ban_basketball's avatar

r.payton@att.net · 06-05-2008, 09:23 AM

this is the documentary I spoke about in another post -these people were begging to buy those cars rather than have them destroyed -another great film about the auto industry is ''Tucker ; A man and his dreams ''-his factory was shut down yet 90% of all original Tucker's still run....

Big Oil controls this country .

Throwby · 06-05-2008, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by r.payton@att.net

this is the documentary I spoke about in another post -these people were begging to buy those cars rather than have them destroyed -another great film about the auto industry is ''Tucker ; A man and his dreams ''-his factory was shut down yet 90% of all original Tucker's still run....

Big Oil controls this country .

"Tucker" is a classic. A truly phenomenal story.

ban basketball · 06-05-2008, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by skipster

You and I are thinking on the same track, Throwby. The Law of Conservation of Energy tells us that the same amount of energy is going to be used to move a vehicle over a distance regardless of its power source. If we burn coal to generate the electricity, we are at no net change in carbon emissions, whether our cars run on electricity or gasoline. If more electricity can be generated using nuclear and hydro means, then we may see a drop in carbon emissions. But, if electric cars are charged using electricity generated from burning fossil fuels, we haven't reduced carbon emissions at all.

What I think will drive the technology is money. If someone can make a buck by selling electric cars, it will happen.

False. The cars are usually charged at night, which is NOT peak energy demand time. So, it did not use more energy.

Either way, it stops reliance on foreign sources of oil.

ban basketball · 06-05-2008, 12:24 PM

Let me address some of the very myths that are being discussed on here that the film readily details. Again, please watch the film, folks, and it will all make sense.

Wouldn't it use more energy, as you now need to use more coal?
No. The cars that were used were charged at night, which is not peak demand time. They would use no more energy than what we are using now, possibly even less, when you considered transportation costs of oil.

If there is demand for it, car companies will develop this product.
And there we have the gist of the film: Who Killed the Electric Car? For the cars that GM leased for use, the demand exceeded the supply for them. Who WOULDN"T want a fully functioning electric car that does everything that your gas guzzler does?!

So, why was it killed? Well, many had a hand in it. The car companies didn't want it because they make a good chunk of their money on servicing present gas cars. The electric car didn't need servicing, so the car companies lost money from it.

The oil companies, obviously, don't want it, and they were the ones (Chevron) who bought the rights to the battery and it never saw the light of day again. However, the batteries are back, and even better than before (around 200 miles per charge).

As you can see, the demand was there, but it wasn't so much that people stood to make money as much as it was people stood to LOSE money that I noted above. This is the only valid conspiracy that I've ever seen documented.

Watch the derned film!!!!!!!! We need a change and this is it.

skipster · 06-05-2008, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by ban basketball

False. The cars are usually charged at night, which is NOT peak energy demand time. So, it did not use more energy.

Either way, it stops reliance on foreign sources of oil.

I love how some people like to begin their posts with "False," no matter what is contained in the post. Night may not be the peak of energy demand currently, but ANY draw on an electric system will require more energy to meet the demand. Remember the Law of Conservation of Energy -- energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Thus, the same amount of energy will be used to propel a vehicle over a particular distance, regardless of the engine type. The difference here may come in the placement of efficiency savings -- electricity is more efficient on the back end, but gasoline is more efficient on the front end.

You can also think of it like this -- if you plug in your car (ar anything) at night, you create demand. That increased demand (however large or small) will need more energy to create electricity, which will add carbon to the atmosphere if fossil fuels will be burned. Proponents of electric cars will recognize that they will add to power demand and should advocate cleaner electricity generation, like nuclear fuel.

It seems that the selling point of the documentary is that electric cars are cleaner. BUt, that can only be the case if electricity is produced using non-fossil fuel means.

Just remember that it is a physical impossiblilty for electric cars to use less energy than internal combustion cars -- energy can not be created nor destroyed.

FloggingSully · 06-05-2008, 03:36 PM

3 points:

1) Equal energy requirements doens't necessarily mean equal carbon/pollution emmissions.

2) It's easier to capture emmissions at a power plant than it is to get them comming out of each individual vehicle.

3) We aren't as dependent on unstable countries for our electrical energy as we are for our oil energy.

Throwby · 06-05-2008, 05:34 PM

Skipster - I think what you are rightly pointing out is that the solution is comprehensive, not simply having an electric car.

Here is a link to an article about Neil Young which Furches mentioned earlier. I really like this because it uses an existing vehicle and no matter what happens we can't just trash every existing vehicle for a new one. There will have to be a transition. http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepu...young0603.html

Ban - kudo's to you for bringing this to the forefront.

Throwby · 06-05-2008, 05:53 PM

Here's a much better link with video:
http://videos.kansas.com/vmix_hosted...dia?id=1909059

WARNING: Watching this video may make you want to live with a Cinnamon Girl for the rest of your life.

ban basketball · 06-05-2008, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by skipster

I love how some people like to begin their posts with "False," no matter what is contained in the post. Night may not be the peak of energy demand currently, but ANY draw on an electric system will require more energy to meet the demand. Remember the Law of Conservation of Energy -- energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Thus, the same amount of energy will be used to propel a vehicle over a particular distance, regardless of the engine type. The difference here may come in the placement of efficiency savings -- electricity is more efficient on the back end, but gasoline is more efficient on the front end.

You can also think of it like this -- if you plug in your car (ar anything) at night, you create demand. That increased demand (however large or small) will need more energy to create electricity, which will add carbon to the atmosphere if fossil fuels will be burned. Proponents of electric cars will recognize that they will add to power demand and should advocate cleaner electricity generation, like nuclear fuel.

It seems that the selling point of the documentary is that electric cars are cleaner. BUt, that can only be the case if electricity is produced using non-fossil fuel means.

Just remember that it is a physical impossiblilty for electric cars to use less energy than internal combustion cars -- energy can not be created nor destroyed.

Nothing more disingenuine than someone antagonistic toward environmental issues trying to educate those of us who are concerned about environmental issues. Let's try to cut the crap that you're thinking "green first," shall we?

Fact is, there are other means of energy out there, asidefrom pulverized coal. It is old technology, dirty, etc, etc, and a lot of other options are out there. If we want to commit to it, or, better yet, have government mandate it, those piddly issues that you refer to become irrelevant.

You can't stop us electric car freaks from making it a reality!

ODH · 06-05-2008, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by skipster

I love how some people like to begin their posts with "False," no matter what is contained in the post. Night may not be the peak of energy demand currently, but ANY draw on an electric system will require more energy to meet the demand. Remember the Law of Conservation of Energy -- energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Thus, the same amount of energy will be used to propel a vehicle over a particular distance, regardless of the engine type. The difference here may come in the placement of efficiency savings -- electricity is more efficient on the back end, but gasoline is more efficient on the front end.

You can also think of it like this -- if you plug in your car (ar anything) at night, you create demand. That increased demand (however large or small) will need more energy to create electricity, which will add carbon to the atmosphere if fossil fuels will be burned. Proponents of electric cars will recognize that they will add to power demand and should advocate cleaner electricity generation, like nuclear fuel.

It seems that the selling point of the documentary is that electric cars are cleaner. BUt, that can only be the case if electricity is produced using non-fossil fuel means.

Just remember that it is a physical impossiblilty for electric cars to use less energy than internal combustion cars -- energy can not be created nor destroyed.

You are mixing some things up. Conservation of Energy will still hold true, but it takes differrent amounts of energy to move different cars the same distance. The even if the amount of work to move them is the same, the amount of energy is not unless they have the same efficiency, which obviously varies greatly. I do not know much about Electric car engines, but if the are inherently more efficient then you are using less energy for the same amount of work becasue you reduce energy losses.
Electric cars can also easily take advantage of things like regenerative braking.
You are correct that charging the batteries at night will not save energy, it is just easier on the electric grid and most electric companies charge less for electricity at night becasue there is less demand.

ban_basketball's avatar

Politics & Religion