Volt Sleeps With the Fishes

[Sterling]

I think that instead of setting up charging stations that can charge your car quickly, they should set up stations similar to the "Blue Rhino" propane cages with already charged batteries and make them easy to swap out.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

First of all, the "scarcity" that some predict is about as hotly contests and falsely "settled" as AGW. About the only thing we know is that there is a finite amount of volume in the earth, so there is a fixed supply and it would eventually run out.

What we don't know is exactly how much oil exists and that new depostis are being discovered all the time and new ways to get at previously undiscovered deposts are being discovered all the time.

We also know that certain people are working very hard to prevent the discovery and access of new deposits. These people are mind-bogglingly connected with industries that wish to replace fossil fuels.

We also know that fossil fuels will diminish in supply and access to them will diminish as well but this will happen OVER TIME. Contrary to the "chicken little" scare tactics, we will not wake up one day and find that all the oil is gone. Oil will deplete over decades of time, and the price will naturally also slowly increase as the supply diminishes.

The way this works in the free market is quite simple:
1) Oil prices slowly rise as supply naturally diminishes.
2) Alternative energy prices slowly climb as more research is conducted by people who see a market for something cheaper than oil.
3) One day the price of oil is more than the price of whatever else is invented and people are smart enough to switch over of their own free will to the new energy.

The way this does not work in the current market is quite complex:
1) Oil prices are low but are artificually inflated due to regulation, litigation, and interference.
2) Alternative energy prices are high but are artificually lowered due to subsidies and graft.
3) These price shifts are not gradual and happen rapidly, leaving most people unable to adjust. Most people cannot simply replace their car at the drop of a hat, so they are forced to pay the high gas prices.
4) People paying artificially inflated prices for gas have no money to save and no money to spend on anything else so:
a. They can never afford a new car that uses alternative fuel.
b. They have no disposeable income so they spend less on everything else and the economy collapses.
c. The collapsed economy puts millions of others in a position of not being able to afford a new energy powered car.

This whole scenario is insane and we need to STOP meddling in the free market and let things happen naturally instead of forcing them to happen in ways that nobody can understand.

By the way, we have finite amounts of minerals on the Earth as well as oil. Some of them are depleting a lot faster than oil is. Where's all the PaNiC over that? Why aren't we hearing anything about everything else that will eventually be used up?

Ohhhhh would that be Lithium?

Yes the price of oil is partly demand, partly political and a lot of profit. But the Chinese automobile market is predicted to go to 30 million units in just about 10 years. That will likely impact the demand portion of that and political resulting in an even greater chance to profit.

I've said it before, we have a LOT of shale in the rocky mountains and tons of natural gas. Being self sufficient is only a decision and will. But the "Jed Clampet Oil" or cheap oil you can get by simply shooting at some food pretty much keeps us at that trough.

Originally Posted by el ess X

The government DOESN'T have a self-proclaimed duty per se, if the people don't want that. If they want to make alternative energy technology grants/loans available for private firms to develop them, like student loans, then let the private industries put their skin on the line instead of our wallets.

I think it's more of HOW government is intervening rather than whether they should or not. Picking who wins and who loses is a game this government can't play well and that's been proven for decades. IMO, they're lucky to pour piss out of a boot with the directions on the heel.

Look around the globe. Government subsidizing car sales does not work in the long term. Government subsidizing anything doesn't work in the long term. It's been proven. Yet the dummies still keep going back to that trough...our pockets, and we keep letting them.

But the government is the magic short term fix everthing answer..............isn't it.

Originally Posted by Sterling

I think that instead of setting up charging stations that can charge your car quickly, they should set up stations similar to the "Blue Rhino" propane cages with already charged batteries and make them easy to swap out.

That has been proposed. Also renting or leasing the batteries to enable exactly what you suggest. The problem is imagine the difficulty in storing enough 500 pound batteries that only result in at best 100 miles. Today that's simply 4 gallons of gasoline or diesel. And now you need someone to remove and install that 500 pound battery. Doable but needs some more thinking and technology.

By the way, there really is no such thing as a "quick charge" battery station. Electricity is similar to gasoline. If you tried to fill your gas tank with 10 gallons of gas in 10 seconds what kind of pressure and flow would be required?

To fill the battery quicker requires the electrons to flow faster. What happens when you do that? HEAT

So yes, you can quick charge the batter for your power tools. I'm told it's quite a different matter when you try to get a 16 kW hour battery charged up.

Want your kid arc welding around the car at the recharging station? It's about the same thing.

[Lou_Dorchen]

Originally Posted by a_Username

If you thought command-and-control, then you probably failed that class!

That depends on the class's professor. If you had Obama's professors you would have received an "A" in that class for that answer.

Capt Awesome is right, it's gov't interference that's causing the problems. It's no more complex than that. The only way the gov't should get involved in trying to get the private sector to pay for the R&D themsleves, is to offer up a HUGE pot of gold if they are successful instead of subsidizing ideas that have previously failed. And use the gov't as the guinea pigs, not us. Simply tell the Big 3 if they can develop an EV for their fleets that will reduce the current cost per mile with a lower cost per mile while retaining (or besting) the current reliability. Do it like the military often does, submit specs to private sector companies and if they CHOOSE to try and meet or beat those specs, guarantee the best EV's company an exclusive contract for say 15 years. So that company will make a huge profit and the rest of us will see how well the EVs work and save money for the gov't and thus people will embrace them in greater numbers than when the Federal gov't decides to "nudge" Americans into them (that was Energy Secretary Chu's exact choice of words).

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by a_Username

You should have probably have added that "fixed supply" describes every resource on the planet. In fact, you'll find some form of that phrase in nearly any definition of scarcity. Now, here's the chance to earn 5 Camaro Points by correctly answering the following question that is probably found in any introductory microeconomics class: what type of economic arrangement is best suited to deal with the issue of scarcity? If you thought market, then you are right! If you thought command-and-control, then you probably failed that class!

The last line in my post mentioned that other things were depleting on the earth as well and I was asking where the false panic was over those things.

But you are correct!

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen

That depends on the class's professor. If you had Obama's professors you would have received an "A" in that class for that answer.

Capt Awesome is right, it's gov't interference that's causing the problems. It's no more complex than that. The only way the gov't should get involved in trying to get the private sector to pay for the R&D themsleves, is to offer up a HUGE pot of gold if they are successful instead of subsidizing ideas that have previously failed. And use the gov't as the guinea pigs, not us. Simply tell the Big 3 if they can develop an EV for their fleets that will reduce the current cost per mile with a lower cost per mile while retaining (or besting) the current reliability. Do it like the military often does, submit specs to private sector companies and if they CHOOSE to try and meet or beat those specs, guarantee the best EV's company an exclusive contract for say 15 years. So that company will make a huge profit and the rest of us will see how well the EVs work and save money for the gov't and thus people will embrace them in greater numbers than when the Federal gov't decides to "nudge" Americans into them (that was Energy Secretary Chu's exact choice of words).

I agree with you 100% that we should not be paying up front for development work, and that offering "X-prize" type awards for developments is the way to go.

If that is too radical, I propose that if we MUST be paying for R&D then we should be paying for VERY soecific milestones. We CANNOT let the producers build any piece of crap and then pay subsidies for whatever happens to get built so people will buy it.

For example, we pay a certain amount of money to a battery company to research a new type of battery or manufacturing process that MUST meet some specific targets. If they can't make it work, then they don't get any future funding. This breaks the payment up into small chunks we can afford and it keeps the R&D focused and practical.

The whole "Clean Energy is just like the Manhattan Project or the Apollo Missions" is a strwman argument. The only thing they have in common is that they were paid for by the taxpayers. Everything else was completely different. The most major difference was that in the earlier programs, the technology existed or was within reach and in the green energy the technology is not within reach and the infrastructure to put it to use is vastly more costly and will take decades to deploy.

The Atomic Bomb and the Moon missions were very well defined problems and the solutions were designs which could be put on paper early in the development. The designs were specified and defined and in the Apollo case they were bid upon by the various aerospace companies and the winners were paid to produce the designs they bid.

What we have today is companies owned by campaign fund bundlers being given money with no specs or plans or even a bidding process. It's simply paying off contributors under the guise of doing things for the environment. They have no requirements to meet or specs to follow. We're not even getting an end product. The money goes to fancy marble office furnishings and bonuses. There's no accountability.

This needs to stop!

[Captain Awesome]

By the way... I have no idea how old you guys all are, but we have been hearing this "sky is falling/oil is running out" argument for about 40 years now. I think it's pretty safe to say that the chicken littles and boys who cried wolf are not taken seriously. Why is it that so many people believe in these scare tactics?

[Lou_Dorchen]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

By the way... I have no idea how old you guys all are, but we have been hearing this "sky is falling/oil is running out" argument for about 40 years now. I think it's pretty safe to say that the chicken littles and boys who cried wolf are not taken seriously. Why is it that so many people believe in these scare tactics?

They've actually openly admitted that, but the press is so biased most people don't realize it:

"To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest." -Dr Stephen Schneider, October 1989

Schneider was also notable for being public in the1970s about the coming ice age, but then being a main global warming proponent in the 1990s.The only consistancy Schneider had was that in both instances the solution was to take more freedoms away from Americans and increasingly regulate business in order to avert the coming catastrophe.

Not to be preaching, but if we do not stop electing Democrats and start rolling back these environmental laws, we wont be able to drive fun cars in the future. It's just a question of when. History repeats itself. In the 1970s, government enacting of laws called for by radical environmentalists killed the Muscle Car Era. We are in another 'muscle car war' now, and it's a great time to be a 'car guy', but it's going to end if we don't do something about it. And it's gonna end for the exact same reason it did last time.

Captain A, I'm 40. When I was a young child I remember asking why we had to wait in line for gas. My parents told me the honest truth and said it was because we had an idiot as a President. lol So I learned how bad policy/leaders affected the average American at a very young age. I've been extremely interested in history and civics since.

[Brokinarrow]

Originally Posted by Lou_Dorchen

Schneider was also notable for being public in the1970s about the coming ice age, but then being a main global warming proponent in the 1990s.

You do realize that global warming (regardless of how it came about) leads to ice ages, right? And also, no politics please

[KMPrenger]

Late in this discussion but its simple...Volt is too costly for the average person for it to make sense. If these things started at 35 that would help a lot. At 30K they'd be flying off the lots.

Natural gas is the next step.
http://www.hybridcars.com/news/gm-ex...les-30344.html

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Late in this discussion but its simple...Volt is too costly for the average person for it to make sense. If these things started at 35 that would help a lot. At 30K they'd be flying off the lots.

Natural gas is the next step.
http://www.hybridcars.com/news/gm-ex...les-30344.html

Just have to get around having large tanks pressurized to 3,000 psi in your trunk. Other than that, Honda sells at home pressure stations for $7,000 that will fill your car up at home in just about the same time it takes a Volt to charge on a 110 circuit..............assuming you have natural at home.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Just have to get around having large tanks pressurized to 3,000 psi in your trunk. Other than that, Honda sells at home pressure stations for $7,000 that will fill your car up at home in just about the same time it takes a Volt to charge on a 110 circuit..............assuming you have natural at home.

Here's a news flash....

Batteries do not produce energy. I think you probably already knew that. The energy in batteries has to come from some source and get transferred to the battery and then transferred out of the battery. This process is INCREDIBLY wasteful. I prefer to drive a vehicle that is the PRIMARY energy producer and not using 2nd or 3rd generation energy that most of which has been wasted.

People who drive electric cars WASTE energy. My SS is a primary producer. I save the planet. The volt is wrecking our planet!

If the goal is to make energy somewhere and then store it in the car (battery) and use it later, why bother with expensive batteries and junk. Why not just put a couple of inexpensive compressed air tanks in the car and use the energy in the compressed air to power the car. It's the same as a battery, but costs a lot less.

[Tom Henry Racing]

My 2 cents, random points.

It is helpful to separate politics from the car.
The Volt handles great from a low center of gravity and is fun to drive.
One of our customers estimates he has used 1 gallon of gas in his first month of ownership.
Battery technology will improve,costs will come down and range will go up.
As gas continues to rise they become more viable.
It is a niche vehicle and high volumes are not expected.
What GM learns from the Volt will transfer to E Assist and other Hybrids.

And the top reason;

The gas that is saved by Volt owners I will be able to use in my 550HP Camaro....

[YourBlindingBias]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Just have to get around having large tanks pressurized to 3,000 psi in your trunk. Other than that, Honda sells at home pressure stations for $7,000 that will fill your car up at home in just about the same time it takes a Volt to charge on a 110 circuit..............assuming you have natural at home.

Thousands of people drive around with pressurized tanks in their trunk, but it's nitrous called NAWZZ

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

If the goal is to make energy somewhere and then store it in the car (battery) and use it later, why bother with expensive batteries and junk. Why not just put a couple of inexpensive compressed air tanks in the car and use the energy in the compressed air to power the car. It's the same as a battery, but costs a lot less.

or.....