Who Killed the Electric Car?

[Titus]

I have driven 2 different electric vehicles when I was in California and they were wonderful. I think everyone in coastal California should own one today. I don't think it is appropriate just yet in most of the rest of the country. The reasons? Power plant types and weather.

There are no coal burning power plants in California. AFAIK, a little over half of the energy comes from Natural gas, and the rest comes from Nuclear, Hydro, wind, and solar plants. The pollution per KWH is much lower than found in other states where much of the power comes form coal. The lower pollution per KWH means that each EV is making a much bigger effect on reducing pollution.

As for weather, coastal California (where most EV development and support exists) has a very mild climate. There is much smaller need for A/C and Heat then a place like Texas. When those batteries have to heat or cool the passengers as well, the range and efficiency goes down much quicker than that of an ICE.

[black roadster]

I have driven 2 different electric vehicles when I was in California and they were wonderful. I think everyone in coastal California should own one today. I don't think it is appropriate just yet in most of the rest of the country. The reasons? Power plant types and weather.

There are no coal burning power plants in California. AFAIK, a little over half of the energy comes from Natural gas, and the rest comes from Nuclear, Hydro, wind, and solar plants. The pollution per KWH is much lower than found in other states where much of the power comes form coal. The lower pollution per KWH means that each EV is making a much bigger effect on reducing pollution.

As for weather, coastal California (where most EV development and support exists) has a very mild climate. There is much smaller need for A/C and Heat then a place like Texas. When those batteries have to heat or cool the passengers as well, the range and efficiency goes down much quicker than that of an ICE.

Very valid comments Titus. I'm impressed! The EV is not an overnight solution. I do think it could be a solution for many Americans across the country though. Battery technology is in it's infantcy. As the technology improves the capabilities of EVs will too.

We need to make drastic changes towards renewable energy sources as California has. California made the tough decisions to get where they are today but there is still lots to do. Oil and Coal are yesterdays power sources. Texas would do well with solar and wind energy as we have plenty of sunny and windy days and the land to install it on.

If I had the $$$ I would use both technologies to power my home.

[sammm]

Hummers should be given not driven.

I almost bought a Hummer...decided to get a "I Need Attention" tattoo on my forehead instead.

[Radio-Active]

I had a Hybrid. Don't want to buy another Honda because of it. The fuel economy was great, but I think that we could do a lot better with a diesel engine. From what I heard on Honda civic Hybrid forums, the engine got the same amount of fuel economy with the hybrid system failure as with the hybrid system in tact.

I would rather see a flash steam engine make it to market. My great Uncle supposedly worked as an engineer for one of the oil companies in the late 40's and early 50's. He told tales of a man that was driving around in a flash steam engine car that used water and a generator to run. The water was sprayed into a 8 cylinder engine that had been converted from an internal combustion engine. There where screens in each of the cylinders to heat the mist into steam. The electric screen grid caused the mist to instantly be transformed into steam. The story goes that the guy had been driving this car around for a couple of months when the oil company bought him out for 2 million dollars. Urban legend I guess... or is it?

[Nexus Flux]

I almost bought a Hummer...decided to get a "I Need Attention" tattoo on my forehead instead.

Nice

[icepenguin66]

The Tesla car is the only thing I've ever read about that is actually practical as an all electric car. As for the hybrid cars, I would love to have a the Highlander hybrid for a daily commuter so I could have the utility to actually fit my hockey gear, etc and not have the poor fuel economy of regular SUV's.

[Treibenschnell]

Free, renewable power for your car. How cool is that?

That'll go over great in a city like Seattle...

And what about all the heads here?

Hey!

Hummers should be given not driven.

Agreed!

[Nexus Flux]

I my defense please note the second part of that post.

And what about all the heads here? (I mean in the US not on this board)

[Treibenschnell]

I my defense please note the second part of that post.

I know. I chose to quote you out of context. Modern media, you know.

[Nexus Flux]

It's cool man. I figured you were ing around.

