"Bobo Bonobo®" > wrote in message
...
> The biggest obstacle to affordability of cars like the Volt is the
> cost of LiIon batteries. Well, why not make a version that has only
> enough battery capacity to go 10 miles on a charge?

Buy the 40 mile car and it a couple of years it will probably turn into a
10 mile car anyway.

What is going to happen when all those batteries start hitting the junk
yards?

"Ed Pawlowski" ha scritto nel messaggio
> "Bobo Bonobo®" wrote in message

>> The biggest obstacle to affordability of cars like the Volt is the>> cost
>> of LiIon batteries. Well, why not make a version that has only>> enough
>> battery capacity to go 10 miles on a charge?
>
> Buy the 40 mile car and it a couple of years it will probably turn into a
> > 10 mile car anyway.
>
> What is going to happen when all those batteries start hitting the junk
> yards?

What will be any worse than the exhaust fumes of millions of cars we have
now and the batteries that are in them now? Part of the design must be how
to recycle what's in them. Just as it should have been for all the other
crap we are sticking in landfills.
I remember seeing film of people laughing at the VW when it first hit the
US. People will not only buy well-designed new ideas, they'll end up loving
it. The US just has to get public transport back and use it. Russia and
China are huge, too, but they don't try to drive from one end to the other
in a private car.

"Giusi" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ed Pawlowski" ha scritto nel messaggio
>> "Bobo Bonobo®" wrote in message
>
>>> The biggest obstacle to affordability of cars like the Volt is the>>
>>> cost of LiIon batteries. Well, why not make a version that has only>>
>>> enough battery capacity to go 10 miles on a charge?
>>
>> Buy the 40 mile car and it a couple of years it will probably turn into
>> a > 10 mile car anyway.
>>
>> What is going to happen when all those batteries start hitting the junk
>> yards?
>
> What will be any worse than the exhaust fumes of millions of cars we have
> now and the batteries that are in them now? Part of the design must be
> how to recycle what's in them. Just as it should have been for all the
> other crap we are sticking in landfills.
> I remember seeing film of people laughing at the VW when it first hit the
> US. People will not only buy well-designed new ideas, they'll end up
> loving it. The US just has to get public transport back and use it.
> Russia and China are huge, too, but they don't try to drive from one end
> to the other in a private car.
>
Few people in the US drive cross country in private cars either... most make
those long journeys by plane, train, bus. And most all the populous areas
have very convenient mass transportation. Most long distance driving is
done in sections over relatively long time periods; the traveling
salesperson is still very much alive and well... and the folks with RVs
don't barrel straight through, they meander. However, the Interstate
roadway system in the US is the most energy efficient long distance mode for
private vehicles on the planet. The only reason transportation is so much
more expensive now is because the price of fuel has risen so. Today autos
get so much better gas milage from when I first used to drive cross country,
but back then a gallon of petrol cost like14¢, in LA 10¢, and near the coast
refineries 8¢... plus double and triple Plaid/Green stamps, free steak
knives, and glassware... and free full service meant pumping gas, checking
fluid levels, washing all glass including headlamps, and free air in all
tires including the spare... and they took your money and brought you your
change, never had to get out of your car. In those days you could pull into
an Amoco station, hand the attendant a dollar bill, and like a big sport
holler fillerup! And you got 20¢ change. LOL

> "Giusi" > wrote in message

>>> What is going to happen when all those batteries start hitting the junk
>>> yards?
>>
>> What will be any worse than the exhaust fumes of millions of cars we have
>> now and the batteries that are in them now? Part of the design must be
>> how to recycle what's in them. Just as it should have been for all the
>> other crap we are sticking in landfills.
>> I remember seeing film of people laughing at the VW when it first hit the
>> US. People will not only buy well-designed new ideas, they'll end up
>> loving it. The US just has to get public transport back and use it.
>> Russia and China are huge, too, but they don't try to drive from one end
>> to the other in a private car.

IMO, the hybrid and electric cars are not quite proven technology. That
clean electric fuel often comes from dirty generating plants. The expensive
batteries will have to be recycled to avoid contamination from the
chemicals. Moving the greenhouse gasses from the car to a powerplant does
not solve the problems, at least not yet.

I'm sure these things are being worked on, but I want to be sure before I
invest. In my case, I tend to rotate my cars and use them for ten years or
more replacing the oldest and making the present primary the secondary.
That could mean two or more sets of expensive batteries.

As for public transportation, there is none at all where I live and work.
Part of the route used to be covered by train up to about 40 years ago. It
may improve, but will never become the main method of transportation in most
areas. It could be better in most cities though and has been making some
progress.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> IMO, the hybrid and electric cars are not quite proven technology.
> That clean electric fuel often comes from dirty generating plants.
> The expensive batteries will have to be recycled to avoid
> contamination from the chemicals. Moving the greenhouse gasses from
> the car to a powerplant does not solve the problems, at least not yet.

Refreshing to hear someone say that. We have all this pollution
drifting over from coal burning electric plants in the midwest, then
people refer to electric cars as non-polluting. Just because smoke
doesn't come out of your electric outlets doesn't mean it's clean
energy, necessarily.

nancy

"Nancy Young" ha scritto nel messaggio

> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> IMO, the hybrid and electric cars are not quite proven technology.>> That
>> clean electric fuel often comes from dirty generating plants. The
>> expensive batteries will have to be recycled to avoid contamination from
>> the chemicals. Moving the greenhouse gasses from the car to a powerplant
>> does not solve the problems, at least not yet.
>
> Refreshing to hear someone say that. We have all this pollution drifting
> over from coal burning electric plants in the midwest, then> people refer
> to electric cars as non-polluting. Just because smoke> doesn't come out
> of your electric outlets doesn't mean it's clean> energy, necessarily.
> nancy

But it doesn't have to be like that. With not-that-modern technology the
effluent from those stacks can be clean and the energy dispersed in it
captured and used. Electric cars are not the one and only possible answer,
either. There are so many ways of producing methane gas that even an
individual farmer can do it. It can be used for producing electricity or
can be condensed and bottled to be used in vehicles. These alternate cars
are not that new here and they work for the purposes they are meant. Gas
bottles are extremely common, cheap, very clean and go as far as you need to
go and then you can fill up easily. Electric cars are ideal for little
service vehicles. These two are the only cars allowed into city centers
when there are pollution alerts.

Public transport is sad in the USA. Next month I have to get from suburban
Washington DC to Gettysburg, a major tourism destination. It's car or
nothing. How did we let things get so bad? The day I arrive I have to get
to Martinsburg WV. There is a train, but ALL the trains go into DC in the
morning and back at night. I need to be there during office hours.

Nancy Young wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> IMO, the hybrid and electric cars are not quite proven technology.
>> That clean electric fuel often comes from dirty generating plants. The
>> expensive batteries will have to be recycled to avoid
>> contamination from the chemicals. Moving the greenhouse gasses from
>> the car to a powerplant does not solve the problems, at least not yet.
>
> Refreshing to hear someone say that. We have all this pollution
> drifting over from coal burning electric plants in the midwest, then
> people refer to electric cars as non-polluting. Just because smoke
> doesn't come out of your electric outlets doesn't mean it's clean
> energy, necessarily.
> nancy


So far the alternatives (wind, solar, ocean tide waves)
aren't being used or researched in high enough volume to
provide clean energy for a fraction of those who want it.
It may be in our great-grandchildren's lifetimes but I doubt
very much it will be in ours. Meanwhile we need to take
advantage of what IS available.

gloria p

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>
> IMO, the hybrid and electric cars are not quite proven technology. That
> clean electric fuel often comes from dirty generating plants. The expensive
> batteries will have to be recycled to avoid contamination from the
> chemicals. Moving the greenhouse gasses from the car to a powerplant does
> not solve the problems, at least not yet.

The hybrid is an interim technology on the road to electric cars which
seems to be the future of personal transportation. The main importance
of hybrids is that it's preparing us for fully electric cars. It's
something that we have to go through. My guess is that it will take
about 25 years until the last gas pump in the US is taken down.

Of course, all the problems with the batteries and power generation and
conduits able to handle the loads will be solved. They don't really seem
that difficult compared the ones we faced building an infrastructure to
support gasoline powered vehicles so 80 years ago.

>
> I'm sure these things are being worked on, but I want to be sure before I
> invest. In my case, I tend to rotate my cars and use them for ten years or
> more replacing the oldest and making the present primary the secondary.
> That could mean two or more sets of expensive batteries.
>
> As for public transportation, there is none at all where I live and work.
> Part of the route used to be covered by train up to about 40 years ago. It
> may improve, but will never become the main method of transportation in most
> areas. It could be better in most cities though and has been making some
> progress.
>
>

On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:13:27 -1000, dsi1 wrote:

> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>
>> IMO, the hybrid and electric cars are not quite proven technology. That
>> clean electric fuel often comes from dirty generating plants. The expensive
>> batteries will have to be recycled to avoid contamination from the
>> chemicals. Moving the greenhouse gasses from the car to a powerplant does
>> not solve the problems, at least not yet.
>
> The hybrid is an interim technology on the road to electric cars which
> seems to be the future of personal transportation. The main importance
> of hybrids is that it's preparing us for fully electric cars. It's
> something that we have to go through. My guess is that it will take
> about 25 years until the last gas pump in the US is taken down.
>
> Of course, all the problems with the batteries and power generation and
> conduits able to handle the loads will be solved. They don't really seem
> that difficult compared the ones we faced building an infrastructure to
> support gasoline powered vehicles so 80 years ago.
>

well, inertia is one of the problems. we took a fork in the road (so to
speak) favoring the gasoline-powered automobile some years ago, and now
there *is* that huge investment in that infrastructure, and consequently
big money to be disbursed in political contributions and the like to make
sure that infrastructure (and the profits therefrom) remains in place.

the change will come when it is forced upon us when the oil runs out (which
will be pretty soon) at a greater expense and with greater dislocations
than might have been strictly necessary had we had some foresight and
planned better for that event.

your pal,
blake

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>
> IMO, the hybrid and electric cars are not quite proven technology. That
> clean electric fuel often comes from dirty generating plants. The expensive
> batteries will have to be recycled to avoid contamination from the
> chemicals. Moving the greenhouse gasses from the car to a powerplant does
> not solve the problems, at least not yet.
>


By the Law of Energy you've gotta put energy in before you
can get it out.
Unless you plan to carpet your back yard with solar cells to
recharge your
power supply, you may have to resort to hamsters on
exercise wheels
to get to your definition of "clean".

gloria p

In article >,
Puester > wrote:

> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> >
> > IMO, the hybrid and electric cars are not quite proven technology. That
> > clean electric fuel often comes from dirty generating plants. The
> > expensive
> > batteries will have to be recycled to avoid contamination from the
> > chemicals. Moving the greenhouse gasses from the car to a powerplant does
> > not solve the problems, at least not yet.
> >
>
>
> By the Law of Energy you've gotta put energy in before you
> can get it out.
> Unless you plan to carpet your back yard with solar cells to
> recharge your
> power supply, you may have to resort to hamsters on
> exercise wheels
> to get to your definition of "clean".

I posted this site before, but here's a different page:

http://www.zapworld.com/electric-veh...ra-solar-panel

UPS (United Parcel Service) leased a fleet of their trucks for Christmas
deliveries.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA