortunate recidivism rate.....

Staying there?  That would bring ridicule.  Albeit only among those escapees who learned of your indifference to your own plight.  Others would be unaware.  Not something you might wish to publicize.


----------



## HenryBHough

*Below partially quoted to address only salient (from my point of view) issues:*



emilynghiem said:


> Please note the same or worse could be said of taxpayers forced to pay TRILLIONS upon TRILLIONS in debt and spendingfor Bush's war in Iraq that wasn't directly against the parties responsible for 9/11......
> 
> That policy was HIGHLY contested, over both terms and equally politicized as ACA and NOT paid for with full consent of taxpayers either! Destroying as much or more civilian infrastructure in Iraq as was saved, and costing TRILLIONS more than damages to our infrastructure by Obama.......
> 
> Apparently, the left has to make the "same mistakes" they criticize on the right before these lessons are learned.



Fair enough. The difference is that, though you may have failed to notice, Bush is no longer president, so to borrow the words of the great sage, Hillary Rodham Clinton:  "_What difference does it make_".  

Have a hard look at the alleged "TRILLIONS and TRILLIONS spent on a futile war and the multiple TRILLIONS squandered by the current regime.  Use fingers to count the one; toes to count the other.  One has been more wastrel than the other and that one is STILL spending!

The Kenyan fella who promised to fix all evils and soothe all wounds has been at it (in case ye might not have noticed) for some six (6) years and has only continued the same sort of policies you disliked when Bush was (past tense of "is") president.  So I guess you're almost right though I believe you're understating things.  It's not that it's going to take Your New Messiah longer to learn - it's that He will never learn.  

Perhaps a non-adversarial form of government might solve all that.  Would you prefer a Russian or German style of one-party system?  



emilynghiem said:


> So you tell me how you can complain about one side more than the other?



Quite simply because one side is in power just now.  Presidency and Senate.  Both failed. Were there some other party in power just now and if they had done the same madness then they, too, would be deserving of wrath.  But, y'see, they're not.  Not in power, that is.  Not much point in complaining about the other when they're not in office so, "What difference does it make".



emilynghiem said:


> Isn't unchecked corporate welfare just as destructive and wasteful and corrupt as lack of accountability for social welfare?
> 
> The social welfare abuses may be more harmful to citizens' ability to develop self-reliance,
> but how can you argue that the corporate abuses of tax dollars isn't even costlier?
> 
> Think how much more taxpayers are owed for that!
> And think how much of these programs would could support
> if we were reimbursed! Why not set up credits and microlending
> against the debts from corporate abuses of govt and taxes,
> and use that to fund a sustainable system of replacing welfare
> with education and training where recipients PAY BACK their loans?



Some good ideas there!  I could get behind several of them but I won't waste energy on any until I see you have obtained written permission from George Soros to allow.


----------



## elektra

HenryBHough said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would that be, cause bigoted assholes may stereotype us? In your world I should be ridiculed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would depend.
> 
> If you had departed Californicacia ultimately _applauded_ for your wisdom but only after an initial period of chiding for having taken so long to come to your senses.  So, yes, that might be considered a sort of ridicule.  Temporary, though, unless (being of exceptionally think skin) you chose not to take it gracefully and returned.  There is a rather unfortunate recidivism rate.....
> 
> Staying there?  That would bring ridicule.  Albeit only among those escapees who learned of your indifference to your own plight.  Others would be unaware.  Not something you might wish to publicize.
Click to expand...


I guess I should just desert my children that are established in California. Running from California is not a long term solution, the problems of California are keenly felt across the country. We began the slow expensive polluting march towards installing millions upon millions of Wind Turbines in this Country, the effect is seen in the price you pay for Gasoline, the price you pay for a pound of Hamburger, the cost of Almonds and Pistachios. The rise in price you pay for a Big Mac reflects directly the rise in price that Green/Renewable Energy costs.

California is the problem of the Nation. Is in not the Presidents first duty to protect the Citizens of the United States of America? The country has failed California, and the failing California is destroying the Country.

Where do I run? Who is not producing any Green Energy? Where do I go to be free to live, free from the constraints placed on my life by the development of Green Energy which steals the wealth of generations thus shackling me in chains. Chains of indebtedness leaving me zero money to be free, to move, to find life elsewhere. 

I did not take you comment with thin skin, maybe my reply was harsh, reading more into what you stated then you intended, but that fact is many do think the sentiment I believe I was responding to.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> RGR: When they cost about the same (or in many cases LESS) than the average price for a new car in Americathen nothey are no more a luxury than a new ICE powered car. Nothing more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> less? in many cases? cost? When the cost is not a factor, we are speaking of people buying cars, not trying to buy a car, we are speaking of people who already own one car, many own two, when you speak of people being able to simply add another car to the ones they have, or to trade a 5 year old car in on a new car, that is a luxury. If you buy a car today because of your ideology, while you have a fine running car, that is a luxury.
Click to expand...


Luxury if you live alone perhaps. Every street in my middle class neighborhood has 2, 3 or even 4 cars sitting beside it, for the wife to work, the kids, a spare, and certainly they are not Mercedes and BMW's but normal, run of the mill family sedans, pickup trucks, jeeps, minivans, etc etc.

A middle class American family, while quite rich by global standards, is still middle class in America, and they can certainly afford more than one car. So it is not a luxury, it is a purchasing decision, and like many purchasing decisions can be made in addition to, or in lieu of, others.

Feel free to be happy with a 7 person family and a single automobile. Some might find this modestly inconvenient, inconvenient enough for make room for a 5 year old Corolla to park next to the family mini-van. Or EV.



			
				Elektra said:
			
		

> RGR: ohand no one is going to want to sell more electricity to make more money so they won't ever want to build more power generation infrastructure? Please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We have brownouts in California, there are restrictions on water, which is needed to produce energy, we have bills that are "tiered", meaning if you use a certain amount you pay more, so they are trying to get us to use less electricity.
Click to expand...


And Zimbabwe took a country functioning reasonably well and turned it into a disaster because of terrible political decisions.

Don't blame your problems on anything other than the standard short sighted nonsense that Californians push out upon the world in the form of Hollywood and reality TV. Don't have enough electricity? Don't demand it come from windmills. Pay more for your electricity. Punish NIMBYS by hanging them in the streets. 

Or move to Texas.certainly they don't appear to be near as short sighted as Californians, but where we live is where we live. So you either deal with your short sighted leaders, or move elsewhere and deal with those conditions. In neither case do you get to blame the places doing it BETTER for your hardships on the Left Coast.



			
				Elektra said:
			
		

> They are shutting down nuclear power, green/renewable energy is failing us. We have been building wind mills and turbines faster then Obama prints the money to pay for them, and you think if everyone bought Electric Cars the government is wise enough to plan for this and insure power plants can be built? Green/Renewable has failed, there is no energy. That is why prices rise, because its in short supply, high demand.



Short supply that is MANDATED by your leaders is completely different than the geologic abundance of oil, natural gas, uranium and coal.

Vote better. Get your friends and neighbors to vote better. But it certainly isn't the rest of the countries fault that those in your state have decided to DO these things to you.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> California!
> 
> A great state to be _*from*_........
> 
> Except if you are foolish enough to let anyone in your new state find out whence you came.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would that be, cause bigoted assholes may stereotype us? In your world I should be ridiculed?
Click to expand...


No. You should be ridiculed for thinking the rest of the country is managed in as stupid a manner as California. Most aren't.

I recommend you move, if you think where you are is THAT bad. Otherwise, OBVIOUSLY, it isn't bad enough, therefore it is your CHOICE to subject yourself to that environment, which by extension means you can't bitch about it as though it is someone else's fault.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> I guess I should just desert my children that are established in California.



Why? Did they learn from you so poorly that you must stick around to help them manage their well established lives there? 

You CHOOSE to live in California, then you CHOOSE to subject yourself to whatever the rules of the state are, it doesn't matter WHY, only that YOU made the choice. So now live with the consequences, certainly it isn't OUR fault you decide to live there. 



			
				Elektra said:
			
		

> Running from California is not a long term solution, the problems of California are keenly felt across the country.



Really? I plug in my EV for free at Kohls. Same as at work. I pay about $0.06/kWh for my electricity. 13% of that came from windmills last year. Another 20% came from the panels on my garage roof. The rest of the time I use abundant and relatively cheap natural gas for heating this and that. So I don't even NOTICE some of the items you are whining about. Your employer doesn't provide free fuel for your car? Too bad for youvote differently next time.



			
				Elektra said:
			
		

> We began the slow expensive polluting march towards installing millions upon millions of Wind Turbines in this Country, the effect is seen in the price you pay for Gasoline, the price you pay for a pound of Hamburger, the cost of Almonds and Pistachios. The rise in price you pay for a Big Mac reflects directly the rise in price that Green/Renewable Energy costs.



The price of gasoline YOU pay is not what I pay. I recommend you vote better next time. Or move.



			
				Elektra said:
			
		

> California is the problem of the Nation. Is in not the Presidents first duty to protect the Citizens of the United States of America? The country has failed California, and the failing California is destroying the Country.



Tell it to the President YOUR state voted for. Maybe next time you'll understand that voting matters. Tell your friends and neighbors.



			
				Elektra said:
			
		

> Where do I run?



Somewhere else. Get started now, why are you wasting time posting?



			
				Elektra said:
			
		

> Who is not producing any Green Energy?



Those of us who pay $0.06/kWh are producing it, including on my garage roof. Nothing wrong with making our power from the sun as far as I can tell. 



			
				Elektra said:
			
		

> Where do I go to be free to live, free from the constraints placed on my life by the development of Green Energy which steals the wealth of generations thus shackling me in chains. Chains of indebtedness leaving me zero money to be free, to move, to find life elsewhere.



The beauty of a free country. Make up your own damn mind, those of us NOT in California know what the answer ISN'T..and have already made our choice. Make your own and just stop whining already.


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> California!
> 
> A great state to be _*from*_........
> 
> Except if you are foolish enough to let anyone in your new state find out whence you came.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why would that be, cause bigoted assholes may stereotype us? In your world I should be ridiculed?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. You should be ridiculed for thinking the rest of the country is managed in as stupid a manner as California. Most aren't.
> 
> I recommend you move, if you think where you are is THAT bad. Otherwise, OBVIOUSLY, it isn't bad enough, therefore it is your CHOICE to subject yourself to that environment, which by extension means you can't bitch about it as though it is someone else's fault.
Click to expand...


Your representatives voted and funded all that is happening in California. It is the other states failures that resulted in illegal immigration. It's your repressive profiting. We are not alone. I difference and ignorance by all other states is the real probl em in California.


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I should just desert my children that are established in California.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? Did they learn from you so poorly that you must stick around to help them manage their well established lives there?
> 
> You CHOOSE to live in California, then you CHOOSE to subject yourself to whatever the rules of the state are, it doesn't matter WHY, only that YOU made the choice. So now live with the consequences, certainly it isn't OUR fault you decide to live there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Running from California is not a long term solution, the problems of California are keenly felt across the country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really? I plug in my EV for free at Kohls. Same as at work. I pay about $0.06/kWh for my electricity. 13% of that came from windmills last year. Another 20% came from the panels on my garage roof. The rest of the time I use abundant and relatively cheap natural gas for heating this and that. So I don't even NOTICE some of the items you are whining about. Your employer doesn't provide free fuel for your car? Too bad for you&#8230;vote differently next time.
> 
> 
> 
> The price of gasoline YOU pay is not what I pay. I recommend you vote better next time. Or move.
> 
> 
> 
> Tell it to the President YOUR state voted for. Maybe next time you'll understand that voting matters. Tell your friends and neighbors.
> 
> 
> 
> Somewhere else. Get started now, why are you wasting time posting?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who is not producing any Green Energy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Those of us who pay $0.06/kWh are producing it, including on my garage roof. Nothing wrong with making our power from the sun as far as I can tell.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where do I go to be free to live, free from the constraints placed on my life by the development of Green Energy which steals the wealth of generations thus shackling me in chains. Chains of indebtedness leaving me zero money to be free, to move, to find life elsewhere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The beauty of a free country. Make up your own damn mind, those of us NOT in California know what the answer ISN'T&#8230;..and have already made our choice. Make your own and just stop whining already.
Click to expand...


Solar on your roof is a luxury that is subsidized.  Of course you can not admit this, you must attempt to define luxury as anything but.


----------



## HenryBHough

Beyond a certain age actuarial tables make it plain that there is NO POINT in buying anything solar as one is unlikely to live long enough to recover costs and certainly not to profit.

Of course for those still in infancy (defined in Obama as "under 26") might expect a payback if they had a home of their own and if they had a job to pay the fraction of the installation that is not just one suck of the government teat away.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. You should be ridiculed for thinking the rest of the country is managed in as stupid a manner as California. Most aren't.
> 
> I recommend you move, if you think where you are is THAT bad. Otherwise, OBVIOUSLY, it isn't bad enough, therefore it is your CHOICE to subject yourself to that environment, which by extension means you can't bitch about it as though it is someone else's fault.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your representatives voted and funded all that is happening in California.
Click to expand...


Could be. Do you have recommendations on how I should vote, because what they voted for, for YOU, they didn't appear to vote for, for ME.

Certainly no brownouts as of late, a fair chunk of renewable energy, decent electricity rates, no discrimination against oil and gas production like they have in California, sounds like I voted for folks who treated my state pretty well, do you think your local representation got in the way somehow and screwed you Californians over? 



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> It is the other states failures that resulted in illegal immigration.



I recommend you vote for fine upstanding folks who will make illegal immigration illegal, and then actually ENFORCE the rules.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> It's your repressive profiting. We are not alone. I difference and ignorance by all other states is the real probl em in California.



Vote better next time. Or move to a state where the ethnic makeup is more to your liking.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> Solar on your roof is a luxury that is subsidized.



Depending on your socio-economic status, you might say the same thing about the car it fuels. So what? Don't like how tax dollars flow forth from Washington? Vote different next time. Certainly I won't disagree that Obama making sure that our children will be paupers is a bad thing, but then I made sure to vote for someone else. Didn't do me much good. But fortunately the locals around here don't kowtow to Washington the way others do. 

A good thing in my book.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> Of course you can not admit this, you must attempt to define luxury as anything but.



I can admit all sorts of things, but the panels came with the house. Maybe they were subsidized for the last guyto methey are no different than the hot water tank, they came with the joint, and I use them as designed. The car those panels fuel came along later. THAT might be considered a luxury because such machines usually require a garage, and some might make the argument that any single family home in America with a garage is a luxury as well. or two bathrooms, the second one is a luxury. Or a TV. Certainly a luxury. 

So wait until you are wearing animal skins in Idaho escaping from the ethnic complexity of California before casting stones at others using the term "luxury".


----------



## flacaltenn

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> Solar on your roof is a luxury that is subsidized.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Depending on your socio-economic status, you might say the same thing about the car it fuels. So what? Don't like how tax dollars flow forth from Washington? Vote different next time. Certainly I won't disagree that Obama making sure that our children will be paupers is a bad thing, but then I made sure to vote for someone else. Didn't do me much good. But fortunately the locals around here don't kowtow to Washington the way others do.
> 
> A good thing in my book.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you can not admit this, you must attempt to define luxury as anything but.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can admit all sorts of things, but the panels came with the house. Maybe they were subsidized for the last guy&#8230;to me&#8230;they are no different than the hot water tank, they came with the joint, and I use them as designed. The car those panels fuel came along later. THAT might be considered a luxury because such machines usually require a garage, and some might make the argument that any single family home in America with a garage is a luxury as well. or two bathrooms, the second one is a luxury. Or a TV. Certainly a luxury.
> 
> So wait until you are wearing animal skins in Idaho escaping from the ethnic complexity of California before casting stones at others using the term "luxury".
Click to expand...


Trust me.. Much more likely to run into folks wearing animal skins in California than Idaho. IF they are synthethic --- like the folks wearing them.. Anyways -- I think you are just a bit TOO pleased with your Green self.. You're not charging a car from PV panels on a garage each day.. You are in the energy biz most likely -- selling power back to the grid -- most likely.

Even a puny Leaf is a 25KWhr fill-up.. That's probably close to the entire daily usage of your home. The OFFICIAL charger for MOST EVehicles requires 220V 40 Amp service. AND -- even with THAT 9KW of charge potential -- that's about 6 or 7 hours.

Unless you got 10KW of panels on that garage -- and you charge during the sunshine -- you're just a big ass power mogul with a GUARANTEED subsidized contract to deliver energy to the grid anytime you want....


----------



## RGR

flacaltenn said:


> Trust me.. Much more likely to run into folks wearing animal skins in California than Idaho. IF they are synthethic --- like the folks wearing them.. Anyways -- I think you are just a bit TOO pleased with your Green self.. You're not charging a car from PV panels on a garage each day.. You are in the energy biz most likely -- selling power back to the grid -- most likely.



Sure. Unless the car is plugged in during the day, and then yes, I am charging the car from PV. Plus the office does the same sort of scheme, they don't have enough PV to run the entire complex, but they have enough to provide charging stations to folks. Not even only employees, anyone who parks at the charging station can use it.



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> Even a puny Leaf is a 25KWhr fill-up.. That's probably close to the entire daily usage of your home. The OFFICIAL charger for MOST EVehicles requires 220V 40 Amp service. AND -- even with THAT 9KW of charge potential -- that's about 6 or 7 hours.



I don't use 220V at the house. 220V is at the office however. I use what I can get, when I can get it, and don't do it for green street cred, but because I don't like going to the extortion stores.



			
				flacaltenn said:
			
		

> Unless you got 10KW of panels on that garage -- and you charge during the sunshine -- you're just a big ass power mogul with a GUARANTEED subsidized contract to deliver energy to the grid anytime you want....



I deliver power to the grid all the time. And they deliver power to me. Works out pretty good for both of us.


----------



## HenryBHough

Two new products are taking California by storm!

1.  Chinese made cheap imitation solar panels.  Screw 'em onto your roof and screw your neighbors into thinking you have made a HUGE investment to save the planet.

2.  Garage door decals.  They cover the entire garage door - available in 2,3 and 4 stall models.  They saw no point in a 1 stall configuration.  Each looks like an open garage door with multiple hybrid or all-electric cars (limited choice of brands but expanding soon).  That way you libs can park your SUVs and stretch limos inside while projecting your sensitivity to the world.


----------



## jon_berzerk

rightwinger said:


> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill



the electric car is not new tec


----------



## HenryBHough

jon_berzerk said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the electric car is not new tec
Click to expand...


Jack Benny used to talk about his "Electric" that Rochester used to drive for him.  

Anybody see anything racist about that radio series?


----------



## jon_berzerk

HenryBHough said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Conservatives root for the failure of any new technology that challenges the internal combustion engine?
> 
> Drill baby drill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the electric car is not new tec
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jack Benny used to talk about his "Electric" that Rochester used to drive for him.
> 
> Anybody see anything racist about that radio series?
Click to expand...


they certainly have been around since 1828

the first hybrid came in 1916


it is fiction to call it new tec


----------



## RGR

jon_berzerk said:


> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> the electric car is not new tec
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jack Benny used to talk about his "Electric" that Rochester used to drive for him.
> 
> Anybody see anything racist about that radio series?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> they certainly have been around since 1828
> 
> the first hybrid came in 1916
> 
> 
> it is fiction to call it new tec
Click to expand...


No different than what people say about hydraulic fracturing or horizontal drilling. Doesn't stop them from continuing to say it, doing otherwise would require they LEARN something.


----------



## PoliticalChic

RGR said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HenryBHough said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jack Benny used to talk about his "Electric" that Rochester used to drive for him.
> 
> Anybody see anything racist about that radio series?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they certainly have been around since 1828
> 
> the first hybrid came in 1916
> 
> 
> it is fiction to call it new tec
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No different than what people say about hydraulic fracturing or horizontal drilling. Doesn't stop them from continuing to say it, doing otherwise would require they LEARN something.
Click to expand...






How about you 'learning something.'


1. " The Obama  administration has not been able to link groundwater contamination to fracking. The Environmental Protection Agency has failed to link fracking to groundwater contamination in three separate studies and, earlier this year, the Energy Department also found that *fracking is safe* when done properly.

To my knowledge, I still have *not seen any evidence of fracking per se contaminating groundwater, *Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said in August.
Dozens of state regulators have also found no evidence of groundwater contamination from fracking operations."
Environmentalists call for national ban on fracking | The Daily Caller




2." PITTSBURGH A landmark federal study on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, shows *no evidence that chemicals from the natural gas drilling process moved up to contaminate drinking water aquifers *at a western Pennsylvania drilling site, the Department of Energy told The Associated Press.

After a year of monitoring, the researchers found that the chemical-laced fluids used to free gas trapped deep below the surface stayed thousands of feet below the shallower areas that supply drinking water, geologist Richard Hammack said." Study finds fracking chemicals didn't pollute water: AP - CBS News


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> How about you 'learning something.'
> 
> 
> 1. " The Obama  administration has not been able to link groundwater contamination to fracking. The Environmental Protection Agency has failed to link fracking to groundwater contamination in three separate studies and, earlier this year, the Energy Department also found that *fracking is safe* when done properly.



What is your point? Of course the Obama administration has not been able to link hydraulic fracturing to ground water contamination, it doesn't happen without well bore integrity failures or some other odd ball one off issue.

Duh. Go teach your *XXXXXXXXX* to suck eggs, and not an ex-completion engineer.


----------



## PoliticalChic

RGR said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> How about you 'learning something.'
> 
> 
> 1. " The Obama  administration has not been able to link groundwater contamination to fracking. The Environmental Protection Agency has failed to link fracking to groundwater contamination in three separate studies and, earlier this year, the Energy Department also found that *fracking is safe* when done properly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is your point? Of course the Obama administration has not been able to link hydraulic fracturing to ground water contamination, it doesn't happen without well bore integrity failures or some other odd ball one off issue.
> 
> Duh. Go teach your grandmother to suck eggs, and not an ex-completion engineer.
Click to expand...





So....no one has been able to find any problem.....

....but you know it's there.



Is today your first day out of the 'nervous hospital'?


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Duh. Go teach your grandmother to suck eggs, and not an ex-completion engineer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....no one has been able to find any problem.....
> 
> ....but you know it's there.
Click to expand...


Depends on what you mean. I can cause a freshwater aquifer invasion problem in a heartbeat if I do a bad primary cement job and then complete the well. I can find methane in freshwater aquifer wells and pretend it is a problem if the people with water wells are producing them from oil and gas producing horizons, as in one of the EPA reports.

But vertical migration through capstone and tombstone rock, miles in distance, when immediately after the stimulation itself the process requires the reversal of all the differential pressure ( thereby removing the drive mechanism necessary to do that vertical migration) means that the entire idea is primarily circle jerk.

So are you claiming to have fallen for the circle jerk, or upset only in the political morons who discuss and potentially know none of this but are just looking for an issue to whine about?



			
				Political Chic said:
			
		

> Is today your first day out of the 'nervous hospital'?



How about you try and understand the thing you are bitching about prior to pretending your amateur and near incomprehensible thoughts on the matter are relevant.


----------



## PoliticalChic

RGR said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Duh. Go teach your grandmother to suck eggs, and not an ex-completion engineer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So....no one has been able to find any problem.....
> 
> ....but you know it's there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depends on what you mean. I can cause a freshwater aquifer invasion problem in a heartbeat if I do a bad primary cement job and then complete the well. I can find methane in freshwater aquifer wells and pretend it is a problem if the people with water wells are producing them from oil and gas producing horizons, as in one of the EPA reports.
> 
> But vertical migration through capstone and tombstone rock, miles in distance, when immediately after the stimulation itself the process requires the reversal of all the differential pressure ( thereby removing the drive mechanism necessary to do that vertical migration) means that the entire idea is primarily circle jerk.
> 
> So are you claiming to have fallen for the circle jerk, or upset only in the political morons who discuss and potentially know none of this but are just looking for an issue to whine about?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Political Chic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is today your first day out of the 'nervous hospital'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How about you try and understand the thing you are bitching about prior to pretending your amateur and near incomprehensible thoughts on the matter are relevant.
Click to expand...





I'm not "bitching about" anything....

...merely pointing out that you are clueless.




Bet you all those who agree with you could hold a meeting in an area the size of a coffin.


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> I'm not "bitching about" anything....
> 
> ...merely pointing out that you are clueless.



The last time I did a frack job that ended up on the surface, I considered it a failure. Do you consider me clueless because I once did frack jobs for a living and know how, and how they go wrong? Or are you saying that your experience as a completion engineer never ended up with bad results? 





			
				PoliticalChic said:
			
		

> Bet you all those who agree with you could hold a meeting in an area the size of a coffin.



Well, I can certainly get the completion engineers to agree with me on the how and why completions work. Or don't. But we wouldn't need folks involved who know nothing on the topic involved. Like you.


----------



## PoliticalChic

RGR said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not "bitching about" anything....
> 
> ...merely pointing out that you are clueless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The last time I did a frack job that ended up on the surface, I considered it a failure. Do you consider me clueless because I once did frack jobs for a living and know how, and how they go wrong? Or are you saying that your experience as a completion engineer never ended up with bad results?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bet you all those who agree with you could hold a meeting in an area the size of a coffin.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, I can certainly get the completion engineers to agree with me on the how and why completions work. Or don't. But we wouldn't need folks involved who know nothing on the topic involved. Like you.
Click to expand...






"Do you consider me clueless because I once did frack jobs for a living and know how,..."


No.....

...you are provably clueless because of this:


1. " The Obama administration has not been able to link groundwater contamination to fracking. The Environmental Protection Agency has failed to link fracking to groundwater contamination in three separate studies and, earlier this year, the Energy Department also found that fracking is safe when done properly.

To my knowledge, I still have not seen any evidence of fracking per se contaminating groundwater, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said in August.
Dozens of state regulators have also found no evidence of groundwater contamination from fracking operations."
Environmentalists call for national ban on fracking | The Daily Caller




2." PITTSBURGH A landmark federal study on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, shows no evidence that chemicals from the natural gas drilling process moved up to contaminate drinking water aquifers at a western Pennsylvania drilling site, the Department of Energy told The Associated Press.

After a year of monitoring, the researchers found that the chemical-laced fluids used to free gas trapped deep below the surface stayed thousands of feet below the shallower areas that supply drinking water, geologist Richard Hammack said." Study finds fracking chemicals didn't pollute water: AP - CBS News


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> "Do you consider me clueless because I once did frack jobs for a living and know how,..."
> 
> 
> No.....
> 
> ...you are provably clueless because of this:



You make no sense. You quoted that before. Are you trying to make a point, and if so, what is it? Hydraulic fracturing is hydraulic fracturing. Some like it, some don't. Some understand what it is, some do not.

Some of us have done it for living. Most haven't.

So what is your point? Do you have specific knowledge on the parts of a 60+ year old oil field completion technique that you don't, or do like? Do you even know what it IS? Do you have any opinion on your own or is cutting and pasting the limit of your intellect on this topic?


----------



## PoliticalChic

RGR said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Do you consider me clueless because I once did frack jobs for a living and know how,..."
> 
> 
> No.....
> 
> ...you are provably clueless because of this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You make no sense. You quoted that before. Are you trying to make a point, and if so, what is it? Hydraulic fracturing is hydraulic fracturing. Some like it, some don't. Some understand what it is, some do not.
> 
> Some of us have done it for living. Most haven't.
> 
> So what is your point? Do you have specific knowledge on the parts of a 60+ year old oil field completion technique that you don't, or do like? Do you even know what it IS? Do you have any opinion on your own or is cutting and pasting the limit of your intellect on this topic?
Click to expand...







I believe I've made the point: studies indicate one thing, and you claim the opposite.


It seems clear that what you need is your sleeves lengthened by a couple of feet so they
can be tied in the back.


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> I believe I've made the point: studies indicate one thing, and you claim the opposite.



Perhaps you can explain what you THINK I have claimed? 

And how your cut and paste of some political claim relates to THAT?


----------



## PoliticalChic

RGR said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe I've made the point: studies indicate one thing, and you claim the opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you can explain what you THINK I have claimed?
> 
> And how your cut and paste of some political claim relates to THAT?
Click to expand...





We've gone around his maypole about enough.


----------



## RGR

PoliticalChic said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe I've made the point: studies indicate one thing, and you claim the opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you can explain what you THINK I have claimed?
> 
> And how your cut and paste of some political claim relates to THAT?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We've gone around his maypole about enough.
Click to expand...


One of us has perhaps. You don't even appear to know the difference between the words someone actually said, and some hysterical, internally referenced but unspoken conclusion you draw from those words. 

There is a difference between those things. Your inability to understand this explains why you think it is time to cut and run.


----------



## Mr. H.

This is cool...

https://autos.yahoo.com/news/2-000-horsepower-electric-dragster-sets-drag-record-160009835.html

2,000-Horsepower Electric Dragster Sets New Drag Record: Video


----------



## RGR

Mr. H. said:


> This is cool...
> 
> https://autos.yahoo.com/news/2-000-horsepower-electric-dragster-sets-drag-record-160009835.html
> 
> 2,000-Horsepower Electric Dragster Sets New Drag Record: Video



Yeahlike electric needs to be used indoors as well.where do some people GET this stuff!!

Zero to 60 in less than a secondwho would even have the basement to run this thing in!


----------



## Wyatt earp

PoliticalChic said:


> Oh, nooooo!
> 
> Not more bad news for our Warmist pals!
> 
> 
> Yup.....AAA tested electric cars and found they perform poorly in cold weather......
> 
> ....and in hot weather.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The average electric vehicle battery range for each full charge in AAA's test was 105 miles at 75 degrees Fahrenheit.
> 
> 2.  That dropped 57% to 43 miles when the temperature was held steady at 20 degrees.
> 
> 3. Warm temperatures were not as stressful but still delivered a lower average of 69 miles per full charge at 95 degrees, AAA said.
> 
> 
> 
> 4. The AAA Automotive Research Center in Southern California found that the average range of an electric car dropped 57% in very cold weather  at 20 degrees Fahrenheit  and by 33% in extreme heat, a temperature of 95 degrees.
> 
> 5. .....we did not expect the degradation we saw," said Greg Brannon, AAA's director of automotive engineering.....a 2013 Nissan Leaf, a 2012 Mitsubishi iMIEV and a 2014 Ford Focus Electric Vehicle....
> 
> a. ...The three vehicles chosen were selected because they're the most widely available electric cars in the USA,...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. ....two of the vehicles, ... were equipped with dedicated management of the battery temperature.
> "We were expecting that difference would yield differences in the optimal range of the vehicles in extreme temperatures," he said. "It did not."
> 
> 
> 7. Among AAA's recommendations: storing the electric car in a garage; monitoring recharge times in colder weather; preheating or cooling the car while it's plugged in to reduce battery drain, and using electric seat heaters to keep warm."
> AAA: Range of electric cars cut in cold, hot weather
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....as long as the temperature is 75 degrees.....you're fine.
> 
> Only driving indoors is the answer......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or......hope for global warming.


