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: marketdisc (Jan 30, 2008 9:31 pm) http://www.evalbum.com/battb/THUN |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: marketdisc (Jan 30, 2008 9:31 pm) 2. sounds like you want someone to do investment research for you. contact the company or other sources. |
|
|
This looks like it really might happen: Mitsu MiEV coming soon to Japan, then the UK? USA when? When it comes to city cars, the Splash is the future for Suzuki – but can the same be said of Mitsubishi’s new i? Powered solely by electricity, it doesn’t emit any CO2 on the move and sprints from 0-60mph five seconds quicker than the petrol version. Called the i MiEV (which stands for Mitsubishi innovative Electric Vehicle), the car goes on sale in Japan next year and could make it here after that. Auto Express took a drive to see if it really is a glimpse of tomorrow’s world Apart from the stickers and a plug-in socket, the exterior is identical to the regular i. Inside, the only changes are the addition of a battery meter, while the auto box is swapped for a selector with two modes – Drive and Eco. Out goes the 660cc three-cylinder turbo petrol engine and in comes an electric motor running off lithium-ion batteries spread underneath the seats. Power is identical to the petrol car, at 63bhp, but torque is up from 85Nm to 180Nm. Response is instantaneous, and the i races from 0-60mph in less than nine seconds in virtual silence. Despite carrying an extra 180kg, it actually handles better than the petrol model, thanks to a lower centre of gravity, and it rides comfortably. Drive hard, though, and the batteries will run out within one hour – which is where Eco mode comes in. This drops power to 42bhp, and Mitsubishi claims you can travel 100 miles before recharging. Choose the special quick-charge mode, and you can refill the batteries to 80 per cent capacity in half an hour. |
|
|
A very interesting bit of electric vehicle news came up on the Alternate Route this morning... Bond, James Bond |
|
|
|
|
http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2008/02/29/079263.html Daimler claims that they are first to get the li-ion in practical mode for autos. Don't know if that's true or not. I do know that the hybrid in the piece gets around 30 mpg. Nothing to write home about, but good for a powerful luxury car I suppose. |
|
|
Replying to: marketdisc (Jan 30, 2008 9:31 pm) Thunder Sky Batteries; Dark Cloud or Silver Lining? http://www.electric-echo.com/blog/?p=53 ThunderSky Lithium-Ion Cells - LiIon experiences http://www.casadelgato.com/ThunderSky/ Basic guidelines for selecting the battery and points to consider http://www.metricmind.com/ac_honda/battery.htm Battery Manufacturers Listed By Country http://www.bicycle-power.com/batteries.html |
|
|
Found an interesting op-ed piece about the rush to be "green" Blarney
|
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Mar 17, 2008 4:36 am) The fact that 50% of our energy is generated by burning coal is a problem that needs to be addressed but it is not a problem that EVs created. Certainly recharging EVs would aggravate this problem if we choose not to transition from coal. We use coal because it is cheap and plentiful. In this country we will sacrifice the environment if the price is right. That mentality will continue to apply when it comes to using coal to power our EVs. If it is wrong to use coal to recharge an EV then it is also wrong to use coal to power our clothes dryers, light our homes, heat/cool our homes, etc.. At least in the case of EVs you are trading one form of pollution for another. Unless all of your electricity comes from the dirtiest coal power plants you won't actually be creating more pollution. So from the "green" perspective it could be argued that there is no major benefit. However there is another, potentially more important, issue here. Our dependence on foreign oil and all the negative consequences that entails. The potential for EVs to reduce oil consumption is significant and indisputable.
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Mar 17, 2008 2:58 pm) My bet, though, is on compressed air. Essentially you're using the same electricity as the EV to charge the thing up, just you're charging it with a compressor instead of an inverter. This at least saves the cost and damage of the batteries to the environment. Plus, you could have an on-board compressor as well powered off of a solar panel on the roof if you wanted to extend your range a bit. It's not as sexy as hybrids or fuel cells, but it's the most viable option long-term that I have heard of for passenger vehicles.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Mar 18, 2008 11:10 am) Regarding the use of compressed air; I believe I've read that it takes quite a bit more electricity to travel a comparable distance due to the inefficiency of existing air compressors. But, perhaps this could change if it's something that get's sufficient attention. I've also read that several of the newer battery technologies are much better for the environment due to their being non-toxic and/or recylable. I'm certainly looking forward to a reduction in gas usage, however it happens. |
|
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
