 |
|
|
|||||
| « Previous thread | Next thread » |
The equivalent to the per gallon tax will be applied to your electrric bill.
My guess is there will be two meters. One for electricity for the car and
another for electricity for the house. There will be a special cable to the
car that can only be plugged into the meter for automobiles.
Be prepared to be totally screwed by fees. Including new 'excess generation
fee', 'hi current line fee', 'nuclear polution abatement fee' etc.
Folks will be screaming for hydrogen power.
Vito
"Lubow" <l...@l...com> wrote in message
news:493347e6$0$24963$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.co
m...
>
> "Doobie Keebler" <k...@g...com> wrote in message
> news:7c8cfdb6-c541-48b8-a5e7-4e14f43a6d48@j35g2000yq
h.googlegroups.com...
>> That's less than about $1.30 to travel 40 miles on battery alone, not
>> bad at all.
>>
>> (Unless OPEC loses control and we go back to 1998 and $10 oil.)
>>
>> .-=d00b
>
> As usual, this will put congress into a difficult situation. On one hand,
> the Obama Administration will encourage energy saving devices and
> automobiles with some kind of tax abatement. However, an auto that is
> even partially fueled by household electricity is not paying its fair
> share owed to the Federal Highway Trust Fund (FHWTF) which itself is
> funded by a per gallon tax on gasoline and Diesel. Don't think this is
> not worrying some on Capitol Hill because just recently it was reported in
> the broadcast news that for the first time the FHWTF is in the red.
>
> Congress giveth then congress taketh away?
Bill Reid wrote:
> John Galt <k...@g...com> wrote in message
news:S7EYk.349774$5p1.191080@en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews
.com...
>
>> Yea, there's that as well. Most people don't know what they pay per KwH,
>
> Boy, that's a difficult thing to find out, since it's on EVERY ELECTRIC
> BILL I'VE EVER RECEIVED...
Mine too, and since I live in a deregulated state with multiple
providers that compete on KwH, I pay attention to it. BUT, ISTM that
most people just pay the bill and don't pay attention to the rate,
particularly if they no choice in providers.
>
>> and I'm sure that Chevy won't be advertising how much power it takes to
>> charge.
>
> Sure they will, since pure electric operation costs somewhere around
> 75% LESS than gasoline operation, though it DOES depend on the rates
> from your local utility company, the actual batteries used, etc. This is
> something you can verify easily doing a simple Google(TM) search, though
> some of the links will complicate the issue by talking about charging
> efficiencies, thermal efficiencies, transmission efficiencies, etc., that I'm
> sure would make all the purported "professional engineers" and "rocket
> scientists" here have to lie down...perhaps permenantly due to actual
> information thrombosis...but the bottom line is, it's MUCH cheaper in terms
> of ENERGY COST PER MILE to drive an electric car...
If that's all true, then they indeed will. However, the larger issue is
the total cost per driven mile over the life of the vehicle. If you have
to replace the batteries every so often, and they're expensive, it's
quite possible that the energy cost per mile will be lower, but the
total cost per mile will be higher.
JG
>
> In any event, back when GM was screwing around with their last foray
> into electric vehicles, the EV1, I knew several people who "owned" one,
> several at a not-very-large company I worked for at the time. They ALL
> loved it, and relayed exactly how much money they saved per mile for
> energy (a LOT), and I think some of them were the type of "tree-huggers"
> who tried to chain themselves to their beloved cars to prevent the evil
> GM/oil company conspiracy from crushing them...
>
> ---
> William Ernest Reid
> Post count: 1357
>
"Bill Reid" <h...@h...net> wrote:
>
>John Galt <k...@g...com> wrote in message
news:S7EYk.349774$5p1.191080@en-nntp-06.dc1.easynews
.com...
>
>> Yea, there's that as well. Most people don't know what they pay per KwH,
>
>Boy, that's a difficult thing to find out, since it's on EVERY ELECTRIC
>BILL I'VE EVER RECEIVED...