----------



## Old Rocks

bear513 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, nooooo!
> 
> Not more bad news for our Warmist pals!
> 
> 
> Yup.....AAA tested electric cars and found they perform poorly in cold weather......
> 
> ....and in hot weather.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The average electric vehicle battery range for each full charge in AAA's test was 105 miles at 75 degrees Fahrenheit.
> 
> 2.  That dropped 57% to 43 miles when the temperature was held steady at 20 degrees.
> 
> 3. Warm temperatures were not as stressful but still delivered a lower average of 69 miles per full charge at 95 degrees, AAA said.
> 
> 
> 
> 4. The AAA Automotive Research Center in Southern California found that the average range of an electric car dropped 57% in very cold weather  at 20 degrees Fahrenheit  and by 33% in extreme heat, a temperature of 95 degrees.
> 
> 5. .....we did not expect the degradation we saw," said Greg Brannon, AAA's director of automotive engineering.....a 2013 Nissan Leaf, a 2012 Mitsubishi iMIEV and a 2014 Ford Focus Electric Vehicle....
> 
> a. ...The three vehicles chosen were selected because they're the most widely available electric cars in the USA,...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. ....two of the vehicles, ... were equipped with dedicated management of the battery temperature.
> "We were expecting that difference would yield differences in the optimal range of the vehicles in extreme temperatures," he said. "It did not."
> 
> 
> 7. Among AAA's recommendations: storing the electric car in a garage; monitoring recharge times in colder weather; preheating or cooling the car while it's plugged in to reduce battery drain, and using electric seat heaters to keep warm."
> AAA: Range of electric cars cut in cold, hot weather
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....as long as the temperature is 75 degrees.....you're fine.
> 
> Only driving indoors is the answer......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or......hope for global warming.
Click to expand...

So, you are stupid enough to run this again. The Prius has a gasoline engine. So, if it needs a charge, there is something else wrong. Only are really stupid sucker would post a picture like that. Guess that describes you.


----------



## Old Rocks

Lightning motorcycle beats the best of the ICE's by a whopping 20 seconds at Pike Peak.


----------



## jon_berzerk

Old Rocks said:


> Lightning motorcycle beats the best of the ICE's by a whopping 20 seconds at Pike Peak.




thanks


----------



## anotherlife

Electric engines will always have a huge advantage in acceleration, so they are perfect for motorcycles.  The magnetic field produces immediate torque, thanks to the bio savard Laplace law of field to current interactions.  Combustion engines need to rev up first.  

The problem is ranging, so can't carry big loads too far, like a car.  This is because there is no way to pack as many lithium atoms in the same volume as covalent bonds in gasoline.  So the energy density of batteries will always be lower.


----------



## jon_berzerk

anotherlife said:


> Electric engines will always have a huge advantage in acceleration, so they are perfect for motorcycles.  The magnetic field produces immediate torque, thanks to the bio savard Laplace law of field to current interactions.  Combustion engines need to rev up first.
> 
> The problem is ranging, so can't carry big loads too far, like a car.  This is because there is no way to pack as many lithium atoms in the same volume as covalent bonds in gasoline.  So the energy density of batteries will always be lower.




from what i read you get about a 100 miles with this bike on a good day 

not really that great

cool bike though


----------



## anotherlife

jon_berzerk said:


> anotherlife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Electric engines will always have a huge advantage in acceleration, so they are perfect for motorcycles.  The magnetic field produces immediate torque, thanks to the bio savard Laplace law of field to current interactions.  Combustion engines need to rev up first.
> 
> The problem is ranging, so can't carry big loads too far, like a car.  This is because there is no way to pack as many lithium atoms in the same volume as covalent bonds in gasoline.  So the energy density of batteries will always be lower.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from what i read you get about a 100 miles with this bike on a good day
> 
> not really that great
> 
> cool bike though
Click to expand...


I am working with a physics student here, to discover how high energy tunneling can be used for transportation.  The idea is that using the same types of techniques as micro electronics uses like e.g. in the good old tunnel diode, we can scale up the energy levels, and use some naturally available global energy gradient to induce a tunneling current.  For example against geo thermal energy.  Such a technology would not require immobile installations like chargers or gas stations.


----------



## Old Rocks

jon_berzerk said:


> anotherlife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Electric engines will always have a huge advantage in acceleration, so they are perfect for motorcycles.  The magnetic field produces immediate torque, thanks to the bio savard Laplace law of field to current interactions.  Combustion engines need to rev up first.
> 
> The problem is ranging, so can't carry big loads too far, like a car.  This is because there is no way to pack as many lithium atoms in the same volume as covalent bonds in gasoline.  So the energy density of batteries will always be lower.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from what i read you get about a 100 miles with this bike on a good day
> 
> not really that great
> 
> cool bike though
Click to expand...

Yes, that is the case with the present batteries. However, there are several types of batteries being tested that can increase that range by a factor of 2 to 5 times.


----------



## Old Rocks

anotherlife said:


> Electric engines will always have a huge advantage in acceleration, so they are perfect for motorcycles.  The magnetic field produces immediate torque, thanks to the bio savard Laplace law of field to current interactions.  Combustion engines need to rev up first.
> 
> The problem is ranging, so can't carry big loads too far, like a car.  This is because there is no way to pack as many lithium atoms in the same volume as covalent bonds in gasoline.  So the energy density of batteries will always be lower.


Partly true. Have a look at what they are playing with in Lithium Air, and Zinc Air batteries. The technology is really just getting off the ground.


----------



## jon_berzerk

Old Rocks said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anotherlife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Electric engines will always have a huge advantage in acceleration, so they are perfect for motorcycles.  The magnetic field produces immediate torque, thanks to the bio savard Laplace law of field to current interactions.  Combustion engines need to rev up first.
> 
> The problem is ranging, so can't carry big loads too far, like a car.  This is because there is no way to pack as many lithium atoms in the same volume as covalent bonds in gasoline.  So the energy density of batteries will always be lower.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> from what i read you get about a 100 miles with this bike on a good day
> 
> not really that great
> 
> cool bike though
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, that is the case with the present batteries. However, there are several types of batteries being tested that can increase that range by a factor of 2 to 5 times.
Click to expand...



they have been saying that for a long time 

im not holding my breath for it to happen


----------



## RGR

jon_berzerk said:


> they have been saying that for a long time
> 
> im not holding my breath for it to happen



Current battery tech has been working okay for normal commuting. The wife didn't use any gasoline from July to December in her plug in hybrid, and it only has 20 miles of range. The old Volt was nice, but wasn't as good as making the transition to pure highway traveler. The parallel system in the Ford does it better.


----------



## jon_berzerk

RGR said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> they have been saying that for a long time
> 
> im not holding my breath for it to happen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Current battery tech has been working okay for normal commuting. The wife didn't use any gasoline from July to December in her plug in hybrid, and it only has 20 miles of range. The old Volt was nice, but wasn't as good as making the transition to pure highway traveler. The parallel system in the Ford does it better.
Click to expand...



true 

out here though one can easily put on a hundred miles or more in a day


----------



## Old Rocks

Normally, I don't drive more than 20 miles in a day. However, when I go looking at rocks, 500 miles a day is not unusual. So a plugin hybrid mini-van hybrid would be ideal for me, until they develop the high density batteries. However, since I always drive my vehicles until the wheels fall off, they have plenty of time to develop those by the time I wear out my present vehicles.


----------



## jon_berzerk

Old Rocks said:


> Normally, I don't drive more than 20 miles in a day. However, when I go looking at rocks, 500 miles a day is not unusual. So a plugin hybrid mini-van hybrid would be ideal for me, until they develop the high density batteries. However, since I always drive my vehicles until the wheels fall off, they have plenty of time to develop those by the time I wear out my present vehicles.




you bet

when they can get some good range on them 

i certainly will have one


----------



## anotherlife

Old Rocks said:


> anotherlife said:
> 
> 
> 
> Electric engines will always have a huge advantage in acceleration, so they are perfect for motorcycles.  The magnetic field produces immediate torque, thanks to the bio savard Laplace law of field to current interactions.  Combustion engines need to rev up first.
> 
> The problem is ranging, so can't carry big loads too far, like a car.  This is because there is no way to pack as many lithium atoms in the same volume as covalent bonds in gasoline.  So the energy density of batteries will always be lower.
> 
> 
> 
> Partly true. Have a look at what they are playing with in Lithium Air, and Zinc Air batteries. The technology is really just getting off the ground.
Click to expand...


Okay, what is the maximum density for lithium?  If it could be a hunk of metal, which it can't be because it oxidizes in a flash, the distance between the lithium atoms would be like ~ 10 Angstrom = 1 nanometer.  This is already a little longer than the distance between the carbon and hydrogen atoms in gasoline.  Then the energy held in the hydrocarbon bond is covalent, which is higher than the metallic lithium bonds.  Or do you mean making a salt structure for the lithium?  That would have ionic bonds, which lowers the density even more.  I don't know how this is possible.


----------



## Old Rocks

_© Argonne National Laboratory_
Lithium-air batteries excite alternative energy fans because they can store up to ten times the energy of today's lithium-ion batteries, an energy density similar to that of gasoline. But skeptics note that lithium peroxide by-products in the lithium-air reactions quickly contaminate the cathode, killing the battery, and the open design required to get enough air to the reaction point for efficiency poses problems.

Breakthough in lithium-air batteries

*I was being conservative with the comparison for Lithium-air to Lithium-ion. 

A Battery Made From Metal and Air Is Electrifying the Developing World

And zinc-air is already being used.*


----------



## RGR

jon_berzerk said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Current battery tech has been working okay for normal commuting. The wife didn't use any gasoline from July to December in her plug in hybrid, and it only has 20 miles of range. The old Volt was nice, but wasn't as good as making the transition to pure highway traveler. The parallel system in the Ford does it better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> true
> 
> out here though one can easily put on a hundred miles or more in a day
Click to expand...


EV mass produced battery tech in America, with 40 miles of range is good enough for about 75% of American commuting mileage. Of critical importance seeing as how we are the most wasteful crude consumers in the world, so replacing every one of our ICE powered machines is of greater value than just about any other citizen doing it. But with the Bolt able to hit 200+ miles on a charge, the problem from my perspective is mostly I don't like the idea of installing a 220V charger. I'm happy using normal household current, because the wife doesn't even need the 20 miles in range she has available most of the time.  Suburbia having its advantages of everything being relatively close together.


----------



## Moonglow

PoliticalChic said:


> Oh, nooooo!
> 
> Not more bad news for our Warmist pals!
> 
> 
> Yup.....AAA tested electric cars and found they perform poorly in cold weather......
> 
> ....and in hot weather.
> 
> 
> 
> 1. "The average electric vehicle battery range for each full charge in AAA's test was 105 miles at 75 degrees Fahrenheit.
> 
> 2.  That dropped 57% to 43 miles when the temperature was held steady at 20 degrees.
> 
> 3. Warm temperatures were not as stressful but still delivered a lower average of 69 miles per full charge at 95 degrees, AAA said.
> 
> 
> 
> 4. The AAA Automotive Research Center in Southern California found that the average range of an electric car dropped 57% in very cold weather  at 20 degrees Fahrenheit  and by 33% in extreme heat, a temperature of 95 degrees.
> 
> 5. .....we did not expect the degradation we saw," said Greg Brannon, AAA's director of automotive engineering.....a 2013 Nissan Leaf, a 2012 Mitsubishi iMIEV and a 2014 Ford Focus Electric Vehicle....
> 
> a. ...The three vehicles chosen were selected because they're the most widely available electric cars in the USA,...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6. ....two of the vehicles, ... were equipped with dedicated management of the battery temperature.
> "We were expecting that difference would yield differences in the optimal range of the vehicles in extreme temperatures," he said. "It did not."
> 
> 
> 7. Among AAA's recommendations: storing the electric car in a garage; monitoring recharge times in colder weather; preheating or cooling the car while it's plugged in to reduce battery drain, and using electric seat heaters to keep warm."
> AAA: Range of electric cars cut in cold, hot weather
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So.....as long as the temperature is 75 degrees.....you're fine.
> 
> Only driving indoors is the answer......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or......hope for global warming.


The golf course sure is buzy with them thar electric horseless carriages...


----------



## jon_berzerk

RGR said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Current battery tech has been working okay for normal commuting. The wife didn't use any gasoline from July to December in her plug in hybrid, and it only has 20 miles of range. The old Volt was nice, but wasn't as good as making the transition to pure highway traveler. The parallel system in the Ford does it better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> true
> 
> out here though one can easily put on a hundred miles or more in a day
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EV mass produced battery tech in America, with 40 miles of range is good enough for about 75% of American commuting mileage. Of critical importance seeing as how we are the most wasteful crude consumers in the world, so replacing every one of our ICE powered machines is of greater value than just about any other citizen doing it. But with the Bolt able to hit 200+ miles on a charge, the problem from my perspective is mostly I don't like the idea of installing a 220V charger. I'm happy using normal household current, because the wife doesn't even need the 20 miles in range she has available most of the time.  Suburbia having its advantages of everything being relatively close together.
Click to expand...



what i would really like to see is an electric vehicle that produces its own electricity no plugging in

100 percent electric not like a diesel electric train but rather perhaps a hydrogen fuel cell

honda is doing it think


----------



## Moonglow

RGR said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Current battery tech has been working okay for normal commuting. The wife didn't use any gasoline from July to December in her plug in hybrid, and it only has 20 miles of range. The old Volt was nice, but wasn't as good as making the transition to pure highway traveler. The parallel system in the Ford does it better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> true
> 
> out here though one can easily put on a hundred miles or more in a day
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EV mass produced battery tech in America, with 40 miles of range is good enough for about 75% of American commuting mileage. Of critical importance seeing as how we are the most wasteful crude consumers in the world, so replacing every one of our ICE powered machines is of greater value than just about any other citizen doing it. But with the Bolt able to hit 200+ miles on a charge, the problem from my perspective is mostly I don't like the idea of installing a 220V charger. I'm happy using normal household current, because the wife doesn't even need the 20 miles in range she has available most of the time.  Suburbia having its advantages of everything being relatively close together.
Click to expand...

You mean you don't enjoy you gasoline internal combustion engine that runs on 25% efficiency...??


----------



## Old Rocks

RGR said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Current battery tech has been working okay for normal commuting. The wife didn't use any gasoline from July to December in her plug in hybrid, and it only has 20 miles of range. The old Volt was nice, but wasn't as good as making the transition to pure highway traveler. The parallel system in the Ford does it better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> true
> 
> out here though one can easily put on a hundred miles or more in a day
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EV mass produced battery tech in America, with 40 miles of range is good enough for about 75% of American commuting mileage. Of critical importance seeing as how we are the most wasteful crude consumers in the world, so replacing every one of our ICE powered machines is of greater value than just about any other citizen doing it. But with the Bolt able to hit 200+ miles on a charge, the problem from my perspective is mostly I don't like the idea of installing a 220V charger. I'm happy using normal household current, because the wife doesn't even need the 20 miles in range she has available most of the time.  Suburbia having its advantages of everything being relatively close together.
Click to expand...

Well, if you have a dryer, you already have one 220 outlet, and if your stove is electric, two. No big deal to install another.


----------



## RGR

Moonglow said:


> The golf course sure is buzy with them thar electric horseless carriages...



Never had the wife's on a golf course. Had it to the top of Mt Washington though. Plus the advantage of free fuel to and from work? Haven't seen too many employers willing to provide that to employees!


----------



## RGR

Old Rocks said:


> Well, if you have a dryer, you already have one 220 outlet, and if your stove is electric, two. No big deal to install another.



I've got 220 service in the house, but to get the garage wired as well is about a $500 job, including the permitting. Just haven't had the urge, and don't really need it until the wife decides she wants to go full EV.


----------



## jon_berzerk

RGR said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, if you have a dryer, you already have one 220 outlet, and if your stove is electric, two. No big deal to install another.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've got 220 service in the house, but to get the garage wired as well is about a $500 job, including the permitting. Just haven't had the urge, and don't really need it until the wife decides she wants to go full EV.
Click to expand...



i have 220 on both garages and the shop

never know when you need the extra juice

my air compressor is 220

the welder too

plus the heating and a/c units


----------



## RGR

jon_berzerk said:


> i have 220 on both garages and the shop
> 
> never know when you need the extra juice
> 
> my air compressor is 220
> 
> the welder too
> 
> plus the heating and a/c units



My air compressor is 110, and the heating, A/C and laundry all sit on the opposite side of the house, so I need everything installed to get 220 to the garage. Like I said though, it will just be part of the cost involved if the wife demands a full on EV rather than the pluggable hybrid, which is working out quite well, a foot in both worlds as it were. EV for months at a time, and then off on a cross country trip guzzling the liquid fuels like everyone else.


----------



## Jarlaxle

Old Rocks said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Current battery tech has been working okay for normal commuting. The wife didn't use any gasoline from July to December in her plug in hybrid, and it only has 20 miles of range. The old Volt was nice, but wasn't as good as making the transition to pure highway traveler. The parallel system in the Ford does it better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> true
> 
> out here though one can easily put on a hundred miles or more in a day
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EV mass produced battery tech in America, with 40 miles of range is good enough for about 75% of American commuting mileage. Of critical importance seeing as how we are the most wasteful crude consumers in the world, so replacing every one of our ICE powered machines is of greater value than just about any other citizen doing it. But with the Bolt able to hit 200+ miles on a charge, the problem from my perspective is mostly I don't like the idea of installing a 220V charger. I'm happy using normal household current, because the wife doesn't even need the 20 miles in range she has available most of the time.  Suburbia having its advantages of everything being relatively close together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, if you have a dryer, you already have one 220 outlet, and if your stove is electric, two. No big deal to install another.
Click to expand...

If and only if...

There is room for it in the breaker box.
The main feed into the house will support it. (My old house would NOT.)
You have a convenient place to park and plug in the car.


----------



## Jarlaxle

RGR said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> The golf course sure is buzy with them thar electric horseless carriages...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never had the wife's on a golf course. Had it to the top of Mt Washington though. Plus the advantage of free fuel to and from work? Haven't seen too many employers willing to provide that to employees!
Click to expand...

Top of Mount Washington...that is supposed to be impressive?


----------



## jon_berzerk

Jarlaxle said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Current battery tech has been working okay for normal commuting. The wife didn't use any gasoline from July to December in her plug in hybrid, and it only has 20 miles of range. The old Volt was nice, but wasn't as good as making the transition to pure highway traveler. The parallel system in the Ford does it better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> true
> 
> out here though one can easily put on a hundred miles or more in a day
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> EV mass produced battery tech in America, with 40 miles of range is good enough for about 75% of American commuting mileage. Of critical importance seeing as how we are the most wasteful crude consumers in the world, so replacing every one of our ICE powered machines is of greater value than just about any other citizen doing it. But with the Bolt able to hit 200+ miles on a charge, the problem from my perspective is mostly I don't like the idea of installing a 220V charger. I'm happy using normal household current, because the wife doesn't even need the 20 miles in range she has available most of the time.  Suburbia having its advantages of everything being relatively close together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, if you have a dryer, you already have one 220 outlet, and if your stove is electric, two. No big deal to install another.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If and only if...
> 
> There is room for it in the breaker box.
> The main feed into the house will support it. (My old house would NOT.)
> You have a convenient place to park and plug in the car.
Click to expand...



depends on what amp rating your service has really


----------



## Skull Pilot

RGR said:


> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> i have 220 on both garages and the shop
> 
> never know when you need the extra juice
> 
> my air compressor is 220
> 
> the welder too
> 
> plus the heating and a/c units
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My air compressor is 110, and the heating, A/C and laundry all sit on the opposite side of the house, so I need everything installed to get 220 to the garage. Like I said though, it will just be part of the cost involved if the wife demands a full on EV rather than the pluggable hybrid, which is working out quite well, a foot in both worlds as it were. EV for months at a time, and then off on a cross country trip guzzling the liquid fuels like everyone else.
Click to expand...

do it yourself it's not that complicated


----------



## Skull Pilot

RGR said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> The golf course sure is buzy with them thar electric horseless carriages...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never had the wife's on a golf course. Had it to the top of Mt Washington though. Plus the advantage of free fuel to and from work? Haven't seen too many employers willing to provide that to employees!
Click to expand...

if you pay for the electricity then it's not free


----------



## jon_berzerk

s 


Skull Pilot said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> The golf course sure is buzy with them thar electric horseless carriages...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never had the wife's on a golf course. Had it to the top of Mt Washington though. Plus the advantage of free fuel to and from work? Haven't seen too many employers willing to provide that to employees!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if you pay for the electricity then it's not free
Click to expand...




Skull Pilot said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jon_berzerk said:
> 
> 
> 
> i have 220 on both garages and the shop
> 
> never know when you need the extra juice
> 
> my air compressor is 220
> 
> the welder too
> 
> plus the heating and a/c units
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My air compressor is 110, and the heating, A/C and laundry all sit on the opposite side of the house, so I need everything installed to get 220 to the garage. Like I said though, it will just be part of the cost involved if the wife demands a full on EV rather than the pluggable hybrid, which is working out quite well, a foot in both worlds as it were. EV for months at a time, and then off on a cross country trip guzzling the liquid fuels like everyone else.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> do it yourself it's not that complicated
Click to expand...

it isnt that difficult 

if i remember correctly the 220 kit for the volt was causing fires 

maybe they have corrected that by this point


----------



## mamooth

By the way, the newest model Leaf uses a heat pump to heat the cabin. That's about three times more efficient than resistance heating, so it mostly solves the problem of cabin heating being a big battery drain. Other EVs will follow, if they haven't already.


----------



## RGR

Skull Pilot said:


> if you pay for the electricity then it's not free



I don't pay for it. The wife doesn't pay for it. So for my family...it is free!! You don't need to be envious, go get an EV of one sort or another, find a progressively minded employer, and get free fuel like we do!


----------



## RGR

mamooth said:


> By the way, the newest model Leaf uses a heat pump to heat the cabin. That's about three times more efficient than resistance heating, so it mostly solves the problem of cabin heating being a big battery drain. Other EVs will follow, if they haven't already.



Late to the game! The wife's car is a 2014, and it has a "TO GO" time that allows you to tell the car to prepare the cabin temperature for a particular time, while it is still tethered to the house current. During the first fall day when he discovered this feature, she opened the car door and said.."its warm!". Turns out, you put in the time you want TO GO, tell the car the temperature, and the car pulls the current from the house. You can also do the same things other car owners can do, for example the wife can lock and unlock the car doors remotely...like from the other side of the country...and turn it on as well. Because it carries an onboard modem, you always know where it is, and can change all the settings on it remotely.


----------



## Skull Pilot

RGR said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> if you pay for the electricity then it's not free
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't pay for it. The wife doesn't pay for it. So for my family...it is free!! You don't need to be envious, go get an EV of one sort or another, find a progressively minded employer, and get free fuel like we do!
Click to expand...


No thanks and I don't work for anyone people work for me.
But hey you can sit in your little electric car in traffic to and from work everyday just don't fool yourself into thinking that people are envious of you


----------



## Jarlaxle

mamooth said:


> By the way, the newest model Leaf uses a heat pump to heat the cabin. That's about three times more efficient than resistance heating, so it mostly solves the problem of cabin heating being a big battery drain. Other EVs will follow, if they haven't already.


Unfortunately, heat pumps don't work well in extreme cold.


----------



## RGR

Skull Pilot said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't pay for it. The wife doesn't pay for it. So for my family...it is free!! You don't need to be envious, go get an EV of one sort or another, find a progressively minded employer, and get free fuel like we do!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No thanks and I don't work for anyone people work for me.
Click to expand...


So...are you a progressive employer that provides free fuel for your employees cars? 



			
				Skull Pilot said:
			
		

> But hey you can sit in your little electric car in traffic to and from work everyday just don't fool yourself into thinking that people are envious of you



Her car isn't little. Its a mid sized family sedan, a Ford Fusion. And she didn't get it for people to be envious of her, that characterization probably applies more to her Mustang convertible. She drives the Fusion because its comfortable, safe, quiet, she never puts gasoline in it, and she works for a progressive employer who really cares about the world we live in, and provides free fuel for their forward thinking employees.

How much free fuel do you pass out to your employees?


----------



## Skull Pilot

RGR said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't pay for it. The wife doesn't pay for it. So for my family...it is free!! You don't need to be envious, go get an EV of one sort or another, find a progressively minded employer, and get free fuel like we do!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No thanks and I don't work for anyone people work for me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So...are you a progressive employer that provides free fuel for your employees cars?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hey you can sit in your little electric car in traffic to and from work everyday just don't fool yourself into thinking that people are envious of you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Her car isn't little. Its a mid sized family sedan, a Ford Fusion. And she didn't get it for people to be envious of her, that characterization probably applies more to her Mustang convertible. She drives the Fusion because its comfortable, safe, quiet, she never puts gasoline in it, and she works for a progressive employer who really cares about the world we live in, and provides free fuel for their forward thinking employees.
> 
> How much free fuel do you pass out to your employees?
Click to expand...


None most of me employees lives less than 10 miles away and none are stupid enough to buy electric cars


----------



## Skull Pilot

Jarlaxle said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, the newest model Leaf uses a heat pump to heat the cabin. That's about three times more efficient than resistance heating, so it mostly solves the problem of cabin heating being a big battery drain. Other EVs will follow, if they haven't already.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, heat pumps don't work well in extreme cold.
Click to expand...

neither do electric cars


----------



## Old Rocks

I'm currently driving my Model S through its third Canadian winter. I thought it might be helpful to discuss some of my "lessons learned" about driving the Model S in the cold.






Feeling a little cold soaked...

*Model S Performance in the Cold*

You can walk up to your totally cold soaked car, hop in, and drive away. You don't need to warm it up. It won't chug and cough like a gas car; it'll just glide away. The cabin heat will even come up pretty quickly. No fuss, no muss.

That said, there are a few differences in the way the car drives after it's been sitting in a frozen wasteland (aka parking lot) all day. 

When the battery pack is below freezing the car will not permit charging, as this will damage the cells. One side-effect of this is that you also lose your regenerative brakes. This is shown by the yellow dotted line on the speedometer. If the car has cold soaked below freezing you may have no regenerative brakes whatsoever. Pay attention, because the car will really really coast - this can be very surprising the first time!!! You'll have to use the conventional brakes until the car warms up.





The dreaded yellow line

If the battery pack is extremely cold, you will also have a power limit. This isn't usually much of an issue because if it's that cold, it's hard to go full throttle without spinning the tires. Cold rubber on frozen pavement doesn't make for great traction. So this is really more of a curiosity than anything. 

The battery pack has a heater. It's necessary so the car can charge in the cold. When you start driving a cold car the pack heater turns on, and it can draw up to 6 kW. So can the cabin heater. Simply sitting at a stop sign you're drawing enough power to go over 40 mph. Fortunately it does get better as the car warms up!

*Cold versus Range*

When the batteries are extremely cold, there will be a little bit of range loss, which is shown by a blue segment on the charge bar. As the batteries warm up that "lost" range will come back, so it's not really lost! The car has to be very cold for this to happen.

Obviously energy needed for heating reduces your range. If the car is cold soaked this can have a big effect on your total range. Starting out with a warmer car can make a big difference to how far you can drive. We'll talk about preheating in a moment.

You will also experience reduced range due to increased aerodynamic drag. Drag moving through the air is the dominant impact on the car's range at any temperature - and it gets worse in the cold. Cooler, denser air is harder to push out of the way. There is also a small effect due to the tires having worse rolling resistance, but aerodynamic effects are much larger. 

(Tip: Safely drafting a large truck has an even more dramatic impact on range in the winter. Do not tailgate; keep a safe following distance and you will still see improvement. Note however that strong crosswinds will adversely affect the effectiveness of drafting.)

*Cabin Heat*

The Model S cabin heater has two (hidden) modes. If the drive train is cold, all heat comes via resistive heaters, which can draw up to about 6 kW. That's a lot of power.

As you drive the car, the drive train will naturally heat up. Once that happens, Model S uses the drive train coolant to help heat the cabin. Essentially it takes waste heat from the motor and inverter and uses that to heat the cabin. This makes a huge difference to the power consumption - a fully warmed-up car will only need 1-2 kW to keep the cabin warm even in extreme cold conditions. In comparison, the original Tesla Roadster needs 4 kW to keep its tiny cabin not-terribly-warm using only resistive heaters. This is a big advantage of Model S engineering that Tesla never talks about!

The upshot here is that cabin heater power consumption gets better quite dramatically after you've been driving for a while. 

Cold Weather Driving

*Doesn't sound like any major problems to me.*


----------



## Papageorgio

Not too happy with my Volt in the winter. It is not as good as a gas only engine.


----------



## RGR

Skull Pilot said:


> Jarlaxle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, heat pumps don't work well in extreme cold.
> 
> 
> 
> neither do electric cars
Click to expand...


Define extreme cold. Define "work well". The wife is out and about when it is 0F outside, as are the various Leafs around town. The issue appears to be battery usability, there is just less to use between heating the cabin, plowing through snow, and the range effect of temperatures that cold. Having said that, I've let the car sit out for an entire week in 0F temps once, and after 5 days of sitting when I fired it up on the 5th day, it was perfectly happy to still EV down the road until it ran out of power. 

They don't work as well, but they still work quite well.


----------



## RGR

Papageorgio said:


> Not too happy with my Volt in the winter. It is not as good as a gas only engine.



You bought it thinking it would be? How about this for a crazy idea...don't charge it up...run the battery out...and then use it just like a gas engined car because at that point...it will be one!


----------



## RGR

Old Rocks said:


> *Doesn't sound like any major problems to me.*



Those Model Ss are gorgeous. The wife would love to have one, but ours must do double duty, as a short range EV around town for weeks, sometimes months at a time, and then a cross country trip machine. Took the wife's machine to the top of Mount Washington this summer, recharged it on the way down, and loved it! 

The wife has an ice blue Ford Fusion Energi, the only downside between it and a normal ICE powered machine is the loss of about 1/2 the trunk for the battery. Otherwise it is just a very fuel efficient ICE machine (35 mpg at 80 mph on highway, 40-42 mpg at steady state 60-65 mph cruising in still air, 52-55 mpg 60-65 mph cruising on rolling country roads). Of course, those mileage figures only matter when on trips, over the course of 6 months last summer the wife didn't use any gasoline at all, commuting around town.


----------



## RGR

Skull Pilot said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...are you a progressive employer that provides free fuel for your employees cars?
> How much free fuel do you pass out to your employees?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None most of me employees lives less than 10 miles away and none are stupid enough to buy electric cars
Click to expand...


Fine, you being such a wonderful employer, how much fuel do you give away to your employees? Who cares if they are smart enough to buy electric cars, how much fuel do you provide them, you being such a wonderful employer and all? You must pass out LOTS of fuel, your employees being so smart and all to work for your establishment.


----------



## Papageorgio

RGR said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not too happy with my Volt in the winter. It is not as good as a gas only engine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You bought it thinking it would be? How about this for a crazy idea...don't charge it up...run the battery out...and then use it just like a gas engined car because at that point...it will be one!
Click to expand...


Yep, it thought it would be ok. Even without a charge the car will store and revert to electric when it can, but you knew that didn't you bright boy.


----------



## Skull Pilot

RGR said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...are you a progressive employer that provides free fuel for your employees cars?
> How much free fuel do you pass out to your employees?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None most of me employees lives less than 10 miles away and none are stupid enough to buy electric cars
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fine, you being such a wonderful employer, how much fuel do you give away to your employees? Who cares if they are smart enough to buy electric cars, how much fuel do you provide them, you being such a wonderful employer and all? You must pass out LOTS of fuel, your employees being so smart and all to work for your establishment.
Click to expand...

Why should I provide them any fuel for their vehicles?

I pay them so they can buy all the fuel they want


----------



## Old Rocks

RGR said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Doesn't sound like any major problems to me.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those Model Ss are gorgeous. The wife would love to have one, but ours must do double duty, as a short range EV around town for weeks, sometimes months at a time, and then a cross country trip machine. Took the wife's machine to the top of Mount Washington this summer, recharged it on the way down, and loved it!
> 
> The wife has an ice blue Ford Fusion Energi, the only downside between it and a normal ICE powered machine is the loss of about 1/2 the trunk for the battery. Otherwise it is just a very fuel efficient ICE machine (35 mpg at 80 mph on highway, 40-42 mpg at steady state 60-65 mph cruising in still air, 52-55 mpg 60-65 mph cruising on rolling country roads). Of course, those mileage figures only matter when on trips, over the course of 6 months last summer the wife didn't use any gasoline at all, commuting around town.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that post. Made me look up the current specs on the Energi. Think of what they can do when they build a car from scratch as a plug in hybrid. Gone would be the tramped trunk space, and, using an ICE like this,


you could bring the weight down, power up.


----------



## RGR

Papageorgio said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not too happy with my Volt in the winter. It is not as good as a gas only engine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You bought it thinking it would be? How about this for a crazy idea...don't charge it up...run the battery out...and then use it just like a gas engined car because at that point...it will be one!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep, it thought it would be ok. Even without a charge the car will store and revert to electric when it can, but you knew that didn't you bright boy.
Click to expand...


I owned one. It taught me plenty about EVs, such as I didn't need to worry about range anxiety as much as I initially thought, and the issue became my distaste for driving the thing as an ICE car. The waste of running gasoline to in-directly power the car became my main irritation. So the Fusion, which can run more like a normal parallel hybrid, directly powering the wheels with the engine, while doing 2 other important things, 1) being much more a normal car in size and shape and 2) still has enough EV range to match around town commuting. Me and the wife not really needing 40 miles of the 75% of American commuters but more like 20 miles.


----------



## RGR

Skull Pilot said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...are you a progressive employer that provides free fuel for your employees cars?
> How much free fuel do you pass out to your employees?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None most of me employees lives less than 10 miles away and none are stupid enough to buy electric cars
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fine, you being such a wonderful employer, how much fuel do you give away to your employees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should I provide them any fuel for their vehicles?
Click to expand...


Because other employers do. Quite a nice benefit from employers...decent ones anyway.



			
				Skull Pilot said:
			
		

> I pay them so they can buy all the fuel they want



My wife gets that as well. Plus all the fuel she can carry away at the end of each day.


----------



## Desperado

In electric cars the heater is also electric... when it is 20f outside you are running the heater in the car.
Heaters are not known for their efficiency.
When it is hot outsides you are running your A/C, which in an electric car is also electric.
Heaters an AC are major drains on the battery.
The Electric car is still not ready for prime time.


----------



## Skull Pilot

RGR said:


> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> So...are you a progressive employer that provides free fuel for your employees cars?
> How much free fuel do you pass out to your employees?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None most of me employees lives less than 10 miles away and none are stupid enough to buy electric cars
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Fine, you being such a wonderful employer, how much fuel do you give away to your employees?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should I provide them any fuel for their vehicles?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because other employers do. Quite a nice benefit from employers...decent ones anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skull Pilot said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I pay them so they can buy all the fuel they want
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My wife gets that as well. Plus all the fuel she can carry away at the end of each day.
Click to expand...


Sorry but no.  No employer I ever had gave away free gas
and neither does yours


----------



## RGR

Desperado said:


> In electric cars the heater is also electric... when it is 20f outside you are running the heater in the car.
> Heaters are not known for their efficiency.
> When it is hot outsides you are running your A/C, which in an electric car is also electric.
> Heaters an AC are major drains on the battery.
> The Electric car is still not ready for prime time.



None of these concerns have stopped my family from owning 2 of them now. Driving back and forth to work for 6 months without harming a gasoline molecule, and warm when it is cold, and cool when it is hot, seems like pretty prime time to me.

What is your experience living and driving EVs? Or are you just yammering away on a topic you really have zero experience with?


----------



## RGR

Skull Pilot said:
			
		

> I pay them so they can buy all the fuel they want





			
				RGR said:
			
		

> My wife gets that as well. Plus all the fuel she can carry away at the end of each day.





			
				Skull Pilot said:
			
		

> Sorry but no.  No employer I ever had gave away free gas
> and neither does yours



Can you read? My wife gets the free fuel from her employer, not me. And if you aren't able to keep up with the competition when it comes to handing out some additional bennies, too bad for you.


----------



## elektra

Electric Cars are here to stay, these work the best.


----------



## elektra

This is another great one, I bought 4, I have two still in the case, the boys play with the other two.


----------



## Old Rocks

Tesla today introduced a new version of its Model S sedan. It’s called the P100D, and it can go from 0-60 MPH in 2.5 seconds. Tesla says that makes this the third-fastest production car ever, behind the Ferrari LaFerrari ($1.4 million) and the Porsche 918 Spyder ($845,000).

Both those cars are way more expensive than the Tesla Model S P100D, which starts around $135,000. But while the list of cars that are faster than the P100D is quite short, the list of cars that the Tesla is quicker than is quite long.

So, here’s a comprehensive (but not necessarily complete) list of cars you can buy in the United States today that are slower from 0-60 than the new Tesla:

Acura: ILX, MDX, NSX, RDX, RLX, TLX

Alfa Romeo: Giulia, 4C, 4C Spider

Aston Martin: DB9, Rapide S, V12 Vantage S, V8 Vantage, V8 Vantage S, Vanquish, Vantage GT


Audi: A3, A4, A4 allroad, A5, A6, A7, A8, Q3, Q5, Q7, R8, RS 7, S5, S6, S7, S8, SQ5, TT, TTS

Bentley: Bentayga, Continental GT, Flying Spur, Mulsanne

BMW: 230, 228, 320, 328, 328 Gran Turismo, 328d, 330, 330 Gran Turismo, 330e, 335 Gran Turismo, 340, 340 Gran Turismo, 428, 428 Gran Coupe, 430, 430 Gran Coupe, 435, 435 Gran Coupe, 440, 440 Gran Coupe, 528, 535 Gran Turismo, 550 Gran Turismo, 535d, 550, 550 Gran Turismo, 640, 640 Gran Coupe, 650, 650 Gran Coupe, 740, 740e, 750, ActiveHybrid 5, ALPINA B6 Gran Coupe, ALPINA B7, i3, i8, M2, M235, M240, M3, M4, M5, M6, M6 Gran Coupe, X1, X3, X4, X5, X5 eDrive, X5 M, X6, X6 M, Z4


Buick: Cascada, Enclave, Encore, Envision, LaCrosse, Regal, Verano

Cadillac: ATS, ATS-V, CT6, CTS, CTS-V, ELR, Escalade, Escalade ESV, SRX, XT5, XTS

Chevrolet: Camaro, City Express, Colorado, Corvette, Cruze, Equinox, Express 2500, Express 3500, Impala, Malibu, Malibu Hybrid, Silverado 1500, Silverado 2500HD, Silverado 3500HD, Sonic, Spark, Spark EV, SS, Suburban, Tahoe, Traverse, Trax, Volt

Chrysler: 200, 300, 300C, Pacifica

Dodge: Challenger, Charger, Durango, Grand Caravan, Journey, Viper

Ferrari: 488 GTB, California, GTC4Lusso

Fiat: 124 Spider, 500, 500c, 500e, 500L, 500X

Ford: C-Max Energy, C-Max Hybrid, Edge, Escape, Expedition, Explorer, F-150, F-250, F-350, F-450, Fiesta, Flex, Focus, Focus Electric, Focus RS, Focus ST, Fusion, Fusion Energy, Fusion Hybrid, Mustang, Shelby GT350, Taurus, Transit Connect, Transit-150, Transit-250, Transit-350

GMC: Acadia, Canyon, Savana 2500, Savana 3500, Sierra 1500, Sierra 2500HD, Sierra 3500HD, Terrain, Yukon

Honda: Accord, Accord Hybrid, Civic, CR-V, CR-Z, Fit, HR-V, Odyssey, Pilot, Ridgeline

Hyundai: Accent, Azera, Elantra, Equus, Genesis, Genesis Coupe, Ioniq, Santa Fe, Sonata, Tucson, Veloster

Infiniti: Q30, Q50, Q50 Hybrid, Q60, Q70, Q70h, Q70L, QX80, QX50, QX60, QX60 Hybrid, QX70, QX80

Jaguar: F-Pace, F-Type, XE, XF, XJ

Jeep: Cherokee, Compass, Grand Cherokee, Patriot, Renegade, Wrangler

Kia: Cadenza, Forte, K900, Nero, Optima, Optima Hybrid, Rio, Sedona, Sorento, Soul, Soul EV, Sportage

Lamborghini: Aventador, Huracan

Land Rover: Discovery Sport, LR4, Range Rover, Range Rover Evoque, Range Rover Sport

Lexus: CT 200h, ES 300h, ES 350, GS 200t, GS 350, GS 450h, GS F, GX 460, IS 200t, IS 300, IS 350, LC 500, LS 460, LS 600h, LX 570, NX 200t, NX 300h, RC 200t, RC 300, RC 350, RC F, RX 350, RX 450h

Lincoln: Continental, MKC, MKS, MKT, MKX, MKZ, MKZ Hybrid, Navigator, Navigator L

Maserati: Ghibli, GranTurismo, Levante, Quattroporte

Mazda: CX-3, CX-5, CX-9, Mazda3, Mazda6, MX-5 Miata

McLaren: 570S, 570GT, 650S, 675LT

Mercedes-Benz: AMG C, AMG CLA, AMG CLS, AMG E, AMG G, AMG GL, AMG GLA, AMG GLC, AMG GLE, AMG GLS, AMG GT, AMG S, AMG SL, AMG SLK, AMG SLC, C-Class, CLA-Class, CLS-Class, E-Class, G-Class, GL-Class, GLA-Class, GLC-Class, GLE-Class, GLS-Class, S-Class, SL-Class, SLC-Class, Metris-Class, Sprinter

Mini: Clubman, Convertible, Countryman, Hardtop, Paceman

Mitsubishi: i-MiEV, Lancer, Mirage, Mirage G4, Outlander

Nissan: 370Z, Armada, GT-R, Juke, LEAF, Maxima, Murano, Murano Hybrid, NV Cargo, NV Passenger, Pathfinder, Quest, Rogue, Rogue Hybrid, Sentr
The new Tesla Model S P100D is faster than all these cars

*LOL, Ms. Elektra, you are so fucking stupid.*


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> This is another great one, I bought 4, I have two still in the case, the boys play with the other two.View attachment 108559



Pretty cool! This is the one the wife drives. It doesn't run around inside at all, instead commuting her to work every day. Damn thing, won't break, costs pennies to fill up for a days commute when I pay for it, she fills it for free at work, who ever would have thought that you could run a mid sized family sedan all over town just on electric motors!


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is another great one, I bought 4, I have two still in the case, the boys play with the other two.View attachment 108559
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty cool! This is the one the wife drives. It doesn't run around inside at all, instead commuting her to work every day. Damn thing, won't break, costs pennies to fill up for a days commute when I pay for it, she fills it for free at work, who ever would have thought that you could run a mid sized family sedan all over town just on electric motors!
Click to expand...

Electric motor are fine, the elements for batteries are finite. Depleting all the worlds natural resources while dumping toxic waste in the third world. Bravo.


----------



## elektra

Old Rocks said:


> Tesla today introduced a new version of its Model S sedan. It’s called the P100D, and it can go from 0-60 MPH in 2.5 seconds. Tesla says that makes this the third-fastest production car ever, behind the Ferrari LaFerrari ($1.4 million) and the Porsche 918 Spyder ($845,000).
> 
> Both those cars are way more expensive than the Tesla Model S P100D, which starts around $135,000. But while the list of cars that are faster than the P100D is quite short, the list of cars that the Tesla is quicker than is quite long.
> 
> So, here’s a comprehensive (but not necessarily complete) list of cars you can buy in the United States today that are slower from 0-60 than the new Tesla:
> 
> Acura: ILX, MDX, NSX, RDX, RLX, TLX
> 
> Alfa Romeo: Giulia, 4C, 4C Spider
> 
> Aston Martin: DB9, Rapide S, V12 Vantage S, V8 Vantage, V8 Vantage S, Vanquish, Vantage GT
> 
> 
> Audi: A3, A4, A4 allroad, A5, A6, A7, A8, Q3, Q5, Q7, R8, RS 7, S5, S6, S7, S8, SQ5, TT, TTS
> 
> Bentley: Bentayga, Continental GT, Flying Spur, Mulsanne
> 
> BMW: 230, 228, 320, 328, 328 Gran Turismo, 328d, 330, 330 Gran Turismo, 330e, 335 Gran Turismo, 340, 340 Gran Turismo, 428, 428 Gran Coupe, 430, 430 Gran Coupe, 435, 435 Gran Coupe, 440, 440 Gran Coupe, 528, 535 Gran Turismo, 550 Gran Turismo, 535d, 550, 550 Gran Turismo, 640, 640 Gran Coupe, 650, 650 Gran Coupe, 740, 740e, 750, ActiveHybrid 5, ALPINA B6 Gran Coupe, ALPINA B7, i3, i8, M2, M235, M240, M3, M4, M5, M6, M6 Gran Coupe, X1, X3, X4, X5, X5 eDrive, X5 M, X6, X6 M, Z4
> 
> 
> Buick: Cascada, Enclave, Encore, Envision, LaCrosse, Regal, Verano
> 
> Cadillac: ATS, ATS-V, CT6, CTS, CTS-V, ELR, Escalade, Escalade ESV, SRX, XT5, XTS
> 
> Chevrolet: Camaro, City Express, Colorado, Corvette, Cruze, Equinox, Express 2500, Express 3500, Impala, Malibu, Malibu Hybrid, Silverado 1500, Silverado 2500HD, Silverado 3500HD, Sonic, Spark, Spark EV, SS, Suburban, Tahoe, Traverse, Trax, Volt
> 
> Chrysler: 200, 300, 300C, Pacifica
> 
> Dodge: Challenger, Charger, Durango, Grand Caravan, Journey, Viper
> 
> Ferrari: 488 GTB, California, GTC4Lusso
> 
> Fiat: 124 Spider, 500, 500c, 500e, 500L, 500X
> 
> Ford: C-Max Energy, C-Max Hybrid, Edge, Escape, Expedition, Explorer, F-150, F-250, F-350, F-450, Fiesta, Flex, Focus, Focus Electric, Focus RS, Focus ST, Fusion, Fusion Energy, Fusion Hybrid, Mustang, Shelby GT350, Taurus, Transit Connect, Transit-150, Transit-250, Transit-350
> 
> GMC: Acadia, Canyon, Savana 2500, Savana 3500, Sierra 1500, Sierra 2500HD, Sierra 3500HD, Terrain, Yukon
> 
> Honda: Accord, Accord Hybrid, Civic, CR-V, CR-Z, Fit, HR-V, Odyssey, Pilot, Ridgeline
> 
> Hyundai: Accent, Azera, Elantra, Equus, Genesis, Genesis Coupe, Ioniq, Santa Fe, Sonata, Tucson, Veloster
> 
> Infiniti: Q30, Q50, Q50 Hybrid, Q60, Q70, Q70h, Q70L, QX80, QX50, QX60, QX60 Hybrid, QX70, QX80
> 
> Jaguar: F-Pace, F-Type, XE, XF, XJ
> 
> Jeep: Cherokee, Compass, Grand Cherokee, Patriot, Renegade, Wrangler
> 
> Kia: Cadenza, Forte, K900, Nero, Optima, Optima Hybrid, Rio, Sedona, Sorento, Soul, Soul EV, Sportage
> 
> Lamborghini: Aventador, Huracan
> 
> Land Rover: Discovery Sport, LR4, Range Rover, Range Rover Evoque, Range Rover Sport
> 
> Lexus: CT 200h, ES 300h, ES 350, GS 200t, GS 350, GS 450h, GS F, GX 460, IS 200t, IS 300, IS 350, LC 500, LS 460, LS 600h, LX 570, NX 200t, NX 300h, RC 200t, RC 300, RC 350, RC F, RX 350, RX 450h
> 
> Lincoln: Continental, MKC, MKS, MKT, MKX, MKZ, MKZ Hybrid, Navigator, Navigator L
> 
> Maserati: Ghibli, GranTurismo, Levante, Quattroporte
> 
> Mazda: CX-3, CX-5, CX-9, Mazda3, Mazda6, MX-5 Miata
> 
> McLaren: 570S, 570GT, 650S, 675LT
> 
> Mercedes-Benz: AMG C, AMG CLA, AMG CLS, AMG E, AMG G, AMG GL, AMG GLA, AMG GLC, AMG GLE, AMG GLS, AMG GT, AMG S, AMG SL, AMG SLK, AMG SLC, C-Class, CLA-Class, CLS-Class, E-Class, G-Class, GL-Class, GLA-Class, GLC-Class, GLE-Class, GLS-Class, S-Class, SL-Class, SLC-Class, Metris-Class, Sprinter
> 
> Mini: Clubman, Convertible, Countryman, Hardtop, Paceman
> 
> Mitsubishi: i-MiEV, Lancer, Mirage, Mirage G4, Outlander
> 
> Nissan: 370Z, Armada, GT-R, Juke, LEAF, Maxima, Murano, Murano Hybrid, NV Cargo, NV Passenger, Pathfinder, Quest, Rogue, Rogue Hybrid, Sentr
> The new Tesla Model S P100D is faster than all these cars
> 
> *LOL, Ms. Elektra, you are so fucking stupid.*





Old Rocks said:


> Tesla today introduced a new version of its Model S sedan. It’s called the P100D, and it can go from 0-60 MPH in 2.5 seconds. Tesla says that makes this the third-fastest production car ever, behind the Ferrari LaFerrari ($1.4 million) and the Porsche 918 Spyder ($845,000).
> 
> Both those cars are way more expensive than the Tesla Model S P100D, which starts around $135,000. But while the list of cars that are faster than the P100D is quite short, the list of cars that the Tesla is quicker than is quite long.
> 
> So, here’s a comprehensive (but not necessarily complete) list of cars you can buy in the United States today that are slower from 0-60 than the new Tesla:
> 
> Acura: ILX, MDX, NSX, RDX, RLX, TLX
> 
> Alfa Romeo: Giulia, 4C, 4C Spider
> 
> Aston Martin: DB9, Rapide S, V12 Vantage S, V8 Vantage, V8 Vantage S, Vanquish, Vantage GT
> 
> 
> Audi: A3, A4, A4 allroad, A5, A6, A7, A8, Q3, Q5, Q7, R8, RS 7, S5, S6, S7, S8, SQ5, TT, TTS
> 
> Bentley: Bentayga, Continental GT, Flying Spur, Mulsanne
> 
> BMW: 230, 228, 320, 328, 328 Gran Turismo, 328d, 330, 330 Gran Turismo, 330e, 335 Gran Turismo, 340, 340 Gran Turismo, 428, 428 Gran Coupe, 430, 430 Gran Coupe, 435, 435 Gran Coupe, 440, 440 Gran Coupe, 528, 535 Gran Turismo, 550 Gran Turismo, 535d, 550, 550 Gran Turismo, 640, 640 Gran Coupe, 650, 650 Gran Coupe, 740, 740e, 750, ActiveHybrid 5, ALPINA B6 Gran Coupe, ALPINA B7, i3, i8, M2, M235, M240, M3, M4, M5, M6, M6 Gran Coupe, X1, X3, X4, X5, X5 eDrive, X5 M, X6, X6 M, Z4
> 
> 
> Buick: Cascada, Enclave, Encore, Envision, LaCrosse, Regal, Verano
> 
> Cadillac: ATS, ATS-V, CT6, CTS, CTS-V, ELR, Escalade, Escalade ESV, SRX, XT5, XTS
> 
> Chevrolet: Camaro, City Express, Colorado, Corvette, Cruze, Equinox, Express 2500, Express 3500, Impala, Malibu, Malibu Hybrid, Silverado 1500, Silverado 2500HD, Silverado 3500HD, Sonic, Spark, Spark EV, SS, Suburban, Tahoe, Traverse, Trax, Volt
> 
> Chrysler: 200, 300, 300C, Pacifica
> 
> Dodge: Challenger, Charger, Durango, Grand Caravan, Journey, Viper
> 
> Ferrari: 488 GTB, California, GTC4Lusso
> 
> Fiat: 124 Spider, 500, 500c, 500e, 500L, 500X
> 
> Ford: C-Max Energy, C-Max Hybrid, Edge, Escape, Expedition, Explorer, F-150, F-250, F-350, F-450, Fiesta, Flex, Focus, Focus Electric, Focus RS, Focus ST, Fusion, Fusion Energy, Fusion Hybrid, Mustang, Shelby GT350, Taurus, Transit Connect, Transit-150, Transit-250, Transit-350
> 
> GMC: Acadia, Canyon, Savana 2500, Savana 3500, Sierra 1500, Sierra 2500HD, Sierra 3500HD, Terrain, Yukon
> 
> Honda: Accord, Accord Hybrid, Civic, CR-V, CR-Z, Fit, HR-V, Odyssey, Pilot, Ridgeline
> 
> Hyundai: Accent, Azera, Elantra, Equus, Genesis, Genesis Coupe, Ioniq, Santa Fe, Sonata, Tucson, Veloster
> 
> Infiniti: Q30, Q50, Q50 Hybrid, Q60, Q70, Q70h, Q70L, QX80, QX50, QX60, QX60 Hybrid, QX70, QX80
> 
> Jaguar: F-Pace, F-Type, XE, XF, XJ
> 
> Jeep: Cherokee, Compass, Grand Cherokee, Patriot, Renegade, Wrangler
> 
> Kia: Cadenza, Forte, K900, Nero, Optima, Optima Hybrid, Rio, Sedona, Sorento, Soul, Soul EV, Sportage
> 
> Lamborghini: Aventador, Huracan
> 
> Land Rover: Discovery Sport, LR4, Range Rover, Range Rover Evoque, Range Rover Sport
> 
> Lexus: CT 200h, ES 300h, ES 350, GS 200t, GS 350, GS 450h, GS F, GX 460, IS 200t, IS 300, IS 350, LC 500, LS 460, LS 600h, LX 570, NX 200t, NX 300h, RC 200t, RC 300, RC 350, RC F, RX 350, RX 450h
> 
> Lincoln: Continental, MKC, MKS, MKT, MKX, MKZ, MKZ Hybrid, Navigator, Navigator L
> 
> Maserati: Ghibli, GranTurismo, Levante, Quattroporte
> 
> Mazda: CX-3, CX-5, CX-9, Mazda3, Mazda6, MX-5 Miata
> 
> McLaren: 570S, 570GT, 650S, 675LT
> 
> Mercedes-Benz: AMG C, AMG CLA, AMG CLS, AMG E, AMG G, AMG GL, AMG GLA, AMG GLC, AMG GLE, AMG GLS, AMG GT, AMG S, AMG SL, AMG SLK, AMG SLC, C-Class, CLA-Class, CLS-Class, E-Class, G-Class, GL-Class, GLA-Class, GLC-Class, GLE-Class, GLS-Class, S-Class, SL-Class, SLC-Class, Metris-Class, Sprinter
> 
> Mini: Clubman, Convertible, Countryman, Hardtop, Paceman
> 
> Mitsubishi: i-MiEV, Lancer, Mirage, Mirage G4, Outlander
> 
> Nissan: 370Z, Armada, GT-R, Juke, LEAF, Maxima, Murano, Murano Hybrid, NV Cargo, NV Passenger, Pathfinder, Quest, Rogue, Rogue Hybrid, Sentr
> The new Tesla Model S P100D is faster than all these cars
> 
> *LOL, Ms. Elektra, you are so fucking stupid.*


Nice jab, PUSSY! The Tesla can maybe beat 3-4 of those cars. After that the battery is exhausted and overheating. Any one of those cars would smoke the Tesla on a very tight, short, road course. Thriw in a couple hills and the Tesla batteries will explode. Go back to google and find another copy/paste you idiot.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> Electric motor are fine, the elements for batteries are finite. Depleting all the worlds natural resources while dumping toxic waste in the third world. Bravo.



The hydrogen supply on the Sun is finite as well. People have been complaining about resource scarcity since Malthus, only proving along the way that they don't know diddly about resource economics. So feel free to live in fear of it, but I gotta tell you, running out of some battery component isn't near as resource scary as what happens when the Sun runs low on hydrogen! I think you need to get your panties in a wad over that one!


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> The hydrogen supply on the Sun is finite as well. People have been complaining about resource scarcity since Malthus, only proving along the way that they don't know diddly about resource economics. So feel free to live in fear of it, but I gotta tell you, running out of some battery component isn't near as resource scary as what happens when the Sun runs low on hydrogen! I think you need to get your panties in a wad over that one!


I don't wear panties? You see, elektra is nothing more than a record label. With you lack of intelligence and education you do not realize that. I got balls, idiot! What else do you assume and foolishly comment on? Considering you are dumb enough to confuse a record label with Greek God!

Running out of a battery component? You mean running out of a finite element used to make batteries for electric cars that are a luxury, something that is frivolous.

We could also talk about Magnets that are used in Electric Cars and the limited supply of this rare Earth element. 

Liberals talk about being worried that we will use all the Oil, but they have no problem using more oil to produce luxury automobiles while depleting the World's reserves of finite rare earth metals and elements. 

At least we can argue Oil is organic, hence replaceable. You can't say the same about rare earth metals.

And you analogy about the sun which will burn billions of years, is about as stupid an analogy made. 

But hey, enjoy your Socialist Obama Car, that everyone pays for but you. We will be paying the National Debt off forever to pay for your luxury electric car. 

Luxury Electric Cars, they add CO2 to the atmosphere as well, in the construction, the constant manufacturing of all things "green". The biggest scam in history. 

You are a fool.


----------



## westwall

Old Rocks said:


> Tesla today introduced a new version of its Model S sedan. It’s called the P100D, and it can go from 0-60 MPH in 2.5 seconds. Tesla says that makes this the third-fastest production car ever, behind the Ferrari LaFerrari ($1.4 million) and the Porsche 918 Spyder ($845,000).
> 
> Both those cars are way more expensive than the Tesla Model S P100D, which starts around $135,000. But while the list of cars that are faster than the P100D is quite short, the list of cars that the Tesla is quicker than is quite long.
> 
> So, here’s a comprehensive (but not necessarily complete) list of cars you can buy in the United States today that are slower from 0-60 than the new Tesla:
> 
> Acura: ILX, MDX, NSX, RDX, RLX, TLX
> 
> Alfa Romeo: Giulia, 4C, 4C Spider
> 
> Aston Martin: DB9, Rapide S, V12 Vantage S, V8 Vantage, V8 Vantage S, Vanquish, Vantage GT
> 
> 
> Audi: A3, A4, A4 allroad, A5, A6, A7, A8, Q3, Q5, Q7, R8, RS 7, S5, S6, S7, S8, SQ5, TT, TTS
> 
> Bentley: Bentayga, Continental GT, Flying Spur, Mulsanne
> 
> BMW: 230, 228, 320, 328, 328 Gran Turismo, 328d, 330, 330 Gran Turismo, 330e, 335 Gran Turismo, 340, 340 Gran Turismo, 428, 428 Gran Coupe, 430, 430 Gran Coupe, 435, 435 Gran Coupe, 440, 440 Gran Coupe, 528, 535 Gran Turismo, 550 Gran Turismo, 535d, 550, 550 Gran Turismo, 640, 640 Gran Coupe, 650, 650 Gran Coupe, 740, 740e, 750, ActiveHybrid 5, ALPINA B6 Gran Coupe, ALPINA B7, i3, i8, M2, M235, M240, M3, M4, M5, M6, M6 Gran Coupe, X1, X3, X4, X5, X5 eDrive, X5 M, X6, X6 M, Z4
> 
> 
> Buick: Cascada, Enclave, Encore, Envision, LaCrosse, Regal, Verano
> 
> Cadillac: ATS, ATS-V, CT6, CTS, CTS-V, ELR, Escalade, Escalade ESV, SRX, XT5, XTS
> 
> Chevrolet: Camaro, City Express, Colorado, Corvette, Cruze, Equinox, Express 2500, Express 3500, Impala, Malibu, Malibu Hybrid, Silverado 1500, Silverado 2500HD, Silverado 3500HD, Sonic, Spark, Spark EV, SS, Suburban, Tahoe, Traverse, Trax, Volt
> 
> Chrysler: 200, 300, 300C, Pacifica
> 
> Dodge: Challenger, Charger, Durango, Grand Caravan, Journey, Viper
> 
> Ferrari: 488 GTB, California, GTC4Lusso
> 
> Fiat: 124 Spider, 500, 500c, 500e, 500L, 500X
> 
> Ford: C-Max Energy, C-Max Hybrid, Edge, Escape, Expedition, Explorer, F-150, F-250, F-350, F-450, Fiesta, Flex, Focus, Focus Electric, Focus RS, Focus ST, Fusion, Fusion Energy, Fusion Hybrid, Mustang, Shelby GT350, Taurus, Transit Connect, Transit-150, Transit-250, Transit-350
> 
> GMC: Acadia, Canyon, Savana 2500, Savana 3500, Sierra 1500, Sierra 2500HD, Sierra 3500HD, Terrain, Yukon
> 
> Honda: Accord, Accord Hybrid, Civic, CR-V, CR-Z, Fit, HR-V, Odyssey, Pilot, Ridgeline
> 
> Hyundai: Accent, Azera, Elantra, Equus, Genesis, Genesis Coupe, Ioniq, Santa Fe, Sonata, Tucson, Veloster
> 
> Infiniti: Q30, Q50, Q50 Hybrid, Q60, Q70, Q70h, Q70L, QX80, QX50, QX60, QX60 Hybrid, QX70, QX80
> 
> Jaguar: F-Pace, F-Type, XE, XF, XJ
> 
> Jeep: Cherokee, Compass, Grand Cherokee, Patriot, Renegade, Wrangler
> 
> Kia: Cadenza, Forte, K900, Nero, Optima, Optima Hybrid, Rio, Sedona, Sorento, Soul, Soul EV, Sportage
> 
> Lamborghini: Aventador, Huracan
> 
> Land Rover: Discovery Sport, LR4, Range Rover, Range Rover Evoque, Range Rover Sport
> 
> Lexus: CT 200h, ES 300h, ES 350, GS 200t, GS 350, GS 450h, GS F, GX 460, IS 200t, IS 300, IS 350, LC 500, LS 460, LS 600h, LX 570, NX 200t, NX 300h, RC 200t, RC 300, RC 350, RC F, RX 350, RX 450h
> 
> Lincoln: Continental, MKC, MKS, MKT, MKX, MKZ, MKZ Hybrid, Navigator, Navigator L
> 
> Maserati: Ghibli, GranTurismo, Levante, Quattroporte
> 
> Mazda: CX-3, CX-5, CX-9, Mazda3, Mazda6, MX-5 Miata
> 
> McLaren: 570S, 570GT, 650S, 675LT
> 
> Mercedes-Benz: AMG C, AMG CLA, AMG CLS, AMG E, AMG G, AMG GL, AMG GLA, AMG GLC, AMG GLE, AMG GLS, AMG GT, AMG S, AMG SL, AMG SLK, AMG SLC, C-Class, CLA-Class, CLS-Class, E-Class, G-Class, GL-Class, GLA-Class, GLC-Class, GLE-Class, GLS-Class, S-Class, SL-Class, SLC-Class, Metris-Class, Sprinter
> 
> Mini: Clubman, Convertible, Countryman, Hardtop, Paceman
> 
> Mitsubishi: i-MiEV, Lancer, Mirage, Mirage G4, Outlander
> 
> Nissan: 370Z, Armada, GT-R, Juke, LEAF, Maxima, Murano, Murano Hybrid, NV Cargo, NV Passenger, Pathfinder, Quest, Rogue, Rogue Hybrid, Sentr
> The new Tesla Model S P100D is faster than all these cars
> 
> *LOL, Ms. Elektra, you are so fucking stupid.*








UMmmmm, that's because of the gearing sweetheart.  If you change the gearing the majority of those would smoke your Tesla.  For the record I like the Tesla.  It's a good car for what it is.  What it is not is a car for the middle class, or for someone who has to commute to work.  It's a great sedan for taking the wife to the show.


----------



## elektra

All the cars smoke the Tesla, the Tesla only wins a very narrowly defined race. My Toyota Tundra will smoke the Tesla. Lets race 10 times, 1/4 mile drags. I guarantee I win more than half.


----------



## westwall

elektra said:


> All the cars smoke the Tesla, the Tesla only wins a very narrowly defined race. My Toyota Tundra will smoke the Tesla. Lets race 10 times, 1/4 mile drags. I guarantee I win more than half.






Actually, I think the Tesla will take your Tundra.  Especially over such a short distance.  Now, do five races over a 25 mile circuit and you'll finish the race while the Tesla won't!  In fact, driven hard, I doubt the Tesla would make it to the 100 mile mark.


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is another great one, I bought 4, I have two still in the case, the boys play with the other two.View attachment 108559
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty cool! This is the one the wife drives. It doesn't run around inside at all, instead commuting her to work every day. Damn thing, won't break, costs pennies to fill up for a days commute when I pay for it, she fills it for free at work, who ever would have thought that you could run a mid sized family sedan all over town just on electric motors!
Click to expand...

That is the one your wife drives? you are a liar, that is a picture you downloaded off the internet. I doubt you own one at all, you or your wife, why else would post a picture of anything but your own car? Yea, take some pics of the warning labels on the battery so we can see what they say. That way we can see if you are a liar.


----------



## elektra

westwall said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> All the cars smoke the Tesla, the Tesla only wins a very narrowly defined race. My Toyota Tundra will smoke the Tesla. Lets race 10 times, 1/4 mile drags. I guarantee I win more than half.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I think the Tesla will take your Tundra.  Especially over such a short distance.  Now, do five races over a 25 mile circuit and you'll finish the race while the Tesla won't!  In fact, driven hard, I doubt the Tesla would make it to the 100 mile mark.
Click to expand...

one race yes, two races yes, three races maybe, four, and five? Right in a row, a quarter mile flat out each time. Up to ten races? That battery will be overheated, smoked. The Tesla is not designed to run 1/4 mile drags, over and over and over. Hell, lets fill the Tesla with adults that weigh 220 lbs each, is the 2 seater or the four seater? Try 4-220 lb men in the Tesla, the 1/4 mile ten times, back to back, against my Tundra with the same amount of people? 

Nope, the Tesla can do the 1/4 once, twice, maybe three times, but after that you are taking a huge risk and it is not advised or condoned.


----------



## westwall

elektra said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> All the cars smoke the Tesla, the Tesla only wins a very narrowly defined race. My Toyota Tundra will smoke the Tesla. Lets race 10 times, 1/4 mile drags. I guarantee I win more than half.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I think the Tesla will take your Tundra.  Especially over such a short distance.  Now, do five races over a 25 mile circuit and you'll finish the race while the Tesla won't!  In fact, driven hard, I doubt the Tesla would make it to the 100 mile mark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> one race yes, two races yes, three races maybe, four, and five? Right in a row, a quarter mile flat out each time. Up to ten races? That battery will be overheated, smoked. The Tesla is not designed to run 1/4 mile drags, over and over and over. Hell, lets fill the Tesla with adults that weigh 220 lbs each, is the 2 seater or the four seater? Try 4-220 lb men in the Tesla, the 1/4 mile ten times, back to back, against my Tundra with the same amount of people?
> 
> Nope, the Tesla can do the 1/4 once, twice, maybe three times, but after that you are taking a huge risk and it is not advised or condoned.
Click to expand...








No, quarter mile races are too short.  The battery is good for at least 40 miles of hard driving (I tested one so have first hand knowledge).  After that though, and it begins to suffer.


----------



## elektra

westwall said:


> No, quarter mile races are too short.  The battery is good for at least 40 miles of hard driving (I tested one so have first hand knowledge).  After that though, and it begins to suffer.


The battery may be good for 40 miles of hard driving. But that is still, different than having to race repeated 1/4 mile runs, with no time to cool. It would be nice to see the Tesla put to the test. I Ferrari could do this all day long, a Tesla, no way. 

Likewise, put a Ferrari on a race track against a Tesla, and the Tesla loses all day long.


----------



## Old Rocks

elektra said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> All the cars smoke the Tesla, the Tesla only wins a very narrowly defined race. My Toyota Tundra will smoke the Tesla. Lets race 10 times, 1/4 mile drags. I guarantee I win more than half.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I think the Tesla will take your Tundra.  Especially over such a short distance.  Now, do five races over a 25 mile circuit and you'll finish the race while the Tesla won't!  In fact, driven hard, I doubt the Tesla would make it to the 100 mile mark.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> one race yes, two races yes, three races maybe, four, and five? Right in a row, a quarter mile flat out each time. Up to ten races? That battery will be overheated, smoked. The Tesla is not designed to run 1/4 mile drags, over and over and over. Hell, lets fill the Tesla with adults that weigh 220 lbs each, is the 2 seater or the four seater? Try 4-220 lb men in the Tesla, the 1/4 mile ten times, back to back, against my Tundra with the same amount of people?
> 
> Nope, the Tesla can do the 1/4 once, twice, maybe three times, but after that you are taking a huge risk and it is not advised or condoned.
Click to expand...

Dumb ass, put another Tundra on a trailer, and the Tesla would beat you in the 1/4 mile towing that trailer. 

At 3:15 in this video.

Tesla Model X beats sports car while towing another car


----------



## Old Rocks

elektra said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, quarter mile races are too short.  The battery is good for at least 40 miles of hard driving (I tested one so have first hand knowledge).  After that though, and it begins to suffer.
> 
> 
> 
> The battery may be good for 40 miles of hard driving. But that is still, different than having to race repeated 1/4 mile runs, with no time to cool. It would be nice to see the Tesla put to the test. I Ferrari could do this all day long, a Tesla, no way.
> 
> Likewise, put a Ferrari on a race track against a Tesla, and the Tesla loses all day long.
Click to expand...

And you are so full of shit. The Ferrari loses to the slower Tesla X P90D, a P100D model S would have severely embarrassed the Ferrari.


----------



## Old Rocks

Looks like no problem on repeated runs.


----------



## elektra

The Tesla sucks, one 1/4 mile race and the idiots claim victory? Against cars built for road racing? How quick is the Tesla from 85 mph to 185 mph? How about Nuremburg? Can the Tesla hold its own under real racing conditions or is it a one shot wonder?
As Expected, Tesla Model S Fails To Lap Nurburgring Under Full Power


Nurburgring
When pushed to the limits, the Tesla Model S often ratchets down its power output in an effort to keep components from reaching critical temperatures.

Therefore, it’s no surprise that the Model S couldn’t complete a full lap of the 14-mile Nurburgring under full power when driven at the limit by Robb Holland.

As Holland explains in a post he authored on Jalopnik:


----------



## skookerasbil

Nobody cares about electric cars. They will sell about 125,000 of them this year. Ford alone will sell close to a million F150/250/350 pick-up trucks.

Hey.....Id love a Tesla S. But not for *$125K  * For the same $$ I can buy a Dodge Hellcat AND a Ford Raptor.


----------



## elektra

skookerasbil said:


> Nobody cares about electric cars. They will sell about 125,000 of them this year. Ford alone will sell close to a million F150/250/350 pick-up trucks.
> 
> Hey.....Id love a T&p


----------



## skookerasbil

Go look at any sales chart of worldwide sales of EV's!! Make sure you are not sipping on a cup of coffee because when you see the numbers, the coffee is going all over the monitor from splitting your sides laughing.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> But hey, enjoy your Socialist Obama Car, that everyone pays for but you. We will be paying the National Debt off forever to pay for your luxury electric car.



Her car is a Ford. An individual economic decision involving her money doesn't have anything to do with Socialism. But free fuel provided at work sure mattered! Capitalism at its best to attract employees!



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> Luxury Electric Cars, they add CO2 to the atmosphere as well, in the construction, the constant manufacturing of all things "green". The biggest scam in history.
> 
> You are a fool.



Well of course manufacturing involves CO2 emissions...the difference being when you sell someone an ICE car, they keep right on doing it!! Of course, so do people breathing, so it isn't as though we can really solve the CO2 emissions problem without self-exterminating..but that becomes an issue of seeing who will recognize it, and do it, their dedication to the cause being absolute. The rest of us will wait to see who is so brave, while we keep on doing what we have been I suppose.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> All the cars smoke the Tesla, the Tesla only wins a very narrowly defined race. My Toyota Tundra will smoke the Tesla. Lets race 10 times, 1/4 mile drags. I guarantee I win more than half.



What a wanker!! How about 10 races, 1/4 mile, without emitting CO2? How about a 100 mile road course race, without emitting CO2? Your truck only competes in the "big ugly dirty CO2 emissions" class, it is like winning the "most retarded person in the class" award...no one wants to win the race you are talking about.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> That is the one your wife drives? you are a liar, that is a picture you downloaded off the internet.



Get real. Hers is an impact blue, that color, Ford Fusion Energi, Titanium, 2014. Feel free to look up your own picture to see what it looks like if you don't like the example I provided. 



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> I doubt you own one at all, you or your wife, why else would post a picture of anything but your own car?



Why would I post a picture of hers when they are all over the internet? It is sitting in the garage charging right now, waiting for a late night non-CO2 emitting trip to the movies! How many movies can you drive too, without emitting CO2 and doing your best to help save the planet?



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> Yea, take some pics of the warning labels on the battery so we can see what they say. That way we can see if you are a liar.



Oh please, like I couldn't find those on the internet and have you pretend all over again she doesn't own one. I'll fill it up with gasoline this evening (if only to offset condensation in the tank after like MONTHS of not emitting CO2), maybe tomorrow we can discuss how much you don't care about the environment because, you know, you just don't care?


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> But hey, enjoy your Socialist Obama Car, that everyone pays for but you. We will be paying the National Debt off forever to pay for your luxury electric car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her car is a Ford. An individual economic decision involving her money doesn't have anything to do with Socialism. But free fuel provided at work sure mattered! Capitalism at its best to attract employees!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luxury Electric Cars, they add CO2 to the atmosphere as well, in the construction, the constant manufacturing of all things "green". The biggest scam in history.
> 
> You are a fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It is socialism, you got a tax break for buying the car,  Ford gets tax breaks for making the electric car. The company that installed the electric charging station got a tax break. Obama taxing us and giving that money back to you in the form of tax breaks is socialism.


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> All the cars smoke the Tesla, the Tesla only wins a very narrowly defined race. My Toyota Tundra will smoke the Tesla. Lets race 10 times, 1/4 mile drags. I guarantee I win more than half.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a wanker!! How about 10 races, 1/4 mile, without emitting CO2? How about a 100 mile road course race, without emitting CO2? Your truck only competes in the "big ugly dirty CO2 emissions" class, it is like winning the "most retarded person in the class" award...no one wants to win the race you are talking about.
Click to expand...

CO2 is produced by electric cars, it takes more energy to charge them then if you simply burned that fuel in a more efficient gas powered car. Using fossil fuels to first make electricity, then charging the battery, involves losses. Your idea that electric cars do not pollute is one great big fat lie. Denial, really.


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the one your wife drives? you are a liar, that is a picture you downloaded off the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get real. Hers is an impact blue, that color, Ford Fusion Energi, Titanium, 2014. Feel free to look up your own picture to see what it looks like if you don't like the example I provided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you own one at all, you or your wife, why else would post a picture of anything but your own car?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I post a picture of hers when they are all over the internet? It is sitting in the garage charging right now, waiting for a late night non-CO2 emitting trip to the movies! How many movies can you drive too, without emitting CO2 and doing your best to help save the planet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, take some pics of the warning labels on the battery so we can see what they say. That way we can see if you are a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please, like I couldn't find those on the internet and have you pretend all over again she doesn't own one. I'll fill it up with gasoline this evening (if only to offset condensation in the tank after like MONTHS of not emitting CO2), maybe tomorrow we can discuss how much you don't care about the environment because, you know, you just don't care?
Click to expand...

No pics of "your car"? Charging? That creates CO2, if you really owned an electric car you would be able to admit that creating electricity creates CO2. Charging electric cars creates more CO2 than simply burning gas in a regular old fashion car. 

This idea that Democrats are saving the World by going green is one big con job that the idiots have fallen for. CO2 free cars? It is as if they are powered by orange trees.


----------



## Wyatt earp

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the one your wife drives? you are a liar, that is a picture you downloaded off the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get real. Hers is an impact blue, that color, Ford Fusion Energi, Titanium, 2014. Feel free to look up your own picture to see what it looks like if you don't like the example I provided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you own one at all, you or your wife, why else would post a picture of anything but your own car?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I post a picture of hers when they are all over the internet? It is sitting in the garage charging right now, waiting for a late night non-CO2 emitting trip to the movies! How many movies can you drive too, without emitting CO2 and doing your best to help save the planet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, take some pics of the warning labels on the battery so we can see what they say. That way we can see if you are a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please, like I couldn't find those on the internet and have you pretend all over again she doesn't own one. I'll fill it up with gasoline this evening (if only to offset condensation in the tank after like MONTHS of not emitting CO2), maybe tomorrow we can discuss how much you don't care about the environment because, you know, you just don't care?
Click to expand...



What read your post over and carefully

Do you comprehend and understand what charges the car?


----------



## Wyatt earp

elektra said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the one your wife drives? you are a liar, that is a picture you downloaded off the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get real. Hers is an impact blue, that color, Ford Fusion Energi, Titanium, 2014. Feel free to look up your own picture to see what it looks like if you don't like the example I provided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you own one at all, you or your wife, why else would post a picture of anything but your own car?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I post a picture of hers when they are all over the internet? It is sitting in the garage charging right now, waiting for a late night non-CO2 emitting trip to the movies! How many movies can you drive too, without emitting CO2 and doing your best to help save the planet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, take some pics of the warning labels on the battery so we can see what they say. That way we can see if you are a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please, like I couldn't find those on the internet and have you pretend all over again she doesn't own one. I'll fill it up with gasoline this evening (if only to offset condensation in the tank after like MONTHS of not emitting CO2), maybe tomorrow we can discuss how much you don't care about the environment because, you know, you just don't care?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No pics of "your car"? Charging? That creates CO2, if you really owned an electric car you would be able to admit that creating electricity creates CO2. Charging electric cars creates more CO2 than simply burning gas in a regular old fashion car.
> 
> This idea that Democrats are saving the World by going green is one big con job that the idiots have fallen for. CO2 free cars? It is as if they are powered by orange trees.
Click to expand...



Another child on here


----------



## Wyatt earp

elektra said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the one your wife drives? you are a liar, that is a picture you downloaded off the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get real. Hers is an impact blue, that color, Ford Fusion Energi, Titanium, 2014. Feel free to look up your own picture to see what it looks like if you don't like the example I provided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you own one at all, you or your wife, why else would post a picture of anything but your own car?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why would I post a picture of hers when they are all over the internet? It is sitting in the garage charging right now, waiting for a late night non-CO2 emitting trip to the movies! How many movies can you drive too, without emitting CO2 and doing your best to help save the planet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, take some pics of the warning labels on the battery so we can see what they say. That way we can see if you are a liar.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh please, like I couldn't find those on the internet and have you pretend all over again she doesn't own one. I'll fill it up with gasoline this evening (if only to offset condensation in the tank after like MONTHS of not emitting CO2), maybe tomorrow we can discuss how much you don't care about the environment because, you know, you just don't care?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No pics of "your car"? Charging? That creates CO2, if you really owned an electric car you would be able to admit that creating electricity creates CO2. Charging electric cars creates more CO2 than simply burning gas in a regular old fashion car.
> 
> This idea that Democrats are saving the World by going green is one big con job that the idiots have fallen for. CO2 free cars? It is as if they are powered by orange trees.
Click to expand...


God damn so many lies.. By that child it's not even funny 
.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> It is socialism, you got a tax break for buying the car,  Ford gets tax breaks for making the electric car.



You are ignorant, and force yet, CHOOSE to be so. It is the wife's car, and no, she got no tax break. She bought it used, with like 11K miles on it, and therefore received none of the tax benefits that generally come with NEW next generation transport. Ford may have gotten a break, but that is a beef you can take up with them, the wife just got a good deal on a car that functions as EV for months on end, but she, or I, can also take on a classic American road trip or, this coming summer, a drive to the beach.

And will still win a 1/4 mile race, multiple times, against some CO2 emitting "wins retard contest of the world" obsolete monstrosity.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> The company that installed the electric charging station got a tax break.



What charging station? The 120V household current she charges in at home? Otherwise known as an electrical outlet, they are all over the house, maybe you've seen them before? Somewhere? Or maybe you mean at work where she gets free fuel? She doesn't care about someone else's tax break because she didn't get them, if someone else did, good for them, no different than you getting a tax break, I'm betting you wouldn't turn down a mortgage deduction or standard deduction any more than anyone else. Why the hypocrisy about tax breaks?



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> Obama taxing us and giving that money back to you in the form of tax breaks is socialism.



Obama doesn't tax anyone, GovCo does. We know this because it was also happening before he was elected. Now that Trump is elected, we are still being taxed. And he won't ever sign an executive order pretending to stop that.  So neither the wife or I got any money back for buying a pretty nice American manufactured car that just doesn't happen to need gasoline to get the wife back and forth to work, 5 days a week, hot or cold. 

I realize you are probably envious that your transport just keeps emitting CO2 and causes constant trips to the gasoline extortion store, but you can solve that problem. Certainly at least then you could whine about the next generation transport from a position of information rather than making up things about non-liquid fueled transport.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> CO2 is produced by electric cars, it takes more energy to charge them then if you simply burned that fuel in a more efficient gas powered car.



Gas powered cars are less efficient. You really should think about some education on this topic prior to utilizing flat earth arguments to justify your stuck in the mud thinking about your own personal transport choices.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> Using fossil fuels to first make electricity, then charging the battery, involves losses. Your idea that electric cars do not pollute is one great big fat lie. Denial, really.



About 30% of the local electricity used in my house, including used to fuel the car when it is in the garage, comes from either the panels on the roof of my state average of 10%+ wind fired generation. The rest of mostly cleaner burning natural gas. The burning natural gas involves making CO2, but the other 30% doesn't. Far better than your tail pipe emissions in your obsolete-mobile. And I never said "don't pollute", I said it doesn't emit CO2 when doing its job, taking the wife from here to there, day after day, for months on end. You could say the same, and LEARN something while participating in saving the world, if you would bother to learn...well...anything...


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> the wife just got a good deal on a car that functions as EV for months on end, but she, or I, can also take on a classic American road trip or, this coming summer, a drive to the beach.
> 
> I realize *you are probably envious* that your transport just keeps emitting CO2 and causes constant trips to the gasoline extortion store, but you can solve that problem. Certainly at least then you could whine about the next generation transport from a position of information rather than making up things about non-liquid fueled transport.
> 
> .


Calling you a liar cause your story does not make sense, and because you won't post any pics, is hardly envious. You can take that Hybrid Fusion on a classic American road trip? What classic American Road trip is a 10 mile, or 21 mile round trip? The Fusion Hybrid you claim to own and drive months on end as an electric vehicle has a 21 mile range! I know you do not own one, otherwise you would not make such ridiculous claims. 

2017 Ford® Fusion Energi Titanium Sedan | Model Highlights | Ford.com
EV Range 21 miles


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> About 30% of the local electricity used in my house, including used to fuel the car when it is in the garage, comes from either the panels on the roof of my state average of 10%+ wind fired generation. The rest of mostly cleaner burning natural gas. The burning natural gas involves making CO2, but the other 30% doesn't. Far better than your tail pipe emissions in your obsolete-mobile. And I never said "don't pollute", I said it doesn't emit CO2 when doing its job, taking the wife from here to there, day after day, for months on end. You could say the same, and LEARN something while participating in saving the world, if you would bother to learn...well...anything...


More lies, first and foremost you do not own an Electric Car. The car you posted a pic of is the Ford Fusion Hybrid that has a 21 mile range. I doubt you own the Ford Fusion in the picture you downloaded off the internet, beings how when challenged, you will not take pics of the car you own. 

How old is your car, the battery range does decrease with age, so how far can she travel know, 18 miles? 10 miles?  Seriously, what is the range of this magical hybrid that seems to operate counter to the claims Ford makes about the newest Fusion.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> Calling you a liar cause your story does not make sense, and because you won't post any pics, is hardly envious.



Your ignorance has nothing to do with my truthfulness. And I've explained why there is no need to post pics, your inability to understand even such basics matches your ignorance apparently.

Like pics prove anything, how stupid can that claim of yours be, when we are talking about the internet?



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> You can take that Hybrid Fusion on a classic American road trip? What classic American Road trip is a 10 mile, or 21 mile round trip?



It is a Ford Fusion Energi, a gas/electric hybrid for sure, and as I've explained, the wife commutes for months on end, to and fro, I took it out for a lunch sandwich for lunch just this very day, and it goes on a road trip when you decide to run a full tank of gasoline through it and become a normal polluting car like you drive.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> The Fusion Hybrid you claim to own and drive months on end as an electric vehicle has a 21 mile range! I know you do not own one, otherwise you would not make such ridiculous claims.



What claims? That the wife can use it for 6 months, 5 days a week, and never put gasoline in it? She has already done it. And I have also taken it on a road trip, to the top of Mount Washington this last summer as a matter of fact. Now, on that trip I polluted as much as you do when driving The rest of the time? Months commuting and dashing about suburbia without harming a molecule of gasoline, and the free fuel from the office doesn't hurt either!


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> More lies, first and foremost you do not own an Electric Car.



You are right, I don't own an electric car, the wife does. Do try and read AND comprehend a little better.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> The car you posted a pic of is the Ford Fusion Hybrid that has a 21 mile range.



No it isn't. I posted a picture of a ford Fusion Energi, not the hybrid, the hybrid doesn't have any ridiculous 21 mile range...but the Energi does.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> I doubt you own the Ford Fusion in the picture you downloaded off the internet, beings how when challenged, you will not take pics of the car you own.



You should doubt I own a Ford Fusion Energi, as I've told you its the wife's car. And pics...please...only a child doesn't know how easy it would be to round up any pic and pretend its mine, what are you, like 12?



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> How old is your car, the battery range does decrease with age, so how far can she travel know, 18 miles?



Her car is a 2014, acquired used. How far you can go on electric depends on the conditions. Roundtrip from the garage or office, she can consistently hit 19-22 miles, as long as she doesn't need to use the heater. If she has ICEed her way to the top of the continental divide, she can EV for 50 miles. I did the same thing on Mount Washington, ICEd to the top, charged it back up on the 7 or so mile descent, and then EVed out of the mountains for another 25 miles (there was more downhill along the way).

Last summer she commuted to and from work, we took no trips anywhere, 6 months with no stops at the middle east extortion stores!!! Bet you can't say that as you pollute your way to and from wherever!


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> More lies, first and foremost you do not own an Electric Car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are right, I don't own an electric car, the wife does. Do try and read AND comprehend a little better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The car you posted a pic of is the Ford Fusion Hybrid that has a 21 mile range.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it isn't. I posted a picture of a ford Fusion Energi, not the hybrid, the hybrid doesn't have any ridiculous 21 mile range...but the Energi does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you own the Ford Fusion in the picture you downloaded off the internet, beings how when challenged, you will not take pics of the car you own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You should doubt I own a Ford Fusion Energi, as I've told you its the wife's car. And pics...please...only a child doesn't know how easy it would be to round up any pic and pretend its mine, what are you, like 12?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How old is your car, the battery range does decrease with age, so how far can she travel know, 18 miles?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Her car is a 2014, acquired used. How far you can go on electric depends on the conditions. Roundtrip from the garage or office, she can consistently hit 19-22 miles, as long as she doesn't need to use the heater. If she has ICEed her way to the top of the continental divide, she can EV for 50 miles. I did the same thing on Mount Washington, ICEd to the top, charged it back up on the 7 or so mile descent, and then EVed out of the mountains for another 25 miles (there was more downhill along the way).
> 
> Last summer she commuted to and from work, we took no trips anywhere, 6 months with no stops at the middle east extortion stores!!! Bet you can't say that as you pollute your way to and from wherever!
Click to expand...

21 mile range, on the battery, no more. A 3 year old electric car with a range of 21 miles, by now, I am sure, at best, it gets 15 miles per charge. Like I said, your story does not add up.


----------



## elektra

RGR said:


> No it isn't. I posted a picture of a ford Fusion Energi, not the hybrid, the hybrid doesn't have any ridiculous 21 mile range...but the Energi does.


The Energi is a hybrid!!!!!!!!! It seems if you owned the Fusion Energi like you claimed then you would know it is a hybrid.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> 21 mile range, on the battery, no more.



The difference between your opinion on its range, and mine, is I've driven it farther than 21 miles, as I said, it depends. Running full heat in the winter, it is less than about 16 miles. Depending on where your starting and ending points are, it can be more than 40-50. The beauty of long downhill runs being that the car generates more power than it needs, so you can store energy until you need it to get over the next hill, and then it depends on whether or not you are generally losing elevation, or gaining it. 

Of course I know this, and you do not, because this is the second EV in the family (I owned a Volt),, and you apparently haven't owned any of these next gen forms of transport.



			
				elektra said:
			
		

> A 3 year old electric car with a range of 21 miles, by now, I am sure, at best, it gets 15 miles per charge. Like I said, your story does not add up.



So far, the electric range hasn't decreased at all.


----------



## RGR

elektra said:


> The Energi is a hybrid!!!!!!!!! It seems if you owned the Fusion Energi like you claimed then you would know it is a hybrid.



Fundamentally, there is only one major difference between a Fusion Hybrid and Fusion Energi, and that is the battery size and ability to charge it from house current. And then the Energi becomes an EV, for 20 miles at a time. It is why she got the thing, because she can use it as a pure EV around town, but it doesn't have the range or comfort limitations of the only EVs.


----------



## blenkins90

Honestly....electric cars are not going to save the world. The electricity has to come from somewhere...


----------



## Old Rocks

Both wind and solar are cheaper than fossil fuels on a delivered kilowatts basis.


----------



## Desperado

elektra said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> More lies, first and foremost you do not own an Electric Car.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are right, I don't own an electric car, the wife does. Do try and read AND comprehend a little better.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The car you posted a pic of is the Ford Fusion Hybrid that has a 21 mile range.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it isn't. I posted a picture of a ford Fusion Energi, not the hybrid, the hybrid doesn't have any ridiculous 21 mile range...but the Energi does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you own the Ford Fusion in the picture you downloaded off the internet, beings how when challenged, you will not take pics of the car you own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You should doubt I own a Ford Fusion Energi, as I've told you its the wife's car. And pics...please...only a child doesn't know how easy it would be to round up any pic and pretend its mine, what are you, like 12?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> elektra said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How old is your car, the battery range does decrease with age, so how far can she travel know, 18 miles?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Her car is a 2014, acquired used. How far you can go on electric depends on the conditions. Roundtrip from the garage or office, she can consistently hit 19-22 miles, as long as she doesn't need to use the heater. If she has ICEed her way to the top of the continental divide, she can EV for 50 miles. I did the same thing on Mount Washington, ICEd to the top, charged it back up on the 7 or so mile descent, and then EVed out of the mountains for another 25 miles (there was more downhill along the way).
> 
> Last summer she commuted to and from work, we took no trips anywhere, 6 months with no stops at the middle east extortion stores!!! Bet you can't say that as you pollute your way to and from wherever!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 21 mile range, on the battery, no more. A 3 year old electric car with a range of 21 miles, by now, I am sure, at best, it gets 15 miles per charge. Like I said, your story does not add up.
Click to expand...

An electric vehicle with a range of 21 miles is nothing more than an enclosed golf cart.


----------



## RGR

blenkins90 said:


> Honestly....electric cars are not going to save the world. The electricity has to come from somewhere...



It does. In my case solar panels, windmills, natural gas, some nukes, some coal.


----------



## RGR

Desperado said:


> An electric vehicle with a range of 21 miles is nothing more than an enclosed golf cart.



With a backup camera, a nicely quiet cabin as it zips down public interstates at 70mph, blasting out tunes via bluetooth from the phone or XM radio, carrying 5 adults, alternating cooling the cabin on 100F days, or warming it on 20F days, with antilock brakes, air bags all over the place, you know, all those enclosed golf cart amenities. Oh...and it isn't allowed on a golf course because...you know...everyone thinks that because it drives like, acts like, quacks like a car..you know...it IS one.


----------



## Old Rocks

The auto manufactures are putting out more and more of the plugin hybrids. That certainly makes sense. Most people's work is less than 40 miles from where they live. So, with a range of 40 to 50 miles, that saves considerable money for the person doing the commuting. And makes them far less vulnerable to fluctuations in fuel prices. I am looking forward to the next five years to see what happens to the cost and energy density of the batteries.


----------



## RGR

Old Rocks said:


> The auto manufactures are putting out more and more of the plugin hybrids. That certainly makes sense. Most people's work is less than 40 miles from where they live. So, with a range of 40 to 50 miles, that saves considerable money for the person doing the commuting. And makes them far less vulnerable to fluctuations in fuel prices. I am looking forward to the next five years to see what happens to the cost and energy density of the batteries.



The wife and I are pretty happy with the duality of a plug in hybrid. It works pretty well for our specific conditions, all EV for as much local commuting as we do, and then tank it up and off across the country like any normal car you go. Our work/commuting arrangement is going to change in about 3-1/2 years, and the temperature environment as well, which is important to battery longevity and thermal management issues. By then I imagine the choices we will have for both more capable plug-ins and cheaper full EVs like the Bolt will be increased. By then used ones should be coming off lease, I was surprised when the Leafs began to come off lease, low miles, and they were pretty inexpensive.


----------



## Old Rocks

RGR said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> The auto manufactures are putting out more and more of the plugin hybrids. That certainly makes sense. Most people's work is less than 40 miles from where they live. So, with a range of 40 to 50 miles, that saves considerable money for the person doing the commuting. And makes them far less vulnerable to fluctuations in fuel prices. I am looking forward to the next five years to see what happens to the cost and energy density of the batteries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wife and I are pretty happy with the duality of a plug in hybrid. It works pretty well for our specific conditions, all EV for as much local commuting as we do, and then tank it up and off across the country like any normal car you go. Our work/commuting arrangement is going to change in about 3-1/2 years, and the temperature environment as well, which is important to battery longevity and thermal management issues. By then I imagine the choices we will have for both more capable plug-ins and cheaper full EVs like the Bolt will be increased. By then used ones should be coming off lease, I was surprised when the Leafs began to come off lease, low miles, and they were pretty inexpensive.
Click to expand...

Good points. Since I am one of those people that run the wheels off a rig before I get another one, I have about three years before I will need a new rig. By then there should be plug in hybrids in many types of vehicles.


----------