[Treibenschnell]

I figured you were a .

Hey!

[sammm]

It's cool man. I figured you were a

[onething]

Bottom line:

NOTHING IS FREE

Most of the technologies listed above are in their infancy, potentially very dangerous, and/or expensive.
Even horses have emissions and need maintenance.













Oh, wait . . . BR dragged us all into another one of his time machines but at least this one got many to think for a nanosecond

[altiain]

Tesla and the tree huggers have an argument for that.

Don't electric vehicles actually just move pollution to another location? And therefore don't EVs still use oil?

No. Electric power generation in the USA does not use oil. Coal, hydro, nuclear, solar, and natural gas are typical sources for generating electricity. Power generation plants, even coal burning ones, are inherently more efficient and less polluting than vehicles due to economies of scale and the ability to more efficiently remove pollutants from a smaller number of much larger fixed locations.
Also, an electric car is far more efficient than a gasoline car, so the amount of pollution generated by producing the electricity to drive an EV a given distance is much less than the pollution from the gasoline to drive an internal combustion car the same distance.

Heh. That's kinda funny. I can guarantee you that there isn't a coal-fired power plant on this planet that has emissions on par with an LEV automobile. Ironically, catalyst technology has reached such a level that what comes out of the tailpipe of an ULEV or SULEV automobile in most major metroplitan areas of this country is actually cleaner than what went in! Cars are not the problem - even with the huge and increasing number of automobiles we have on this planet, they contribute only a minute fraction of total airborne pollutants - a number that is dwarfed by the emissions from heavy industry and power generation facilities.

Secondly, economies of scale have nothing to do with pollution levels - this statement is akin to saying "We lose money on every unit we sell, but we make up for it on volume".

Lastly, a large portion of the pollution in coal's lifecycle comes from the mining process - a process that creates inherently more air pollution than oil or natural gas extraction. When you look at pollution lifecycles, you not only have to account for the consumption part of the lifecycle (whether that be in an internal combustion engine or a power plant), but the extraction process as well.

BTW titus - California may not have any coal-fired pwoer plants on its own soil... but the sad fact is that California is not energy self-sufficient. According to the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technology, California actually imports 21% of its electricity from coal-fired plants in other states.

I guess if it isn't technically in your state you don't have to count it, right?

Battery powered cars are not the answer. Personally, I'd be more inclined to invest my infrastructure dollars in a hydrogen powered fuel cell economy, but that's just me.

[icepenguin66]

Heh. That's kinda funny. I can guarantee you that there isn't a coal-fired power plant on this planet that has emissions on par with an LEV automobile. Ironically, catalyst technology has reached such a level that what comes out of the tailpipe of an ULEV or SULEV automobile in most major metroplitan areas of this country is actually cleaner than what went in! Cars are not the problem - even with the huge and increasing number of automobiles we have on this planet, they contribute only a minute fraction of total airborne pollutants - a number that is dwarfed by the emissions from heavy industry and power generation facilities.

Secondly, economies of scale have nothing to do with pollution levels - this statement is akin to saying "We lose money on every unit we sell, but we make up for it on volume".

Lastly, a large portion of the pollution in coal's lifecycle comes from the mining process - a process that creates inherently more air pollution than oil or natural gas extraction. When you look at pollution lifecycles, you not only have to account for the consumption part of the lifecycle (whether that be in an internal combustion engine or a power plant), but the extraction process as well.

BTW titus - California may not have any coal-fired pwoer plants on its own soil... but the sad fact is that California is not energy self-sufficient. According to the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technology, California actually imports 21% of its electricity from coal-fired plants in other states.

I guess if it isn't technically in your state you don't have to count it, right?

Battery powered cars are not the answer. Personally, I'd be more inclined to invest my infrastructure dollars in a hydrogen powered fuel cell economy, but that's just me.

Bravo! Wonderfully put! I gotta dig up that article in response to the rancid film An Inconvenient Truth. Says something about the percentages of greenhouse gasses and how the percent generated by humans is very trivial.