I remember it being on my electric bills too, back when I received
them. Along with a bunch of surcharges and stuff. But when I called
the local electric company to see about getting hooked up to the grid,
they wouldn't quote me a rate. Said it varies and it's their
suppliers and costs that determine it. Wouldn't even hint at a rate.
Wanted an outrageous amount to plop a transformer down, and as it
turns out I'd have been buying it as a gift for them. Given the cost
and the attitude that customers will eat any amount of shit to have
their [bow down before it] electricity, my response was basically
"okay, fuck you very much". The point, which may be slightly askew,
is that although you know what you paid last month from looking at the
bill, you may not know what you'll pay this month or next month.
>> and I'm sure that Chevy won't be advertising how much power it takes to
>> charge.
>
>Sure they will, since pure electric operation costs somewhere around
>75% LESS than gasoline operation, though it DOES depend on the rates
>from your local utility company, the actual batteries used, etc.
Battery powered cars suck, and unless there are some drastic
improvements in battery technology they will always suck. Batteries
are simply too heavy and inefficient to lug around in a vehicle. The
purpose of batteries is to satisfy short-term demands for electrical
current beyond what your electricity production capability can handle.
The vehicle needs to be supplying its own electricity by some other
method and using batteries to smooth out the supply against the
demand. Unless the vehicle recaptures electricity on braking, and has
a set of solar panels big enough to act like a sail or is generating
electricity based on some (unknown) principle, I wouldn't touch it
with a stick (and I don't want to drive a sailcar).
Note that I'm not saying batteries are valuless or electric cars are
an impossibility. The short-term current available from a set of
batteries can provide some serious torque, but it's short-term and has
to be constantly (or at least frequently) replenished.
> This is
>something you can verify easily doing a simple Google(TM) search, though
>some of the links will complicate the issue by talking about charging
>efficiencies, thermal efficiencies, transmission efficiencies, etc., that I'm
>sure would make all the purported "professional engineers" and "rocket
>scientists" here have to lie down...perhaps permenantly due to actual
>information thrombosis...but the bottom line is, it's MUCH cheaper in terms
>of ENERGY COST PER MILE to drive an electric car...
I'm sure it is, but cost per mile isn't really the limiting factor.
>In any event, back when GM was screwing around with their last foray
>into electric vehicles, the EV1, I knew several people who "owned" one,
>several at a not-very-large company I worked for at the time. They ALL
>loved it, and relayed exactly how much money they saved per mile for
>energy (a LOT), and I think some of them were the type of "tree-huggers"
>who tried to chain themselves to their beloved cars to prevent the evil
>GM/oil company conspiracy from crushing them...
There are some environments and needs that can be satisfied by an
electric golf cart. Others require some big-assed diesel truck. The
only size that fits all is hoofing it and that pretty much sucks worse
than any of the alternatives.
Electric cars are one of "the" answers in my opinion, but there's
technology lacking. Investors should imo be looking for opportunities
to make a buck by backing companies researching alternative power
sources. New power sources, not the same old stuff that's been tried
over and over and found lacking.
--
victim: A newbie who has it all figured out.
On Dec 1, 11:25 am, "Lubow" <l...@l...com> wrote:
> "Doobie Keebler" <k...@g...com> wrote in message
>
> news:7c8cfdb6-c541-48b8-a5e7-4e14f43a6d48@j35g2000yq
h.googlegroups.com...
>
> > That's less than about $1.30 to travel 40 miles on battery alone, not
> > bad at all.
>
> > (Unless OPEC loses control and we go back to 1998 and $10 oil.)
>
> > .-=d00b
>
> As usual, this will put congress into a difficult situation. On one hand, the
> Obama Administration will encourage energy saving devices and automobiles with
> some kind of tax abatement. However, an auto that is even partially fueled by
> household electricity is not paying its fair share owed to the Federal Highway
> Trust Fund (FHWTF) which itself is funded by a per gallon tax on gasoline and
> Diesel. Don't think this is not worrying some on Capitol Hill because just
> recently it was reported in the broadcast news that for the first time the FHWTF
> is in the red.
