Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons
1586 messages, Last post on Oct 23, 2009 at 4:19 PM
You are in the Electric Vehicles Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Replying to: tpe (Nov 03, 2007 4:23 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: apeweek (Nov 03, 2007 6:11 pm) it is equipped with a non-toxic, revolutionary Altairnano (NASDAQ: ALTI) NanosafeTM lithium-titinate battery, which can be recharged in less than 10 minutes and has a battery pack with a life of greater than 250,000 miles. I would feel better about that statement if it included 10 years of life. As I would probably put about 50k miles in 10 years on one. Those Chinese batteries sound pretty awesome. Do you know anyone that has ordered and installed them yet? If so what kind of price. I still think of the possibility of converting my Ranger when the V6 gives out some day.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 03, 2007 7:51 pm) Altairnano has waffled a bit on life, possibly because nobody can know for certain until they've been in the field that long. However, I have seen published estimates of 12 to 20 years for those batteries. ...Those Chinese batteries sound pretty awesome. Do you know anyone that has ordered and installed them yet? Here are several hobbyist projects powered by Thunder Sky batteries: http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/battb/THUN
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 03, 2007 7:38 pm) I like that idea too, but is it really much hassle to buy gas? I stop at a station on a road I am travelling on, slide my credit card, stick the nozzle in and wait a few minutes for it to click off. I'm then good for 400+ miles...which is about a month, if all I do is go to and from work. I don't know that plugging and unplugging my car every day, vs. stopping for gas every 3-4 weeks, would take much less time, in total. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Nov 03, 2007 4:23 pm) First thing to note is that a lot of the pro EV argument is that its cheaper to run. Second the break even argument is based on a very simple economic premise that one would try to maximize utility with the minimum cost. In other words most people would chose the least expensive of two potions if both gave the same thing. I don't know why people who are willing to pay a premium for being more environmentally friendly Well one has to wonder if the EV's are truly more environmentally friendly. It is my understanding that the environmental impact of creating and then disposing the elements needed for an EV car outweigh the lesser impact that using an EV over a gas powered car has. Also you have to remember that the electricity has to be produced somehow. A lot of that that means burning oil or coal.
|
|
|
Replying to: apeweek (Nov 03, 2007 8:05 pm) I like the way the website is laid out. Tracking different brands of components and equipment. Are you in there?
|
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Nov 04, 2007 2:01 pm) Untrue. This is nothing more than a bit of propaganda spread around by the various petroleum interests. I have seen this repeated countless times, but never explained, justified or proved. Since the EV has fewer and simpler parts, it will require less manufacturing input, not more. Therefore this argument must refer to EV batteries. But the newest designs for EV batteries have very minor environmental impact. Even old battery designs (like lead-acid) are fully recyclable. Besides, no conceivable 'battery pollution' could possibly compare with the drilling, pumping, shipping, refining, and burning of gasoline. Sorry, bogus argument. ...Also you have to remember that the electricity has to be produced somehow. A lot of that that means burning oil or coal. Another old argument, just as baseless. The EV makes much more efficient use of energy all along the fuel chain. It's true that about 50% of electricity comes from coal (and just 3% from oil), but because of greatly improved efficiencies, the EV only creates a mere 3% of the pollution of a gas vehicle. Sources: http://www.electric-cars-are-for-girls.com/electric-powered-cars.html actual study here: http://www.energy.ca.gov/papers/CEC-999-1996-015.PDF "...in a study conducted by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, EVs were significantly cleaner over the course of 100,000 miles than ICE cars. The electricity generation process produces less than 100 pounds of pollutants for EVs compared to 3000 pounds for ICE vehicles."
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Nov 04, 2007 6:49 pm) My EV is in there, at: http://www.austinev.org/evalbum/775
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: apeweek (Nov 04, 2007 7:00 pm) Unless you can provide a source for this I will presume that this is just propaganda as the creation and disposal of the batteries used does have a great environmental impact. Another old argument, just as baseless. Not baseless at all, electricity has to be created and its not going to be created cleanly. Unless its neclear and those plants are not being built. You want electricity for your EV oil and coal will be burnt to create it and there goes the clean factor.
|
|
|
Replying to: apeweek (Nov 04, 2007 7:01 pm)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Hybrid Vehicles Electric Vehicles Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
