Electric Cars Not Yet Viable

[bitrex]

On 6/25/19 1:08 PM, Rick C wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 11:57:44 AM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 11:26:26 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 6/25/19 4:37 AM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 9:06:03 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 6/24/19 8:36 PM, George Herold wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

Gasoline is great, and not going away soon.
Still don't electric vehicles have a place.
It's nice to keep the products of (gasoline)
combustion, out of the cities and crowded town
centers. Win's driving situation seems perfect for
an EV. (I see cash kick backs for EVs as more money for
rich people, and so don't like it. I feel the same about
'free' college and college debt forgiveness.)

George H.

Except if you look at the statistics for e.g. Massachusett's cash
kick-backs for electric car sales the majority didn't go to wealthy
drivers buying luxury-class vehicles like the Model S, Model X, and
Jaguar above, it went to drivers like me buying reasonably-priced
"regular cars" like the Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf, plug-in Prius, and Model 3.

Further incentives may be provided to help continue progress in bringing EVs to market, but that won't continue indefinitely. However, once EVs become pretty well accepted I expect many jurisdictions to add a carbon tax to fossil fueled vehicles at the pump. It will probably start small like $0.25 a gal and increase each year until gasoline and diesel are taxed like cigarettes and liquor.

I figure California will start a fossil fuel carbon tax around 2025. By 2030 ICE autos will be pretty well phased out and the tax will be a dollar or two.

Big trucks may take a bit longer to phase out as they often run for 20 years or more. But there the switch to EVs will be driven by the much lower fuel and maintenance costs anyway, so like my 30 year old refrigerator, it will be cheaper to dump the old iron and go with the more cost effective solution. The sooner you switch, the more money you save.


GH sees them as kickbacks to "rich people" - if you also define everyone
who is above the poverty line as "rich"

Right, I'll try and be better with my words. Not the poverty line,
(that's much too low a line)
but do you know any people living pay check to pay check? They
can't afford to invest in a new car, or solar panels for their home...
Let's call it kick backs for the upper middle class.
I don't know, but I'm guessing most of the EV refunds go to the
coastal elite. They have the extra money, and living style that favors
an EV.

Yeah, I know people who live paycheck to paycheck or effectively so if not literally. That's because they suck at managing their money. They've never bought a house. They have no real savings. They have three cars for the two of them. They live in a five bedroom house they are renting.

While they may not be "rich", they are far from poor and both of their children went to college. Well, 1.5. One got a two year AA degree.

That's one of the nice things about a decent minimum wage. While it may not allow a person to live well, it allows a person to live. So people can work and get through school if they don't have to pay huge tuition bills.

I put myself through college working summers. If the tuition is paid for, I think pretty much anyone could do that.

What am I missing?

That it's definitely possible in America in 2019 to be living paycheck
to paycheck while doing everything "right" because the cost of living
has increased just that much, and the minimum wage in many places
doesn't in fact allow a person to live at all they're still dependent on
"entitlements."

And the unaddressed question of "Look, you really can afford to live on
a minimum wage, even now, if you simply worked 50-60 hours a week and
come home exhausted and sleep 6 hours a night every night and have no
time to do anything enjoyable basically ever."

"But I don't want to live that life it sounds horrible..." "Well then
you'd better suck it up and do well in college because that's your only
shot at ever..."

"But college costs have exploded and..."

"Well you'd better..."

And you know what a young person might say at that point? FUCK YOU, OLD
MAN. Ha!

and I don't blame them one bit. Tell an old boostrap-theory
Puritan-work-ethic codger who could buy a new car for $2000 in 1973vto
go fuck themselves, today. It feels great!

 

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 11:57:44 AM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 11:26:26 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 6/25/19 4:37 AM, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 9:06:03 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 6/24/19 8:36 PM, George Herold wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

Gasoline is great, and not going away soon.
Still don't electric vehicles have a place.
It's nice to keep the products of (gasoline)
combustion, out of the cities and crowded town
centers. Win's driving situation seems perfect for
an EV. (I see cash kick backs for EVs as more money for
rich people, and so don't like it. I feel the same about
'free' college and college debt forgiveness.)

George H.

Except if you look at the statistics for e.g. Massachusett's cash
kick-backs for electric car sales the majority didn't go to wealthy
drivers buying luxury-class vehicles like the Model S, Model X, and
Jaguar above, it went to drivers like me buying reasonably-priced
"regular cars" like the Chevy Volt, Nissan Leaf, plug-in Prius, and Model 3.

Further incentives may be provided to help continue progress in bringing EVs to market, but that won't continue indefinitely. However, once EVs become pretty well accepted I expect many jurisdictions to add a carbon tax to fossil fueled vehicles at the pump. It will probably start small like $0.25 a gal and increase each year until gasoline and diesel are taxed like cigarettes and liquor.

I figure California will start a fossil fuel carbon tax around 2025. By 2030 ICE autos will be pretty well phased out and the tax will be a dollar or two.

Big trucks may take a bit longer to phase out as they often run for 20 years or more. But there the switch to EVs will be driven by the much lower fuel and maintenance costs anyway, so like my 30 year old refrigerator, it will be cheaper to dump the old iron and go with the more cost effective solution. The sooner you switch, the more money you save.


GH sees them as kickbacks to "rich people" - if you also define everyone
who is above the poverty line as "rich"

Right, I'll try and be better with my words. Not the poverty line,
(that's much too low a line)
but do you know any people living pay check to pay check? They
can't afford to invest in a new car, or solar panels for their home...
Let's call it kick backs for the upper middle class.
I don't know, but I'm guessing most of the EV refunds go to the
coastal elite. They have the extra money, and living style that favors
an EV.

Yeah, I know people who live paycheck to paycheck or effectively so if not literally. That's because they suck at managing their money. They've never bought a house. They have no real savings. They have three cars for the two of them. They live in a five bedroom house they are renting.

While they may not be "rich", they are far from poor and both of their children went to college. Well, 1.5. One got a two year AA degree.

That's one of the nice things about a decent minimum wage. While it may not allow a person to live well, it allows a person to live. So people can work and get through school if they don't have to pay huge tuition bills.

I put myself through college working summers. If the tuition is paid for, I think pretty much anyone could do that.

What am I missing?

--

Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 9:45:34 AM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 4:24:00 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 8:36:04 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

Gasoline is great, and not going away soon.
Still don't electric vehicles have a place.
It's nice to keep the products of (gasoline)
combustion, out of the cities and crowded town
centers. Win's driving situation seems perfect for
an EV. (I see cash kick backs for EVs as more money for
rich people, and so don't like it. I feel the same about
'free' college and college debt forgiveness.)

That makes no sense. "Free" college makes it available to everyone, not just the rich. That is rather the point.

Sorry, I should have explained that I think most of us here are 'rich'.
Rich (in this context) means having enough money and not living paycheck to
paycheck. Money in the bank and a decent retirement account. Making
college free, just exacerbates the inequality between those who are smart
and those who are less smart.

I don't wish to be rude, but I'm not following your reasoning. Are you thinking of some class of people who are so poor they don't have money to eat, no money for clothes, so they can't go to college because they can't learn on an empty stomach? Are these the only people who aren't "rich"? Should we have a college lunch program to go with the free college?

I really don't know what you are saying.

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[George Herold]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:01:48 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 9:45:34 AM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 4:24:00 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 8:36:04 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

Gasoline is great, and not going away soon.
Still don't electric vehicles have a place.
It's nice to keep the products of (gasoline)
combustion, out of the cities and crowded town
centers. Win's driving situation seems perfect for
an EV. (I see cash kick backs for EVs as more money for
rich people, and so don't like it. I feel the same about
'free' college and college debt forgiveness.)

That makes no sense. "Free" college makes it available to everyone, not just the rich. That is rather the point.

Sorry, I should have explained that I think most of us here are 'rich'.
Rich (in this context) means having enough money and not living paycheck to
paycheck. Money in the bank and a decent retirement account. Making
college free, just exacerbates the inequality between those who are smart
and those who are less smart.

I don't wish to be rude, but I'm not following your reasoning. Are you thinking of some class of people who are so poor they don't have money to eat, no money for clothes, so they can't go to college because they can't learn on an empty stomach? Are these the only people who aren't "rich"? Should we have a college lunch program to go with the free college?

I really don't know what you are saying.

About 1/3 of the US will attend college. Those are the smart people,
they will make more money over their lifetime. Why give them an extra
handout? They've been blessed with brains already. (Mostly because
their parents were smart, but partially genetic roulette... they got the
smarter set of genes from their parents) Or perhaps you think there is
no genetic component to intelligence?

(I also think making college 'free' will continue the rising cost of
higher education, but that's a separate issue.)

So you think college should be 'free'? Why?

George H.

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[John Doe]

A drug crazed troll pulling something about gender discrimination
out of its hat...

--
bitrex <user example.net> wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx37.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Electric Cars Not Yet Viable
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
References: <qep68d$45o$8 dont-email.me> <686b0b30-c6fa-4a03-b58e-9994002a7bd8 googlegroups.com> <qepjt3$td1$1 gioia.aioe.org> <qnm0he9eco3tvkoa5qambgeotdd7gf6qvt 4ax.com> <qeq50402d2q drn.newsguy.com> <fgo1he9kns571kp8eh3oej0jn7rjstqsme 4ax.com> <qerhs6$rmo$3 dont-email.me> <i1r2he1am098emp5246qvrsetu495aiko3 4ax.com> <qerrub$52i$1 dont-email.me
From: bitrex <user example.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <qerrub$52i$1 dont-email.me
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <7dfQE.5391$xk5.1937 fx37.iad
X-Complaints-To: abuse frugalusenet.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 01:58:27 UTC
Organization: frugalusenet - www.frugalusenet.com
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 21:58:26 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 3721
X-Received-Body-CRC: 4142846048
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:555274

On 6/24/19 9:04 PM, John Doe wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin highland_snip_technology.com> wrote:

John Doe <always.look message.header> wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
Winfield Hill <winfieldhill yahoo.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote...

A weatherproof, enclosed drone with passengers and luggage
isn't going to make it very far.

An item like that will be an airplane, not a drone.

It will have the same dronish vertical takeoff/land props, so
has the same energy and reliability issues. And many of the
proposed shuttle things have no pilot, which I might call
"drone."

Cape Air is adding a few dozen all-electric planes to its
fleet, for its short-haul passenger routes. They expect to save
$400 in aviation fuel per trip, compared to $10 for the
electricity fillups. With many trips/day the E-planes will pay
for themselves.

I was talking about downtown rooftop to airport shuttles.
Electric winged planes might well make sense for short trips,
like SFO to the Oakland airport maybe. Recharge time will be an
issue.

Use spare batteries

An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

Battery weight is the issue. Maybe if you can eject the battery
after reaching a desired altitude.

Not very economical either.

But of course you would recover the battery. Given current technology,
the battery could cheaply and easily fly itself home (to a waypoint).

See YouTube for lots of gas powered ultralight aircraft, like
powered paragliding and powered hang gliding.

Add "crash" and "die" to your search.

Any recognizable names who have died? Probably mostly user error, as
with everything else. Dell Schanze has been doing acrobatic powered
paragliding for over a decade, jillions of his extreme videos on
YouTube. His EXTREME stunts are done close to the ground, where the
most danger exists. Not a scratch. Altitude is your friend. Carry a
spare parachute.

I saw a paraglider die who should have died. Setting a horrible
example. Acting like a lunatic while taking off. That's how evolution
works.



Yeah also men generally make better paragliders and computer programmers
than women because <some explanation about hunter gatherers 40,000 years
ago>.

eVoluTion faCTS

these are scientific FACTS, bro.

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 20:55:57 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
<always.look@message.header> wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

The battery is too heavy, but...

It only needs to run for a few minutes, and sailplanes are light.

Actually, several people have done it.