>
> Congress giveth then congress taketh away?
Those trust funds are always a joke, a publicity stunt. Money is
money. Fungible.
On Dec 1, 11:39 am, "Uncle_vito" <u...@y...com> wrote:
> The equivalent to the per gallon tax will be applied to your electrric bill.
> My guess is there will be two meters. One for electricity for the car and
> another for electricity for the house. There will be a special cable to the
> car that can only be plugged into the meter for automobiles.
>
> Be prepared to be totally screwed by fees. Including new 'excess generation
> fee', 'hi current line fee', 'nuclear polution abatement fee' etc.
>
Not a chance. By the way, recharging of batteries can be done during
off-peak hours so it is a good deal for the power company.
> Folks will be screaming for hydrogen power.
>
Maybe, but energy has to be expended to liberate hydrogen, and that
energy is practically certain to be electrical power.
Unfortunately I live in Indonesia where almost all the electrical
power comes from burning hydrocarbons.
On Dec 1, 4:05 am, m...@n...com wrote:
> Note that I'm not saying batteries are valuless or electric cars are
> an impossibility. The short-term current available from a set of
> batteries can provide some serious torque . . .
Speaking of torque, check out the KillaCycle electric drag bike.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dRpAZci9m0
It's a freakin' torque monster.
- more -
http://www.killacycle.com/2007/04/04/8168-15578-mph-
getting-close-to-the-magic-7s/
.-=d00b
.
On Dec 1, 4:26 am, p...@g...com wrote:
> Not a chance. By the way, recharging of batteries can be done during
> off-peak hours so it is a good deal for the power company.
Folks with electric heat already have separate meters for that, and
pay a lower off-peak rate, too.
Here in Wisconsin we're putting up wind farms as fast as the boys can
raise steel:
http://www.we-energies.com/environmental/bluesky_gre
enfield.htm
From Campellsport to Fond Du Lac and all along Lake Winnebago, the
evening sky is ringed by the pale glow of red beacons, flashing in
unison, atop hundreds and hundreds of towers.
Freakin' awesome!
See, we remember the '72 Arab Oil Embargo, and the Texas assholes with
their 'Let A Yankee Freeze To Death In The Dark' bumper-sticker
bullshit.
The Great Lakes freshwater? Ours.
The Great Plains windstream? Ours.
Maybe we should take Palins' advice and secede from the Union, only
we'd join Canada, eh?
Yo! Buffy, send me an Application For Provincial Annexation, wouldja?
What do you think? Should we try to hook up with Ontario or Manitoba?
.-=d00b
.
wonder if it can use windshield wipers or the ac.....lol or headlights
even.
guess youll only get 29mpcharge...lol
On Dec 1, 4:23?pm, b...@w...net (bob wald) wrote:
> wonder if it can use windshield wipers or the ac.....lol or headlights
> even.
> guess youll only get 29mpcharge...lol
They will have the same ac and wipers like I had on the cars I drove
when I was a kid. Want ac, roll down the windows and the wipers speed
depended on vaccuum so when you slowed down the wipers almost stopped.
On Dec 1, 4:48?pm, Lawyerkill <L...@a...com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 4:23 pm, b...@w...net (bob wald) wrote:
>
> > wonder if it can use windshield wipers or the ac.....lol or headlights
> > even.
> > guess youll only get 29mpcharge...lol
>
> They will have the same ac and wipers like I had on the cars I drove
> when I was a kid. Want ac, roll down the windows and the wipers speed
> depended on vaccuum so when you slowed down the wipers almost stopped.
Oh and PS the 57and 59 chevies I had then are worth more than the cars
I own now. I also had a 56 olds and 59 caddy.
They use to call the cars I drove back then, junk, now they are called
classics.
| « Previous thread | Next thread » |
Why not push GM to Chapter 11?
Horde of crazed negroes crush Walmart worker. (videos shocking)
programming for automated stock trading
(in the public interest) The Rod Speed FAQ ...
How to avoid brainwashing .....
Up