I reckon if they devoted a tenth of the capital to it that they devote to shoving fucking adverts in our fucking faces at every fucking opportunity then it wouldn't be long before there was a workable tech. There's just no incentive to do so at the moment. Still, if the price of oil continues its steady ascendancy the situation will probably change before too long.
Who Killed the Electric Car?
- Thread starter BingoBongoBango
- Start date
Oswaldtwistle
Banned
Electric cars are a no-brainer in most of the US, but at best only a partial solution here in the UK, because many people don't have off street parking, plus they don't touch the UK's congestion problem
Still worth persuing, IMHO, and if the last few years have proved anything is that head-on anti car taxes don't work and aren't popular with the public.....
Still worth persuing, IMHO, and if the last few years have proved anything is that head-on anti car taxes don't work and aren't popular with the public.....
It probably will if those air tanks take a whack in an accident.
My bet would be using renewable energy to make hydrogen to fuel for cars.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
liablity if they broke leaked became unsafe degraded in some poluting way and mainly of course the manner in which they were handed out in the first place which was by agreement that you were given an experimenal car inorder that they could then gain data on the feasiabilty and reliablity of the cars and their power source. they were in essence hire cars not intended for personal ownership therefore they recalled them all to prevent the technology from getting into other peoples hands....
If you believe the EV1 "big oil" conspiracy, then the car companies squashed the project to make us all keep buying petrol cars.
But from a look at various web sites discussing the EV1, it doesn't look that complicated to design and build an electric car.
GM is big, and so are the oil companies, but surely if the opportunity is there to make a viable, useful electric car, there are other companies with lots of money to spend who do not have a stake in internal combustion engines?
And who stand to make huge amounts of dosh if they produced a simple and affordable electric vehicle?
Maybe something with swappable battery packs would solve the range problem?
Giles..
But from a look at various web sites discussing the EV1, it doesn't look that complicated to design and build an electric car.
GM is big, and so are the oil companies, but surely if the opportunity is there to make a viable, useful electric car, there are other companies with lots of money to spend who do not have a stake in internal combustion engines?
And who stand to make huge amounts of dosh if they produced a simple and affordable electric vehicle?
Maybe something with swappable battery packs would solve the range problem?
Giles..
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
Total radiant energy impingent on the earth on a very good day is in the order of 1kw per square metre.
That's all of 1 1/2 HP.
We're back to whether people are prepared to drive ultra-lightweight vehicles ...
That's all of 1 1/2 HP.
We're back to whether people are prepared to drive ultra-lightweight vehicles ...
Yep, and if I remember right the 'car' was a lightweight motor vehicle. Given the need at the moment for heavy batteries, it would be interesting to see how this would be overcome.
It's not only about how the energy is collected but also how it can be stored. Maybe the answer is to have solar powered charging points rather than a self contained solar powered vehicle. Although I prefer the self contained vehicle idea.
There's a new electric sports car out at the moment made by a Silicon Valley startup:
Tesla Roadster
It does 0-60 in 3.9 and has a range of 220 mi (350 km).
Might be a start to better cars in the future or could end up as another electric car flop. What are your opinions on this?
Tesla Roadster
It does 0-60 in 3.9 and has a range of 220 mi (350 km).
Might be a start to better cars in the future or could end up as another electric car flop. What are your opinions on this?
Still need to generate the electricity, which is the real issue with electric cars I guess.
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
I couldn't even reliably park one near enough to my house to recharge it.
hah hah yeah good point. Need fast charge at stations, like the charging on the go-karts.
But still got to burn, nuke or geotherm something. Just displacing the generation of the energy. Doesn't really solve the issues.
Nuclear engine is much cleaner than coal, oil or gas... Geothermal energy is re-usable, as is tidal or wind-power. And there's also hydro-electric power. Removing oil from the shifts production of energy to a central source which is easier to change. Plus, think of how much less polluted London's roads would be. (And quieter...!)
Mainly because most of the cars so far have been prototypes, rather than production models. I see plenty of the Noddy electric cars in London, so I don't see why a non-Noddy version would be a problem...
Oh sure, but with current nuke plans, there's more shit to clean up (for the next generation.) Just saying that in themselves electric cars are not all they're cracked up to be.
Geo-thermal is not completely re-usable. You can pump water down, but the rock cools down over time (and can cause land destabilisation, too.)
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
To get back to the consumer demand question - Tesla (with a bit of help from Lotus) seem to have been the first to produce an electric car with decent acceleration and range and - surprise surprise - there is demand for them. Admittedly they are only making them in small numbers (thousands atm) and they cost a hundred thousand dollars - but on the other hand people are willing to pay a hundred thousand dollars for them 
Think what a major car manufacturer could do now that better technology has been researched and with their economies of scale. If they could cut the price even to, say, $50,000 (luxury but not just for the super rich either) then it could start to build up real demand and gradually as the technology became commonplace it would become cheaper.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster
Think what a major car manufacturer could do now that better technology has been researched and with their economies of scale. If they could cut the price even to, say, $50,000 (luxury but not just for the super rich either) then it could start to build up real demand and gradually as the technology became commonplace it would become cheaper.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster
Although I've now read that link, I can't see that being stated.
It seems quite clear from the film that there was a potentially vast consumer demand and that GM were putting people through all kinds of hoops in order to get one. OK, the cars had limitations but they had an utterly unique selling point - zero emissions.
Anyone that breathes should be able to understand the appeal of that.
To get back to the consumer demand question - Tesla (with a bit of help from Lotus) seem to have been the first to produce an electric car with decent acceleration and range and - surprise surprise - there is demand for them. Admittedly they are only making them in small numbers (thousands atm) and they cost a hundred thousand dollars - but on the other hand people are willing to pay a hundred thousand dollars for them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster
And if there's a market for electric supercars - where performance is the priority - then there must be one for more humble vehicles
The only demand is for people to have one as a "toy" as their sixth or seventh choice in the garage, a bit like all the Hollywood slebs who proudly own a Prius (used occasionally by one of their staff).
Witness all the Government Ministers fleeing from their Jags to G-wizzes (ideal for the hundreds of yards separating Whitehall / Parliament / their John Lewis appliance filled London homes) - not.........
I follow their example!
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
My first choice is always my pushbike.
My second choice is my car that's practically welded to the road.
Are you infirm, Cobbles ?
How's your cardiovascular system ?
My second choice is my car that's practically welded to the road.
Are you infirm, Cobbles ?
How's your cardiovascular system ?
Lots of "normal" people have Prius's as well... There's also lots of demand for the Tesla car among ordinary people...
Normal = brain dead + believing the hyperbole.
There's also lots of demand for the Tesla car among ordinary people...[/quote]
[/quote]
- Reservations for the 2009 Tesla Roadster are open to all US Residents
- 2009 Roadster base price: $109,000*
- Wait time to delivery is approximately 12 months*
- A $60,000 refundable reservation fee is required to secure your position
Tremendous (according to the last 3 years' corporate funded "well-man" assessments on the private health portion of my compensation package).
The adrenaline generated by copious doses of pleasure driving (380BHP/550 Ft/Lbs torque) at the week-ends must be part of this.
Baboonking
Registered Baboon
I've been tinkering about with EV's for about 3 years now.
Electric vehicles (EV's) beat fossil fuel powered ones in pretty much every category, including environmental performance, except in range, refeulling time and arguably cost. see here for a mythbuster primer http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/transportation/4264025.html?series=19
I say arguably because since electric cars haven't been mass produced for about 90 years, the costs of batteries, motors etc are only really projections. For the last 30 or so years car companies said there wouldn't be any demand, activists said there would be if they were mass produced and pretty much nothing was built.
Fortunatly lots of things are changing since the film came out the oil companies no longer have a lock on battery technology, lots of smaller firms, lots venture capital in battery technology, collectives, governments are moving ahead, even with low tech lead acid batteries for example http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/tech/2008/06/02/rivers.nepal.electric.cars.cnn?iref=videosearch
Also lots of people who are tired of petrol prices/pollution are building converting there own cars
for example http://www.kiwiev.com/
or http://www.evalbum.com/1753
or http://www.evalbum.com/battt/LION/16
Electric vehicles (EV's) beat fossil fuel powered ones in pretty much every category, including environmental performance, except in range, refeulling time and arguably cost. see here for a mythbuster primer http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/transportation/4264025.html?series=19
I say arguably because since electric cars haven't been mass produced for about 90 years, the costs of batteries, motors etc are only really projections. For the last 30 or so years car companies said there wouldn't be any demand, activists said there would be if they were mass produced and pretty much nothing was built.
Fortunatly lots of things are changing since the film came out the oil companies no longer have a lock on battery technology, lots of smaller firms, lots venture capital in battery technology, collectives, governments are moving ahead, even with low tech lead acid batteries for example http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/tech/2008/06/02/rivers.nepal.electric.cars.cnn?iref=videosearch
Also lots of people who are tired of petrol prices/pollution are building converting there own cars
for example http://www.kiwiev.com/
or http://www.evalbum.com/1753
or http://www.evalbum.com/battt/LION/16
Things like the Modec perhaps.
"
A Modec can do:
- up to 100 mile range
- 50 mph
- 2 tonne payload
Recharging is simplicity itself. Just get out, plug in and go home.
Tesco, Center Parcs, Hildon Water and many other major companies have already introduced Modecs to their fleets.
"
Some general info about EVs here.