You could eject the battery with a parachute. Purely physical, no big
deal engineering wise. Using GPS, completely contained in the battery
module, using four small propellers (one on each side) and some
electronics, push the battery towards a waypoint (your takeoff
location). Should be more than high enough to get the battery to the
waypoint, after your desired altitude is reached.

Technically, that's less complex than an ordinary consumer drone. No
need for providing lift or maintaining stability, the parachute does
that. Two of the four propellers are active for pushing the battery
towards its waypoint. That's already part of the electronics used for
GPS on $80 consumer drones.

Like a multiple stage rocket. You could send the sailplane very high
that way, cheaply and easily.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[John Doe]

The drug-crazed troll provides no explanation for its delusion
of gender discrimination in my prior post. Was its reply born
of anything except insanity?

--
bitrex <user example.net> wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx44.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Electric Cars Not Yet Viable
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,free.spam
References: <qep68d$45o$8 dont-email.me> <686b0b30-c6fa-4a03-b58e-9994002a7bd8 googlegroups.com> <qepjt3$td1$1 gioia.aioe.org> <qnm0he9eco3tvkoa5qambgeotdd7gf6qvt 4ax.com> <qeq50402d2q drn.newsguy.com> <fgo1he9kns571kp8eh3oej0jn7rjstqsme 4ax.com> <qerhs6$rmo$3 dont-email.me> <i1r2he1am098emp5246qvrsetu495aiko3 4ax.com> <qerrub$52i$1 dont-email.me> <7dfQE.5391$xk5.1937 fx37.iad> <qeu0i4$ln3$1 dont-email.me
From: bitrex <user example.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <qeu0i4$ln3$1 dont-email.me
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <xLvQE.1881$j55.1075 fx44.iad
X-Complaints-To: abuse frugalusenet.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 20:47:25 UTC
Organization: frugalusenet - www.frugalusenet.com
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 16:47:24 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 1640
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3099057858
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:555425 free.spam:12470

On 6/25/19 4:35 PM, John Doe wrote:
A drug crazed troll pulling something about gender discrimination
out of its hat...


You don't understand gender any more than you do evolutionary biology
would be my assumption, even if that were the thrust of my "troll"

No evidence you know anything about electronics design, either

what _is_ your function, precisely?

 

[John Doe]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

> An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

The battery is too heavy, but...

You could eject the battery with a parachute. Purely physical, no big
deal engineering wise. Using GPS, completely contained in the battery
module, using four small propellers (one on each side) and some
electronics, push the battery towards a waypoint (your takeoff
location). Should be more than high enough to get the battery to the
waypoint, after your desired altitude is reached.

Technically, that's less complex than an ordinary consumer drone. No
need for providing lift or maintaining stability, the parachute does
that. Two of the four propellers are active for pushing the battery
towards its waypoint. That's already part of the electronics used for
GPS on $80 consumer drones.

Like a multiple stage rocket. You could send the sailplane very high
that way, cheaply and easily.

 

[bitrex]

On 6/25/19 4:35 PM, John Doe wrote:

A drug crazed troll pulling something about gender discrimination
out of its hat...

You don't understand gender any more than you do evolutionary biology
would be my assumption, even if that were the thrust of my "troll"

No evidence you know anything about electronics design, either

what _is_ your function, precisely?

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 22:17:24 -0700, Rick C wrote:

> According to Bill,

Aha! Now I can see where you're going wrong.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 10:30:52 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<gherold@teachspin.com> wrote:

About 1/3 of the US will attend college. Those are the smart people,
they will make more money over their lifetime. Why give them an extra
handout? They've been blessed with brains already. (Mostly because
their parents were smart, but partially genetic roulette... they got the
smarter set of genes from their parents) Or perhaps you think there is
no genetic component to intelligence?

Too many kids are going to college, accumulating massive debt for
useless degrees. Many will give up, get no degree but still have the
debt.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 22:02:42 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

If it takes an hour to fast-charge an electric car, the stall is
occupied for an hour. Or more if the owner doesn't immediately move the
car when it's charged. That's going to take some serious real estate,
and some serious waiting times.

I can't believe some people are dumb enough to be buying EVs at this
early stage in their development. It can't be anything other than virtue-
signalling.

Having more electric cars, even 25%, is going to need some major
logistics.

The battery technology isn't here yet. A quantum leap breakthrough
(nothing less) in battery building - something totally novel - is the
only way these things can seriously challenge IC vehicles. They'll never
come close as things stand with poor range and absurdly long charging
times. Whoever gets to discover and patent that new battery will become
richer than Croesus and more famous than Edison.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[John Doe]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highland_snip_technology.com> wrote:

John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote:
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

An electric powered sailplane would be cool, to avoid the tow.

The battery is too heavy, but...

You could eject the battery with a parachute. Purely physical, no
big deal engineering wise. Using GPS, completely contained in the
battery module, using four small propellers (one on each side)
and some electronics, push the battery towards a waypoint (your
takeoff location). Should be more than high enough to get the
battery to the waypoint, after your desired altitude is reached.

Technically, that's less complex than an ordinary consumer drone.
No need for providing lift or maintaining stability, the
parachute does that. Two of the four propellers are active for
pushing the battery towards its waypoint. That's already part of
the electronics used for GPS on $80 consumer drones.

Like a multiple stage rocket. You could send the sailplane very
high that way, cheaply and easily.

It only needs to run for a few minutes, and sailplanes are light.

Actually, several people have done it.

Just because you turn off the motor or run out of fuel/energy does not
turn it into a sailplane.

I guess this might be the first example of using an electric motor to
gain enough altitude before floating downwards. But they were too
chicken to start from the ground...

https://youtu.be/VGJljVV_GyY

 

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 8:50:55 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:f53a42eb-d4bc-45b4-b171-bf0807b3ffd8@googlegroups.com:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 4:01:16 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 11:04:47 AM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 08:29:06 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 24/06/19 06:17, Rick C wrote:
EVS DON'T NEED CHARGING STATIONS WHEN PEOPLE CAN CHARGE AT
HOME!!!

Did that get through?

MANY CAN'T!!!

Did that get through?

He probably lives in a ranch-style house with a lawn and a
carport and a swimming pool in the burbs somewhere. Not
everybody does.

I park on the street. I couldn't run an extension cord to my
car,

Yeah, all three of my houses are detached. I have no interest in
living
where I can't stretch my elbows. I stayed with my brother in his
town house after a recent surgery and I actually got
claustrophobic.

At some point those who park on the street will have options for
charging
overnight. It will take some time. Once EVs start to saturate
the market for those who have overnight charging options there
will be a lot of pressure to provide ways to charge for everyone.


Just like gas stations grew up on street corners all over when
fume belch
ing, horse scaring autos appeared, we will be able to rid
ourselves of that nuisance and the bother of having to drive to
gas stations to gas up the car simply by providing outlets by the
curbs as many towns in the north already have.

More electric car derangement syndrome. And I'd rather be scared
by a car, then run over by a silent, deadly electric vehicle.






I may have mentioned that Tesla has started construction of the
planned S
upercharge in Frederick. That will be a big improvement for me.
Huzzah! In another five years level 2 chargers will be much more
ubiquitous for local charging. If you can't charge at home, you
will be able to charge at work.

Resistance is futile! Over the next 10 years EVs will become the
dominan
t vehicle sold.


Sure, dream on. I suppose you think we'll see free healthcare for
illegal aliens, reparations for slavery, the govt paying off all
student loans, retroactive tax refunds for gays, elimination of
airplanes and no more deportation of any illegal aliens too.

Stupid fucks like you never discuss the topic of the group. You
are here to be a banter boy. You are an immature FAT ASSED PUTZ, at
best.

Heh, I didn't start the off topic thread, numb-nuts.

 

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:24:44 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 6/25/19 1:21 PM, bitrex wrote:

And you know what a young person might say at that point? FUCK YOU, OLD
MAN. Ha!

and I don't blame them one bit. Tell an old boostrap-theory
Puritan-work-ethic codger who could buy a new car for $2000 in 1973vto
go fuck themselves, today. It feels great!


Don't have to like it. Probably won't. Keep in mind though that a lot of
the "kids these days" think guillotines are a more cost-effective option
than caring for aging boomers who always want to go on and on about how
easy it all is.

Maybe we shouldn't teach French anymore?

--

Rick C.

-+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:30:56 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:01:48 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 9:45:34 AM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 4:24:00 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 8:36:04 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

Gasoline is great, and not going away soon.
Still don't electric vehicles have a place.
It's nice to keep the products of (gasoline)
combustion, out of the cities and crowded town
centers. Win's driving situation seems perfect for
an EV. (I see cash kick backs for EVs as more money for
rich people, and so don't like it. I feel the same about
'free' college and college debt forgiveness.)

That makes no sense. "Free" college makes it available to everyone, not just the rich. That is rather the point.

Sorry, I should have explained that I think most of us here are 'rich'.
Rich (in this context) means having enough money and not living paycheck to
paycheck. Money in the bank and a decent retirement account. Making
college free, just exacerbates the inequality between those who are smart
and those who are less smart.

I don't wish to be rude, but I'm not following your reasoning. Are you thinking of some class of people who are so poor they don't have money to eat, no money for clothes, so they can't go to college because they can't learn on an empty stomach? Are these the only people who aren't "rich"? Should we have a college lunch program to go with the free college?

I really don't know what you are saying.
About 1/3 of the US will attend college. Those are the smart people,
they will make more money over their lifetime. Why give them an extra
handout? They've been blessed with brains already. (Mostly because
their parents were smart, but partially genetic roulette... they got the
smarter set of genes from their parents) Or perhaps you think there is
no genetic component to intelligence?

You can't seem to grasp the concept. First your assumption that all of the smart people go to college is flat out wrong. Many of the people I know who did not go to college are very smart. It is not at all uncommon for college to be unaffordable, so the utility of the idea of free college.

Ok, how about this alteration to the idea. Only people going in to rather high paid professions should get free schooling. So no free college for doctors. In fact, make them pay for primary and secondary schooling as well. lol

(I also think making college 'free' will continue the rising cost of
higher education, but that's a separate issue.)

I would tend to agree with you. Many of the high priced schools are state universities. But if they are already rising, will government sponsorship change that? Maybe they will apply economic forces to push the costs back down?


> So you think college should be 'free'? Why?

The same reason why primary and secondary school should be free. But I also think there should be controls on the costs. It makes no sense to me that 45 years ago I could work in the summer to pay my way through school AND pay for my living expenses, but to day people have to go into debt for $100,000. Something has dramatically altered.

--

Rick C.

--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 06:35:24 -0700, Rick C wrote:

It's hard to imagine the British being so intransigent when they
invented the Steam Engine and Train. Had to make some changes to
accommodate that, eh?

That was a genuine technological breakthrough, though. When we can say
the same about some new kind of battery, maybe your EVs will have a
viable future.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 6:10:20 PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 22:02:42 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

If it takes an hour to fast-charge an electric car, the stall is
occupied for an hour. Or more if the owner doesn't immediately move the
car when it's charged. That's going to take some serious real estate,
and some serious waiting times.

I can't believe some people are dumb enough to be buying EVs at this
early stage in their development. It can't be anything other than virtue-
signalling.

You love your labels and buzzwords. I bought an electric car because it is a great car. It's the fastest car I'll ever own and faster than 99% of the cars on the road. It has a lot of great features... and I get the fuel free for the rest of my life.

Seems like virtue-signalling is your thing as no one else here talks about it.

Having more electric cars, even 25%, is going to need some major
logistics.

The battery technology isn't here yet.

That is simply not a supportable statement in any real way. Obviously the battery technology *is* here as Tesla has sold a lot of cars so there are over half a million people who disagree with you. By the end of the year it will be closer to 1 million people who disagree with you.

A quantum leap breakthrough
(nothing less) in battery building - something totally novel - is the
only way these things can seriously challenge IC vehicles. They'll never
come close as things stand with poor range and absurdly long charging
times. Whoever gets to discover and patent that new battery will become
richer than Croesus and more famous than Edison.

On the way home I was approached by a couple asking about charging. I have learned that when they ask how long it takes to charge I tell them, "charge overnight at home and your car will always be topped off without taking it to a service station". That's not what they were thinking so it makes them think a little harder. This couple was on top of it and they got it when I explained how a 120 volt outlet is not really enough unless your use is very light. They understood it is no big deal to install a 240 volt outlet. They understood that they only need to visit the Superchargers when on trips and even then they can combine charging with meal stops.

Unfortunately not many here understand this.

--

Rick C.

-+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[bitrex]

On 6/25/19 4:59 PM, John Doe wrote:

The drug-crazed troll provides no explanation for its delusion
of gender discrimination in my prior post. Was its reply born
of anything except insanity?

I'll rephrase so my point is more clear to you, vis:

"I saw a paraglider die who should have died. Setting a horrible
example. Acting like a lunatic while taking off. That's how evolution
works."

only if you're a fuckhead who doesn't understand how evolution works.

 

[George Herold]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 5:50:16 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:30:56 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 1:01:48 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 9:45:34 AM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 4:24:00 AM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 8:36:04 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 4:28:24 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:52:23 -0700 (PDT), omnilobe@gmail.com wrote:

A battery exchange station will replace the gas station.
It is faster to remove a battery block and put a fresh
block in than it is to fill a tank with gasoline. It is
safer than a self-driving auto-pilot tesla.

Is anyone doing that?

Gasoline has enormous weight advantages over batteries. Half of the
chemical inputs don't need to be loaded into the car, and none of the
used reactants need to be schlepped around.

Gasoline is great, and not going away soon.
Still don't electric vehicles have a place.
It's nice to keep the products of (gasoline)
combustion, out of the cities and crowded town
centers. Win's driving situation seems perfect for
an EV. (I see cash kick backs for EVs as more money for
rich people, and so don't like it. I feel the same about
'free' college and college debt forgiveness.)

That makes no sense. "Free" college makes it available to everyone, not just the rich. That is rather the point.

Sorry, I should have explained that I think most of us here are 'rich'.
Rich (in this context) means having enough money and not living paycheck to
paycheck. Money in the bank and a decent retirement account. Making
college free, just exacerbates the inequality between those who are smart
and those who are less smart.

I don't wish to be rude, but I'm not following your reasoning. Are you thinking of some class of people who are so poor they don't have money to eat, no money for clothes, so they can't go to college because they can't learn on an empty stomach? Are these the only people who aren't "rich"? Should we have a college lunch program to go with the free college?

I really don't know what you are saying.
About 1/3 of the US will attend college. Those are the smart people,
they will make more money over their lifetime. Why give them an extra
handout? They've been blessed with brains already. (Mostly because
their parents were smart, but partially genetic roulette... they got the
smarter set of genes from their parents) Or perhaps you think there is
no genetic component to intelligence?

You can't seem to grasp the concept. First your assumption that all of the smart people go to college is flat out wrong. Many of the people I know who did not go to college are very smart. It is not at all uncommon for college to be unaffordable, so the utility of the idea of free college.

Huh, OK I agree college is too expensive, but why go to 'make it free',
rather than, asking how to make it less expensive, free is the wrong
incentive.

Ok, how about this alteration to the idea. Only people going in to rather high paid professions should get free schooling. So no free college for doctors. In fact, make them pay for primary and secondary schooling as well. lol


(I also think making college 'free' will continue the rising cost of
higher education, but that's a separate issue.)

I would tend to agree with you. Many of the high priced schools are state universities. But if they are already rising, will government sponsorship change that? Maybe they will apply economic forces to push the costs back down?


So you think college should be 'free'? Why?

The same reason why primary and secondary school should be free.

Huh? How is that free? Don't you pay taxes in your state?
Who is building/ maintaining the schools and paying the teachers?

Public schools are for everyone, college is for the smart ones.

Going back to circuits,

George H.

But I also think there should be controls on the costs. It makes no sense to me that 45 years ago I could work in the summer to pay my way through school AND pay for my living expenses, but to day people have to go into debt for $100,000. Something has dramatically altered.

--

Rick C.

--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209