PRC as a amplifier in GPS question.

[Joerg]

Eeyore wrote:

Joerg wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Joerg wrote:

There is a major stumbling block in areas like ours: Monopoly, plus
baseline usage rules the monopoly imposes. The millisecond you exceed
baseline by IIRC as little as 30% electricity becomes painfully
expensive. Anyone who dared to use their A/C in summer knows that.
Unless this changes or one can line up a sweet and most of all longterm
night-time deal there won't be a realistic future for electric cars.
One former EV-1 owner has a solution to the electric power cost
problem:
http://www.solarwarrior.com
http://www.solarwarrior.com/why.html
A 30kW peak output PV solar array would cost somewhere in the region of
$120,000 in panels alone by my estimation yet would only provide around
120kWh of electricity daily (worth around $12) on average. Factor in
financing costs and it simply will NEVER 'pay back'

Scale that down to a 12kWh EV battery pack daily recharge and it would still
cost you $12,000 PLUS and the associated installation, inverter etc, say
$20k overall. Yet it would only cost about $1.20 for that daily recharge
from the mains.
Not if you live in an area where electricity cost versus monthly usage
has the I/V characteristic of a silicon diode. Out here when you reach
130% of baseline that would be the 600mV point. Go beyond that and
you'll hear a huge slurping sound. That sound would be coming from your
bank account. And that happens in a lot of other places, too.

Sounds like you guys need to form your own co-operatives to supply your own power.

But from what? Usually water rights and all that have been divvied up
"appropriately" many moons ago.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joerg]

T wrote:

In article <5iIXj.542$mh5.416@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>,
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net says...
Eeyore wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 10:47:27 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

There is a major stumbling block in areas like ours: Monopoly, plus
baseline usage rules the monopoly imposes. The millisecond you exceed
baseline by IIRC as little as 30% electricity becomes painfully
expensive. Anyone who dared to use their A/C in summer knows that.
Unless this changes or one can line up a sweet and most of all longterm
night-time deal there won't be a realistic future for electric cars.
One former EV-1 owner has a solution to the electric power cost
problem:
http://www.solarwarrior.com
http://www.solarwarrior.com/why.html
A 30kW peak output PV solar array would cost somewhere in the region of
$120,000 in panels alone by my estimation yet would only provide around
120kWh of electricity daily (worth around $12) on average. Factor in
financing costs and it simply will NEVER 'pay back'

Scale that down to a 12kWh EV battery pack daily recharge and it would still
cost you $12,000 PLUS and the associated installation, inverter etc, say
$20k overall. Yet it would only cost about $1.20 for that daily recharge
from the mains.

Not if you live in an area where electricity cost versus monthly usage
has the I/V characteristic of a silicon diode. Out here when you reach
130% of baseline that would be the 600mV point. Go beyond that and
you'll hear a huge slurping sound. That sound would be coming from your
bank account. And that happens in a lot of other places, too.



That's ok, I just got a notice that National Grid is hiking electric
rates in RI again. It's bad enough that with the combined distribution
and generation charges we pay 14.5 cents per kWh. I don't know how much
more I can bear of this.

Deregulation, yeah it's only good for the company not for the people.

Deregulation can be good if there is competition. Airline travel was
pretty much restricted to upper class folks before deregulation. But
deregulation while keeping monopolies in place is IMHO not a good thing.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joerg]

MooseFET wrote:

On May 18, 2:55 pm, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net
wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2008 11:43:25 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
True. But Li-Ion charge cycles are pretty well researched out by now. I
doubt one can ever get to 200k miles with one set. But one can on the
first engine, and then some.
Not really. The A123 Systems batteries are HD Nanophosphate
technology which is allegedly better than conventional Li-Ion and LiPO
batteries. Although commonly used in overpriced battery operated
power tools, there's really not enough field experience to predict
reliability and lifetime.
http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/power/pchart1/
"Thousands and thousands" of charge cycles lifetime:
http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/life/
Sounds a bit vague to me.
Fast Charging:
http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/power/pchart5/
I am not a fan of those. My sister has instant heaters and often you
either get pelted with an arctic shower or boiling water. Ok, that's an
exaggeration but it ain't comfy.
That's high luxury compared to taking a shower with a rooftop solar
water heater. I got introduced to those in the 1970's in Israel.
Israel has lots of sun, lots of rooftops, and isn't insterested in
wasting power heating what water it pulls out of the Jordan River.
Haifa was literally covered with apartment buildings. The ground
floor was reserved for businesses. The rest were apartments which
were sold, not rented. Every apartment had its solar water heater on
the roof (along with multiple TV antennas at the time) which made
things rather crowded.
Anyway, when you first turn on the water, you get the somewhat warm
water that was sitting in the pipes. About 15 seconds later, you get
scalded by maximumly hot, near boiling, water directly from the solar
water heater. That slowly tapers off in temperature as the rooftop
heater slowly empties. I learned to take a shower with one hand on
the valves.
I've done the same with flash water heaters. They do a somewhat
better job of temperature regulation, but without a ballast tank,
constant adjustment is required. Still, it's more energy efficient
than a tank type water heater. Sacrifices must be made.
Most of the stuff sold for residential use is so incredibly crude. I
mean, what would it take to design an automatic mixer between hot and
cold? It ain't rocket science and has been done before.

There is no design needed. You can buy just such a valve already.

http://www.plumbersurplus.com/Prod/Watts-Series-1170-US-M2-Hot-Water-Temperature-Control-Valve-3-4-(0206013)/26805/Cat/254

There's a used one.

I know those, they also come within single-lever shower/bathtub control
valves where you just set a temperture instead of a percentage. I think
Grohe makes them. But most aren't fast and when you have the situation
that Jeff saw in Israel the water coming through the pipes can turn from
barely warm to scalding in milliseconds. Unless you have a point-of-use
recirc but most houses are not that modern.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[Joerg]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Sun, 18 May 2008 05:10:21 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 10:47:27 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

There is a major stumbling block in areas like ours: Monopoly, plus
baseline usage rules the monopoly imposes. The millisecond you exceed
baseline by IIRC as little as 30% electricity becomes painfully
expensive. Anyone who dared to use their A/C in summer knows that.
Unless this changes or one can line up a sweet and most of all longterm
night-time deal there won't be a realistic future for electric cars.
One former EV-1 owner has a solution to the electric power cost
problem:
http://www.solarwarrior.com
http://www.solarwarrior.com/why.html

A 30kW peak output PV solar array would cost somewhere in the region of
$120,000 in panels alone

I don't recall the exact total cost but I think it was about $150,000.
That did not include legal fees and time wasted dealing with PG&E
nonsense.

by my estimation yet would only provide around
120kWh of electricity daily (worth around $12) on average. Factor in
financing costs and it simply will NEVER 'pay back'

No financing that I know of on this system.

Typical production is about 15kw-hr/day. See graphs and visually
guess the average delivered power:
http://www.solarwarrior.com/historical-data.html

Non-tracking vverage hours equivalent to full sunlight is about 4.5
hrs in Santa Cruz County. That yields:
15kw * 4.5 hrs/day = 68kw-hr/day

PG&E rates vary with usage and season. The cost to charge the fleet
of electric vehicles would have placed them in nearly the highest
rates. See:
http://www.pge.com/tariffs/ResElecCurrent.xls
That's the current residential rates. My guess is that electricity
would cost about $0.30/kw-hr at the highest rate.

Can't see the spreadsheet but IIRC it does cost that much. As people who
moved into this area have painfully found out. Real estate is less
expensive than the Bay Area but the rude awakening comes when the A/C is
used. Then PG&E begins to charge them through the nose. Same for people
with heat pumps in winter. Which is why we had a heat pump in Europe but
do not have one here.

68Kw-hr/day * $0.30/kw-hr = $20/day

Scale that down to a 12kWh EV battery pack daily recharge and it would still
cost you $12,000 PLUS and the associated installation, inverter etc, say
$20k overall. Yet it would only cost about $1.20 for that daily recharge
from the mains.

The owner indicates that the calculated break even point is 18 years
out of a 30 year lifetime. The higher prices of electricity will make
the break even point somewhat sooner. I don't have all the numbers
necessary to verify that. I certainly won't buy into anything that
takes 18 years to break even as I don't expect to live that long. I
agree that it's not very practical (unless you include government
subsidies and rebates), but it's a start.

The reason why PV is popular in Europe is that goverments there provide
HUGE subsidies. They often get well north of 50c/kWh and the other
ratepayers foot the bill. There is no free lunch.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[MooseFET]

On May 18, 2:55 pm, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net>
wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2008 11:43:25 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

True. But Li-Ion charge cycles are pretty well researched out by now. I
doubt one can ever get to 200k miles with one set. But one can on the
first engine, and then some.

Not really. The A123 Systems batteries are HD Nanophosphate
technology which is allegedly better than conventional Li-Ion and LiPO
batteries. Although commonly used in overpriced battery operated
power tools, there's really not enough field experience to predict
reliability and lifetime.
http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/power/pchart1/

"Thousands and thousands" of charge cycles lifetime:
http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/life/
Sounds a bit vague to me.

Fast Charging:
http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/power/pchart5/

I am not a fan of those. My sister has instant heaters and often you
either get pelted with an arctic shower or boiling water. Ok, that's an
exaggeration but it ain't comfy.

That's high luxury compared to taking a shower with a rooftop solar
water heater. I got introduced to those in the 1970's in Israel.
Israel has lots of sun, lots of rooftops, and isn't insterested in
wasting power heating what water it pulls out of the Jordan River.
Haifa was literally covered with apartment buildings. The ground
floor was reserved for businesses. The rest were apartments which
were sold, not rented. Every apartment had its solar water heater on
the roof (along with multiple TV antennas at the time) which made
things rather crowded.

Anyway, when you first turn on the water, you get the somewhat warm
water that was sitting in the pipes. About 15 seconds later, you get
scalded by maximumly hot, near boiling, water directly from the solar
water heater. That slowly tapers off in temperature as the rooftop
heater slowly empties. I learned to take a shower with one hand on
the valves.

I've done the same with flash water heaters. They do a somewhat
better job of temperature regulation, but without a ballast tank,
constant adjustment is required. Still, it's more energy efficient
than a tank type water heater. Sacrifices must be made.

Most of the stuff sold for residential use is so incredibly crude. I
mean, what would it take to design an automatic mixer between hot and
cold? It ain't rocket science and has been done before.

There is no design needed. You can buy just such a valve already.

http://www.plumbersurplus.com/Prod/Watts-Series-1170-US-M2-Hot-Water-Temperature-Control-Valve-3-4-(0206013)/26805/Cat/254

There's a used one.

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

 

[MooseFET]

On May 18, 3:00 pm, "Tim Williams" <tmoran...@charter.net> wrote:
[....]

An electric field DC motor might be the easiest, but the field burns up a
couple horsepower sitting there. That would cut into efficiency a bit.
[Asynchronous] AC motors are a bit harder to generate power from.

AC motors are not all that hard to generate power with, if you already
have AC power systems to run them. If the slip frequency goes
negative, the terminal impedance of an AC motor has a negative real
component.

 

[kevin93]

On May 18, 3:00 pm, "Tim Williams" <tmoran...@charter.net> wrote:

Do they use permanent magnet, electric field or AC (induction) motors?
...

They are permanent magnet AC synchronous 3-phase motors - so they
don't need excitation.

They use a DC rail of up to 500V (650V in other Toyota models) feeding
three half bridges to drive the motor pretty much as you describe.

They are not set into reverse to regenerate though, the PWM duty-cycle
is controlled to give boost so that current flows into the battery
rather than out. They can regenerate with a road-speed as low as
7mph, while allowing over 100mph before they run out of control
because the BEMF exceeds the rail voltage.

kevin

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 18 May 2008 16:40:09 -0700, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

I know those, they also come within single-lever shower/bathtub control
valves where you just set a temperture instead of a percentage. I think
Grohe makes them. But most aren't fast and when you have the situation
that Jeff saw in Israel the water coming through the pipes can turn from
barely warm to scalding in milliseconds. Unless you have a point-of-use
recirc but most houses are not that modern.

One solution that I saw was an inverted siphon between the mixer
output pipe coming out of the wall, and the shower head. The pipe was
about 6 ft long. There was a bi-metallic thermometer clamped to the
entry point. My guess is that it would give about a 3 second warning
of impending thermal excess. The installation looked commercially
done and may have been part of aftermarket kit. As I was a visitor, I
didn't give the shower a proper test flight.

It would be fairly trivial to build a proper mixer, with electronic
(or bi-metallic mechanical) temperature control and independent flow
control. There were some on sale in Israel in the early 1970's when I
was there. It's just that the apartment where I was living didn't
have one and apparently nobody thought the cost was justified. People
can get used to almost anything.

I once had my bathroom sink setup as in a medical office or surgeons
wash room. Limited manually adjustable temperature (to insure self
sterilization) and foot switch operated flow control (to prevent
contaminating the hands). It saved considerable water and by
implication, considerable energy heating the water. My ladyfriend at
the time found it "inconvenient" so I reluctantly removed it.
<http://www.faucetcontrol.com>
<http://www.stepflow.com>
<http://www.pedalvalve.com>

An IR faucet adapter:
<http://www.ezfaucet.com>

The same device could easily be installed in a shower, with foot valve
operation. Set the temperature with a controlled mixing arrangement
and adjust the flow (or more crudely on/off) with a foot switch. It's
even patented:
<http://www.google.com/patents?id=6uMvAAAAEBAJ&dq=4729135>

So, what's preventing such installations in the home? I once
discussed the issue with a local doctor, who was building a new house
at the time. The Uniform Building Code for residential dwellings
won't allow such innovative plumbing. It's perfectly acceptable for
commercial and hospital, just not residential. I'll supply a suitable
conspiracy theory when I have time.

Hmmm.... I still have the parts of the foot operated sink valve
somewhere. I should try to resurrect it.

Incidentally, one of the old but fun problems with hospital water
control is selecting the temperature. One set of regulations demanded
that the water be hotter than 52C in order to minimally self
sterilize. Another set of regulations from a different agency,
demanded that water be no warmer than 52C to prevent scalding. This
was about 10 years ago, and hopefully a suitable compromise has been
reached by now.

"Control of nosocomial Legionnaires' disease by keeping the
circulating hot water temperature above 55 degrees C: experience from
a 10-year surveillance programme in a district general hospital."
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11886198>

Google couldn't find anyone using a rooftop solar water heater as a
drinking water purifier or pasteurizer. Stand alone yes, but not part
of the water heater pretzel:
<http://solarcooking.org/plans/spasteur.htm>
<http://solarcooking.org/pasteurization/puddle.htm>
Yet another opportunity ignored.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 18 May 2008 18:21:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

Incidentally, one of the old but fun problems with hospital water
control is selecting the temperature. One set of regulations demanded
that the water be hotter than 52C in order to minimally self
sterilize. Another set of regulations from a different agency,
demanded that water be no warmer than 52C to prevent scalding. This
was about 10 years ago, and hopefully a suitable compromise has been
reached by now.

My wife works in a hospital where one inspection agency requires
plastic-bag liners in trash cans, and another agency forbids them.
They adjust according to which inspection is scheduled.

John

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 18 May 2008 17:12:42 -0700, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

PG&E rates vary with usage and season. The cost to charge the fleet
of electric vehicles would have placed them in nearly the highest
rates. See:
http://www.pge.com/tariffs/ResElecCurrent.xls
That's the current residential rates. My guess is that electricity
would cost about $0.30/kw-hr at the highest rate.

Can't see the spreadsheet but IIRC it does cost that much.

Y'er news header shows that you're using Windoze. You might want to
download the various Word, Excel, and Powerpoint viewers from
Microsloth.

Word 2003:
<http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=95e24c87-8732-48d5-8689-ab826e7b8fdf&displaylang=en>

Excel 2003:
<http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=c8378bf4-996c-4569-b547-75edbd03aaf0&displaylang=en>

PowerPointless 2007:
<http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=048DC840-14E1-467D-8DCA-19D2A8FD7485&displaylang=en>

Visio 2003:
<http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=3fb3bd5c-fed1-46cf-bd53-da23635ab2df&DisplayLang=en>

The reason why PV is popular in Europe is that goverments there provide
HUGE subsidies. They often get well north of 50c/kWh and the other
ratepayers foot the bill. There is no free lunch.

"The world's largest solar power plant is only the latest addition to
Germany's investment in alternative power..."
<http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/05/28/100049624/index.htm>

The way I understand it (from a rather marginal TV documentary) the
logic is that when the oil runs out, Germany will have electricity
while most other countries will not. It's also part of creating jobs
and dealing with the unemployment problem. German taxpayers
apparently paid about $3.8 billion last year to subsidize alternative
engergy sources. Whatever it takes.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[krw]

In article <o8m134t5dc3g4pjlcvjn2l96qeu4723qke@4ax.com>,
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says...

On Sun, 18 May 2008 18:21:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:


Incidentally, one of the old but fun problems with hospital water
control is selecting the temperature. One set of regulations demanded
that the water be hotter than 52C in order to minimally self
sterilize. Another set of regulations from a different agency,
demanded that water be no warmer than 52C to prevent scalding. This
was about 10 years ago, and hopefully a suitable compromise has been
reached by now.

My wife works in a hospital where one inspection agency requires
plastic-bag liners in trash cans, and another agency forbids them.
They adjust according to which inspection is scheduled.

A friend had the same sort of problem with trash can lids in his
restaurant. The county health inspectors insisted on them and the
state inspectors gave him a major ding for having them.

--
Keith

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 18 May 2008 18:37:00 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 18 May 2008 18:21:02 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote:

Incidentally, one of the old but fun problems with hospital water
control is selecting the temperature. One set of regulations demanded
that the water be hotter than 52C in order to minimally self
sterilize. Another set of regulations from a different agency,
demanded that water be no warmer than 52C to prevent scalding. This
was about 10 years ago, and hopefully a suitable compromise has been
reached by now.

My wife works in a hospital where one inspection agency requires
plastic-bag liners in trash cans, and another agency forbids them.
They adjust according to which inspection is scheduled.

One more for your collection. OSHA requires rubber mats in the food
preparation areas in order to prevent slip and fall due to slop on the
floor. Some other hospital safety agency forbids such rubber mats to
facilitate slop cleanup and prevent filth accumulation in the mats.
The hospital currently uses the same strategy. Rubber mats are either
deployed or well hidden depending on the scheduled inspection type.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[krw]

In article <nkav24d81o82137h48nbjdk01mbr27jlc1@4ax.com>,
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says...

On Fri, 16 May 2008 17:21:51 -0400, "Paul E. Schoen"
pstech@smart.net> wrote:


"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ieidnSvlPKQURrDVnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@earthlink.com...

Reality. There isn't enough generating capacity to convert to electric
cars.

It may not exist at the moment, but the switch to electric (as well as
other more efficient vehicles) must be accompanied by an overall reduction
in our total per-capita energy consumption. Even if new electric power
plants would be built, using the same fossil fuels that now power
automobiles, they would be much more efficient and cleaner than millions of
individual cars and trucks being driven in stop-and-go traffic. But the
ultimate resolution to this problem will involve people changing their
lifestyles, using more public transportation, living closer to jobs (or
telecommuting), and generally becoming a more cooperative society living
and working closely with other people, rather than isolationism, needless
competition, and broken families.

Non-competitive paradises like Cuba and North Korea? They certainly
aren't suffering from glutted super-highways or packed shopping-center
parking lots. And they have excellent energy conservation techniques:
the power is only on a few hours a day.

Wait a year; that's Obama's energy plan too.

--
Keith

 

[Eeyore]

Tim Williams wrote:

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote

You need to consider that not everyone lives in the USA where you have
many acres per person of land space. The same problem also occurs in some
US
cities too.

Dense central urban populations take the train or subway

Only if they're going to the right place. Not everywhere has a subway either.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Joerg wrote:

The reason why PV is popular in Europe

But it ISN'T ! It's wind power that's generally popular here.

is that goverments there provide HUGE subsidies.

The Germans do and that's totally crazy given their latitude and consequent low
insolation. It's a huge waste of resources.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

"Paul E. Schoen" wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
"David L. Jones" wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote

http://gm-volt.com/2008/05/11/the-ev-1-wasnt-killed-it-was-dead-on-arrival/

Required to do so, GM went on to make the EV-1. It used lead acid
batteries which held 0.4% as much energy as the same weight of
gasoline.

Irrelevant.

Highly relevant to the motive power required.

The motive power is more related to vehicle speed (aerodynamic drag) and
acceleration.

Yes, so a heavy battery will reduce thne car's acceleration making its overal
performance less acceptable.

And DO NOT forget rolling resistance which is affected by weight too.

The energy you spend hauling a weight uphill can be largely
recouped when going back down.

The large battery will also mean you take longer to climb those hills.

The resulting range was 90/70 miles hwy/city.

Plenty enough for the majority of people.

Only if you also have a second car. And as long as you NEVER find your
plans changed and need to do a longer trip.

Having a second car is an excellent alternative.

Only for those who can afford it and indeed for those who have suitable parking
space. This effectively rules out 'pure' EVs as a practical option for a large
percentage of the population.

Also, you can get a motor-generator set on a small trailer that can be used for
longer trips.

That's utterly ridiculous. Trailers have to be speed-limited for safety reasons and
that's the last thing you want on a long trip. Never mind that most people haven't a
clue how to drive properly with a trailer !

This is classic 'grabbing at straws'.

Especially when you can
conveniently recharge at home, at work, or at a shopping centre etc.

You can't be assured of conveniently recharging in any of those places.

See above. Also this will become more convenient when demand is there.

How do you propose to deal with the common situation where there is no off-road
parking ?

No excuse for GM to go to ridiculous lengths to get back every one of
the cars

No ridiculous lengths were required. The cars were always the property of
GM.

and then crush them literally out of existence. Especially when there
were thousands who would have taken them off their hands and waived all
rights to support.
GM did an evil thing, just evil.

Oh poor diddums.

The poor diddums will probably turn out to be GM, Ford, et al.

GM currently has the best looking offerings (Volt and Flextreme). Due to be
available in full-scale production in about 2 years. I think you mean poor Ford and
Chrysler.

There are plenty of competitors poised to enter the EV market,

None of whom have any car manufacturing experience. Futhermore, there's alimited
demand for 2 seaters.

and GM has simply
followed the lure of quick temporary profits with the promise of an
infinite source of fossil fuel and a power-hungry horde of motorists with
plenty of money to spend on overpowered bloated vehicles that were cheaper
to make. The inevitable economic downturn has erased that scenario, and the
Detroit guys are themselves too big to make changes quickly enough to
respond.

GM's AHEAD ! You're clearly not aware of what they're doing.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Joerg wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Joerg wrote:

There is a major stumbling block in areas like ours: Monopoly, plus
baseline usage rules the monopoly imposes. The millisecond you exceed
baseline by IIRC as little as 30% electricity becomes painfully
expensive. Anyone who dared to use their A/C in summer knows that.
Unless this changes or one can line up a sweet and most of all longterm
night-time deal there won't be a realistic future for electric cars.
One former EV-1 owner has a solution to the electric power cost
problem:
http://www.solarwarrior.com
http://www.solarwarrior.com/why.html

A 30kW peak output PV solar array would cost somewhere in the region of
$120,000 in panels alone by my estimation yet would only provide around
120kWh of electricity daily (worth around $12) on average. Factor in
financing costs and it simply will NEVER 'pay back'

Scale that down to a 12kWh EV battery pack daily recharge and it would still
cost you $12,000 PLUS and the associated installation, inverter etc, say
$20k overall. Yet it would only cost about $1.20 for that daily recharge
from the mains.

Not if you live in an area where electricity cost versus monthly usage
has the I/V characteristic of a silicon diode. Out here when you reach
130% of baseline that would be the 600mV point. Go beyond that and
you'll hear a huge slurping sound. That sound would be coming from your
bank account. And that happens in a lot of other places, too.

Sounds like you guys need to form your own co-operatives to supply your own power.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

"David L. Jones" wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote

Thus the EV-1
weighed 2970 lbs, 1175 lbs of which were the batteries.

Also irrelevant.

And how exactly is it irrelevant ?

The only relevant thing is how much range you get and whether or not that
suits your requirements.

Since when is that range a fixed requirement ?

I've 'commuted' as little as 20-25 miles daily and as far as 100 miles. I don't
really want to have to buy a new car every time I find a new client!

Just WTF do you have against (P)HEVs ? It's clear that they fix ALL the
arguments against EVs in a trice (except for not being able to hear them) and
provide just as much benefit.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

"David L. Jones" wrote:

You can have a small second car

No. Lots of people simply do not have that option for financial or other
practical reasons (lack of parking space etc).

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

"David L. Jones" wrote:

My home has a power point in the garage, doesn't yours?

My home doesn't have a garage with power point or otherwise. To recharge an EV
I'd have to trail a power lead across the footpath which is clearly ridiculous.
That's if I can park directly in front of my own house which I usually can't.

Here's one for sale in my road for nearly $1 mill that doesn't have one either.
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-18757154.rsp?pa_n=2&tr_t=buy

There is LESS THAN ONE car parking space per house (each house is about 13 feet
wide).

You need to consider that not everyone lives in the USA where you have many
acres per person of land space. The same problem also occurs in some US cities
too.

Graham