Topic: BHO proposes to Kill 50,000 jobs | |
---|---|
Not driving an electric car has less to do with the actual cost and more to do with the fact of what happens when you run out of juice. You can't just go to the gas station and fill up. We are talking hours of recharging. That just isn't doable for a lot of people. Times vary upon the battery and the voltage used to charge the battery, Fully charged with 3 phase 440 volts on many models is as low as 30 min. Some can be charged using 240 volts in 15 min. Most are currently hybrids and when you run out of juice they simply run on gas until you get to a charger. Transition is happening! |
|
|
|
This is how the US is falling behind.
While we debate, resist, and deny other countries are moving forward. Things just got a little cozier between Norwegian electric car company Think and one of its U.S. investors, Ener1. EnerDel, the battery-making subsidiary of Ener1, already had a major contract with Think to supply batteries for the company’s electric City model, as well as “supplier of choice” status. Now, in a press conference at the Washington Auto Show, Think has named EnerDel the exclusive battery supplier for Think City vehicles sold in the U.S. through 2012.
The automaker, which hopes to secure funding from the Department of Energy to set up manufacturing in the U.S., also announced a new partnership today with AeroVironment to work on fast charging for the Think City. AeroVironment, which provides charging infrastructure for electric vehicles, will work with Think under the agreement on demonstration and commercial projects using AeroVironment’s Level 3 charging system (chargers are classified as Level 1, 2 or 3 based on how much power they can provide). The Department of Energy says a charger is deemed “fast” if it can “charge an average electric vehicle battery pack in 30 minutes or less.” According to Think, the AeroVironment system will juice its City batteries up to an 80 percent charge in as little as 15 minutes. This type of high-voltage rapid charging system will be critically important, Nissan’s Mark Perry said last year, for what he calls “destination” and “pathway” charging, at shopping centers and along major roadways, for example. The idea is that if you’re charging at home overnight or at work during the day, the high-voltage quick fix isn’t as necessary. But AeroVironment and Think plan to offer the fast-charge option as “a supplementary alternative for customers’ added sense of security and for fleets with daily mileage requirements exceeding the car’s range.” Today’s deal with Think comes on the heels of AeroVironment winning a contract with Nissan to provide home charging equipment and installations for the upcoming Nissan LEAF, announced earlier this month. AeroVironment spokesperson Steven Gitlin told the Los Angeles Business Journal at the time that the deal was a first for AeroVironment in the home charging space. “We’ve been working on electric vehicle technology for 20 years,” he said, “but are now ready to start seeing it used widely in homes.” As in the Nissan deal, AeroVironment’s charging systems for the Think City will be sold separately from the vehicle. The exclusive battery deal highlights a difference between Think’s strategy in the U.S. and in the European market, where it offers customers two battery options: EnerDel’s lithium-ion battery, and a sodium-based battery made by Switzerland’s Mes-Dea and designed for use in very hot or very cold climates. According to Think’s announcement today, EnerDel will supply about 60 percent of the batteries for City vehicles sold in Europe. http://gigaom.com/cleantech/think-hands-enerdel-exclusive-u-s-battery-deal-heads-for-faster-charging/ |
|
|
|
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Sun 01/30/11 02:34 AM
|
|
Eaton Corp. is developing an electric-vehicle charger with Japan-based Takaoka Electric that they say will allow faster recharging of personal and commercial electric vehicles, marking the Ohio-based engine-valve and transmission making giant's continued effort to address fuel consumption beyond its gas-saving turbochargers and hybrid-electric drivetrains.
Eaton and Takaoka Electric will develop its so-called DC Quick Charger for residential, commercial and industrial users in North America, Eaton said in a statement Wednesday. The company didn't immediately provide details about the product's power use, availability and cost. "Through this collaboration, Eaton will bring its leadership in sustainability, energy efficiency and power distribution to the electric-vehicle supply equipment market in North America," company President Richard Stinson said in the statement. Publicly traded Eaton, whose work in the alternative-propulsion market includes making drivetrains for UPS's fleet of hybrid trucks, is joining the ranks of companies such as closely held Coulomb Technologies that are looking to boost sales by making EV-chargers for what they view will be a rapidly expanding U.S. base of electric vehicles. Coulomb deployed more than 600 of its ChargePoint stations last year and expects to ship thousands this year. Eaton last week said its superchargers will be used by three models made by China-based automaker Chery to boost power while maintaining fuel economy with its small engines. The company also said last week that it turned a first quarter profit of $156 million, compared with a year-earlier loss, as revenue increased 10 percent to $3.1 billion. http://www.eaton.com/Electrical/USA/MarketSolutions/AlternativeEnergy/ElectricVehicle/index.htm It's happening. Reliability: Eaton is uniquely positioned to create a safe and reliable infrastructure that supports the use of electric vehicles. Eaton's network of engineers provides the capabilities for auditing, implementing, monitoring, maintaining and supporting charging stations and networks. Efficiency: Eaton's hybrid electric system recovers power normally lost during breaking and stores the energy in batteries. The stored energy is used to improve fuel economy and vehicle performance for a given speed or it is used to operate the vehicle with electric power only. By providing real-time monitoring and reporting, Eaton's Pow-R-Station Network Manager allows EV fleet managers to increase system uptime, reduce energy costs and maximize the reliability of chargers. Safety: Eaton is an industry leader in product solutions with safety-conscious design and installation that comply with the latest industry codes and standards. Workers can attend Eaton training programs designed to help users identify and avoid potential hazards such as arc flash and arc fault. |
|
|
|
Edited by
willing2
on
Sun 01/30/11 08:02 AM
|
|
As I said before.
Have the Gov. lead by example and use electric cars, planes and trains. I really doubt they will. Again, this is not as Gore claims,"An emergency situation." We have enough untapped oil to last us 100 years or more and there are carburetors that get 100 mph. BB won't release them. |
|
|
|
Big oil does not need any tax breaks they are rich enough. We will have to go to green teck or it will get forced on us in due time even when out of fossil fuels. So best start looking at all alternative options. Way to go Obama!!!
|
|
|
|
Fanta...
How much oil, gas, and coal is used to provide energy to those charge stations? another balderdash bubble. |
|
|
|
Fanta... How much oil, gas, and coal is used to provide energy to those charge stations? another balderdash bubble. Depends where you live. You have to remember that power grids are also going green as we write this. By the time everyone is driving greener autos we will have an almost carbon free electric power grid. |
|
|
|
Maybe this will answer your pessimism.
Is an EV Really Carbon-Free? Sure, a Nissan Leaf or a Tesla Roadster has no tailpipe emissions — they have no tailpipes at all — and a Chevy Volt will take you 40 emissions-free miles before the ultraefficient engine kicks in. But these cars charge their batteries from the grid, and in the U.S., most utility plants burn coal to produce electricity. So is this "greener" than driving a gasoline car? It looks like the answer is yes, but not by much. Different regions of the country have cleaner power than others, so it matters where you live. The time of day also matters: Charge up at night and you're probably using coal. Charge during the day and there's a better chance it's natural gas or nuclear power, both of which have lower emissions. Here's the difference: As the grid gets cleaner, so does every car that charges from it. By adding wind, solar and nuclear to our nation's energy mix, we make our fleet more sustainable. So while driving an EV today likely means driving on coal, tomorrow it may mean driving on wind. |
|
|
|
Maybe this will answer your pessimism. Is an EV Really Carbon-Free? Sure, a Nissan Leaf or a Tesla Roadster has no tailpipe emissions — they have no tailpipes at all — and a Chevy Volt will take you 40 emissions-free miles before the ultraefficient engine kicks in. But these cars charge their batteries from the grid, and in the U.S., most utility plants burn coal to produce electricity. So is this "greener" than driving a gasoline car? It looks like the answer is yes, but not by much. Different regions of the country have cleaner power than others, so it matters where you live. The time of day also matters: Charge up at night and you're probably using coal. Charge during the day and there's a better chance it's natural gas or nuclear power, both of which have lower emissions. Here's the difference: As the grid gets cleaner, so does every car that charges from it. By adding wind, solar and nuclear to our nation's energy mix, we make our fleet more sustainable. So while driving an EV today likely means driving on coal, tomorrow it may mean driving on wind. None of the current proposed 'systems' is ACTUALLY 'green'... What we actually need (I have no idea if you understand this) Is a SHIPSTONE power unit (or some such thing). |
|
|
|
Hydrogen fuel cells are the future, but they still need some development. Until then hydrids will fill the need.
|
|
|
|
Hydrogen fuel cells are the future, but they still need some development. Until then hydrids will fill the need. Aye.... Much easier to rip off the public when you control the systems. Shipstones would mean only the purchase of the 'power unit' would be necessary. but I guess you must not read science fiction. Anyone out there can clue him in to what a shipstone is? |
|
|
|
LMAO
I'm an electronic engineering tech. I know what a supercapicitor is and I know it's capabilities. |
|
|
|
Some folks watch too much science fiction.
We live in a reality, don't ya know? |
|
|
|
Big Oil Reacts to Obama’s ‘Discriminatory’ Proposals The American Petroleum Institute is taking issue with the president's State of the Union demand to end subsidies and tax breaks for oil producers. While Obama didn't say just which subsidies he'd cut, the industry isn't waiting for specifics to defend itself. http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/investing/big-oil-rejects-obama-subsidy-proposals/19818703/ Intelligence says it must be done. We can't have a future living in the past. The transition from fossil fuels to green energy technologies has to start somewhere. How about when Green Energy is cheaper than petroleum? Nah, that makes too much sense. Let's destroy the middle class, starve millions of children and reduce commerce and innovation instead. |
|
|
|
Transitions like, fossil fuels to greener alternatives, are always difficult. When Autos were suggested as an alternative to horses, for example. The avg person could not afford to buy a car at first. Not to mention the attitude adjustment necessary for acceptance of this new contraption. I don't remember reading about when they made horses illegal. When was that again? |
|
|
|
Who said they did?
And who said they were going to make fossil fueled autos illegal? Where's your facts? |
|
|
|
50,000 jobs globally is nothing. I'd sacrifice 500,000 oil company jobs each year, for the millions green energy will produce. and the economic stability, and American lives lost fighting wars like Iraq, etc. etc. etc. You live in a very strange universe. In our universe, jobs are created by demand. Demand is controlled by cost. "Green" technology is still very expensive, so the demand is very limited. So eliminating 50,000 jobs in the oil industry will not result in 50,000 new jobs in the "Green" industry, unless the Government subsidizes them. Those subsidies end up being taxes on the productive workers and companies in the country. Raising taxes has the added effect of reducing the total number of jobs in the economy and reducing the total tax revenues for the government. The reduced amount of disposable income will make people far less likely to purchase "green" technology, so the Government will have to raise taxes again (or go into debt) to continue to subsidize "green" jobs. It's a very nasty cycle. How our economy works is that when investors see a possible source of income, they invest money to develop that source. Eventually, the project will either fail or succeed. If the project succeeds and it's a new source of energy (solar, wind, wave, bio-fuel), it will be adopted in place of Oil, if it is economically viable. Look at NanoSolar. They have developed solar panels that can be printed at a cost of about $1 / Watt and are so durable, that they can last 25 years. These panels are so cheap and durable, that you would be a fool to not buy some for your house when they go on the market. Nanosolar had to do this without government subsidies, because although they qualified for Tax credits, they were unable to use them. The Government shouldn't be picking and choosing winning technologies (a Chinese solar company was given billions in US tax credits that were denied to US solar companies), the government should get out of the way and let the people through economic actions pick the winners and losers. |
|
|
|
Hydrogen fuel cells are the future, but they still need some development. Until then hydrids will fill the need. Hydrogen costs more energy to produce and store than it can provide. MAYBE in the future we will have a better way of generating hydrogen, but right now, that's up in the air. I'm going to put my money on the Traveling Wave reactors. A tiny nuclear reactor that requires no maintainance, cannot melt down, has minimal radiation and will run for 40+ years? That sounds like the future to me. |
|
|
|
Hydrogen fuel cells are the future, but they still need some development. Until then hydrids will fill the need. Aye.... Much easier to rip off the public when you control the systems. Shipstones would mean only the purchase of the 'power unit' would be necessary. but I guess you must not read science fiction. Anyone out there can clue him in to what a shipstone is? Thought up by Robert Heinlein, the Shipstone is a battery that stores potential energy. I don't see how a Shipstone is possible, but nuclear reactors are becoming more advanced and safe by the year. Evenually (assuming battery / ultracapacitor technology catches up), we could switch to 100% nuclear energy localized to a city or even neighborhood level. |
|
|