Re: electric sports car
Johhny, you should want electric cars to become popular. The less people driving gasoline powered vehicles means more gasoline for you.
As for electric cars, I like them. I see the US switching from coal to nuclear power in the next 50 years. I also see solar and wind power becoming more and more popular, so I see the whole "coal is so dirty" arguement not being very valid in the near future. There are three big things to figure out with electric cars. 1) How to store the power efficiently and effectively. 2) (Similar to 1) How to get a decent range on the vehicle. 3) Effectively recharging the car. If they can figure out a way to give me 400 miles of range and then get a full recharge in 30-60 minutes, they will have a very salable product. Not only will they have a salable product, but also they will be able to offer gas stations, truck stops, dinners, malls, ect. a side business as offering a way to transfer large amounts of electricity very quickly may be a salable service. |
Re: electric sports car
Hah. I can imagine car outlets in parking outlets :P Throw some solar panels on buildings just to lessen the consumption. Would be nice to park and charge while you're at work. Have a full charge on your way home.
The biggest problem with electric-powered ---- right now isn't the ability to propel a car with it (Tesla for example) or cost of electricity. It's mostly just the cost of the batteries. Tesla gets a 200-250+ mile range, with a 1 or 2 speed transmission. That's not bad considering my 10 gal crx gets only 300-400 (probably less with the mileage on the motor). They've developed batteries that charge fast as hell, and hold more power, and release power faster. But, they're still way too expensive for the average consumer. I think the switch will happen eventually, but right now it's too damn expensive. Solar panels and batteries are getting cheaper but I think it'll still be a decade or two before it's "the norm." I sure as hell wouldn't mind covering my roof in some sort of solar panel and charging my car with it to get most of my trips for little or no money. You can still modify the electric ----, it just doesn't have the awesome noise and number of upgrades you can make as with a fuel powered car. But, there are mods, just not as many. Seeing an electric motor explode into a ball of plasma is cool though. |
Re: electric sports car
solar panels are not efficient enough. they're basically worthless. you have to have a huge amount to even power a meduim sized house, which hardly uses any electricity in the big picture.
|
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by random-strike
solar panels are not efficient enough. they're basically worthless. you have to have a huge amount to even power a meduim sized house, which hardly uses any electricity in the big picture.
http://www.energy.gov/news/4503.htm <- 40% efficiency I know it's still not "great", but regardless it would cut down on costs. |
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by Jorsher
Yeah I thought stating it would be a decade or two before they'd become not-so-big of a surprise to see, people would have gathered they would be cheaper and more efficient.
http://www.energy.gov/news/4503.htm <- 40% efficiency I know it's still not "great", but regardless it would cut down on costs. they prob won't work |
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by random-strike
even if they were 90% efficient, you wouuld still need acres of them to do anything.
they prob won't work We DEFINITELY need to stick with fuel, and when it eventually runs out we'll just throw some hamsters on generators. |
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by Jorsher
Yeah you're right. New Mexico, New Jersey, Arizona, Californa, etc are building solar farms and subsidizing roof panels because it's a stupid concept. Who cares that after a few years they'll pay for themselves and give "free" energy from then on. The New Mexico one does take up 3,200 acres, but it will power 240,000 homes without using the most efficient panels. I believe that 240,000 homes would take up more than 3,200 acres...
We DEFINITELY need to stick with fuel, and when it eventually runs out we'll just throw some hamsters on generators. |
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by random-strike
why do they need subsidizing if they work so good?
Tell me what your better post-fuel solution is? |
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by Jorsher
Possibly because the initial cost is so high? If they "didn't work" they wouldn't be subsidized at all.
Tell me what your better post-fuel solution is? its "subsidized" because it doesn't work yet. |
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by random-strike
fat women and farts
its "subsidized" because it doesn't work yet. Either way, most of the solar stations don't get ANYTHING from the government, and do it for their own profit. The one built in NM was paid for by investors. You know why? Because they work. And they know that eventually, all their money will be profit (other than the usual maintenance). How can you say solar panels don't work??? Is pixie dust keeping the space station and satellites powered? It sure isn't gas, and I'm sure they have the panels up for a reason. There are more and more solar plants being built for a reason. The reason is, it works, and doesn't require anything but the sun. Do I believe they'll ever be able to support ALL the power requirements of the lovely human race? Hell no. But I don't think we should be sitting around burning ---- for power forever either. Put the deserts to use. Nobody wants to live there. Fat women need to be on treadmills generating power, and their farts used for methane powered generators. |
Re: electric sports car
|
Re: electric sports car
Chevy has also begun testing on an all electric car. Look up the chevy volt. It's been spotted as a test mule using the malibu chassis, which obviously is just for testing. They say they'll have it out by 2010 I think.
|
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by Jorsher
Same reason farmers and business get subsidies, because they don't work. Government wouldn't waste money on something that doesn't work. Yes, I know they love to waste money, but it's usually on something that benefits them.
Either way, most of the solar stations don't get ANYTHING from the government, and do it for their own profit. The one built in NM was paid for by investors. You know why? Because they work. And they know that eventually, all their money will be profit (other than the usual maintenance). How can you say solar panels don't work??? Is pixie dust keeping the space station and satellites powered? It sure isn't gas, and I'm sure they have the panels up for a reason. There are more and more solar plants being built for a reason. The reason is, it works, and doesn't require anything but the sun. Do I believe they'll ever be able to support ALL the power requirements of the lovely human race? Hell no. But I don't think we should be sitting around burning ---- for power forever either. Put the deserts to use. Nobody wants to live there. Fat women need to be on treadmills generating power, and their farts used for methane powered generators. im not "against" solar power, but i am against solar power subsidies |
Re: electric sports car
The way I see things with solar power is, the government should be installing the panels on state/federal buildings rather than subsidizing private business. This way they are increasing demand, hopefully allowing prices to drop, and thus allowing more "average" people to buy into solar power. At least then they are not just going completely into debt but building equity by making an "investment". If government is going to increase in size, it should at least do so in a logical, capitalistic manner.
|
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by random-strike
those satelittes use less power than your computer...
im not "against" solar power, but i am against solar power subsidies I can agree with you on being against solar power subsidies since eventually whoever received the subsidies will be making nearly pure profit, but it's for a good cause. The gov't should give "credit" to these companies that are to be repaid when the stations reach their profitable point, IMO. My "hometown" in wisconsin is setting up 120 wind generators, bitches are huge and I'm not sure how well they hold up to tornados. There's also "solar satellites" that could beam power back to earth, and always be facing the sun, however that's another thing that's not very cost efficient right now. I'm all for them now. Solar panel efficiency is increasing, it's 0 pollution, "free" power, and the country will be slightly less dependant on fuels. |
Re: electric sports car
Originally Posted by bigwig
The way I see things with solar power is, the government should be installing the panels on state/federal buildings rather than subsidizing private business. This way they are increasing demand, hopefully allowing prices to drop, and thus allowing more "average" people to buy into solar power. At least then they are not just going completely into debt but building equity by making an "investment". If government is going to increase in size, it should at least do so in a logical, capitalistic manner.
As they (slowly) become more widely used, prices will drop on panels, development into panels will increase, and they someday become in reach of normal people. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands