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: michael2003 (Aug 02, 2006 2:35 am) As the electric car technology is refined, it will become relatively easy to add a small and very efficient internal combustion motor that will start when the batteries are below, say, 50% and start producing energy to recharge the batteries. The engine would run at WOT and at low RPMs, and would therefore be more efficient than if it were driving the wheels directly. |
|
|
Replying to: rorr (Aug 04, 2006 6:32 am) Here are a few more interesting docs to look at: This is an interesting Wheel-to-well analysis for Japan. Of course it is not apples to apples with US, because their power mix is different. I find it interesting that their numbers show a large advantage for BEV over FCV, but their conclusion states "BEV is a little better than FCV both in terms of required energy and CO2 emission, but still needs total evaluation including driving range per charge.". They have to discount their own numbers because BEV comes out to well! http://www.jhfc.jp/data/seminar_report/04/pdf/06_h17seminar_e.pdf This is a fairly recent large, very detailed Wheel-to-well analysis of energy use and emissions from Argonne National Labs and GM. They compare 18 different future vehicle/fuel systems. Guess which future vehicle/fuel system was not considered in the comparison? While there is some very good info here, this is the kind of government study that really pisses me off because government policy will be made based on it without accounting for the glaring omission. http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/339.pdf Here is a similar Japanese study by Toyota (just to show I am not biased towards GM!) It basically does the same thing. http://www.mizuho-ir.co.jp/english/knowledge/documents/wtwghg041130.pdf |
|
|
I just stumbled across something very cool. It should help with the discussion on emissions. I just loaded it up and haven't done much with it yet, but I thought I would pass it along. http://www.transportation.anl.gov/software/GREET/ |
|
|
I've posted this link before on other Edmunds chats but I think it belongs here. Electric cars with their batteries charged by nuclear power stations are the only way to go. The link describes safe nuclear generating plants. http://www.eskom.co.za/nuclear_energy/pebble_bed/pebble_bed.html
|
|
|
Replying to: 3745 (Aug 08, 2006 2:54 am) I agree that it is a very good way to go and far superior to generating electricity from coal. My objection to expanding nuclear energy has to do with the fact that we live in a world with terrorists and that's not going to change. Nuclear plants and their waste materials are going to be very attractive to these people that want to do us harm. The cost to provide security for these facilities will be considerable and will only increase as the threat becomes more sophisticated. I think from a domestic security perspective we are best off generating our electricity on the most local level possible. Homeowners producing their own electricity through wind, solar, etc., being tied together in a small community grid.
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Aug 08, 2006 3:56 am) Meanwhile, America lags behind. Solar and wind power can only provide a small percentage of power needed. It is also unreliable and dependant on the weather. Coal mines and their environmental impact are more dangerous than nuclear power. Coal fired power stations pollute the atmosphere. How many coal miners have been killed in America and how many people have died due to nuclear accidents in this country? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 3745 (Aug 08, 2006 2:54 am) Somewhere someone will come up with a system that charges a battery or capacitor in someones garage using solar panels which the electric car can be plugged into at night.
|
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Aug 08, 2006 5:12 am) Fact of the matter is that solar power chargers do exist. Cell phone companies use them to charge their remote station batteries as one example. Solar panels are expensive to make and the manufacturing process is environmentaly dirty. It's also no good to plug into the solar charger at night. It's just not going to work! Bear in mind we are talking about millions of vehicle batteries that would have to be charged if and when a change to battery power took place. Super capacitors are an alternative to conventional batteries and at this moment you can buy super capacitor batteries for your flashlight. There are claims that they outperform standard rechargable flash light batteries and are much lighter. |
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Aug 08, 2006 5:12 am) Its already being done. Tesla Motors website states that they have an arrangement with solar installers to provide customers with this capability. If you live in a sunny climate like the desert Southwest this could be a very attractive way to go especially when the tax breaks are considered. While I'm sure the initial investment won't be cheap this represents something the individual can do to make himself energy independent. Expanding nuclear energy may be a good idea but it is something clearly outside your control.
|
|
|
Replying to: tpe (Aug 08, 2006 5:55 am) Early on, Governor Arnold talked about a grand plan to put solar cells on all new houses. I haven't heard anything about that lately, so I don't know where it stands. Once PV cells get thin, and flexible (which the new ones are), and cheap, they make a lot of sense because they distribute the generation across the grid.
|
|
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
