Vern said:
actually Lord, unless you can somehow prove that electric companies are selling electricity below cost I pretty sure I’ve just proven that the lower cost means its greener even with all those “losses and stuff”.
I'm not convinced they are greener, and if so, only marginally. That part I don't know with certainty, but fuel in modern engies does burn cleaner than coal. Once the car is made, it is greener in the aspect it doesn't use as much energy. If I mislead, I was pointing out that it is not as green as people think it is. In post 31, I responded to "More inefficient than ICEs?" with "I would say it's hard to say." I didn't say one way or another.
Vern said:
Just so you know, when someone wants to “clarify any angles” they tend to be specific.
Are you suggesting bringing the topic up doesn't steer the conversation to such a direction? I may get more specific. It depends on the time i wish to devote to this topic as I don't have the numbers at my fingertips.
Vern said:
Posting vague recollections about battery life or electrical losses not being part of the cost of electricity doesn’t really ‘clarify’ anything to me.
We all know battery technology technology isn't where we need it at yet for EV's. Vague or not, there is no define batter life I've seen, and it is not a point that should be ignored. To date, I don't think we know the real costs of the battery per miles driven.
Vern said:
And “greener” also includes “pollution and stuff” (dare I mention carbon footprint?). Even pretending all electricity is generated by oil and coal (wait, you already are pretending that), its less pollution because of control measures at the power plants. Luckily all electricity isn’t generated by oil and coal. And as more electricity is generated by renewable resources and natural gas the electric car just gets greener and greener. (and charging at night makes power plants more efficient).
Pretending? It is rare that our power generation isn't already using all the renewable energy. Can you show me that any additional demands are by other renewable sources? If I'm wrong, I would love to see that. As it sits, I firmly believe that the extra energy needed is by those sources that can be throttled as needed, like coal, oil, and natural gas.
Vern said:
Do their numbers really represent reality to you? I used to love Scientific American, but they are no longer very accurate in most things reported. I can no longer trust them.
I pay over $0.10 for electricity for additional electricity over a specific KWH level and it has gone up very little, if any since 2011. Where are they getting theirs? Only $0.0885 per kwh... I live in Oregon where most of our power is hydroelectric and cheap compared to most the nation. I think my cost is $0.075/kwh, but by the time distribution charges and other fees they tack on per kwh, it's over $0.10/kwh.
Note that they do a few things to make the numbers better. They include the fuel the car came with for gas costs vs. the actual fuel used. They don't say how much the tax payers subsidized them for the 240V charging station, or the cost of rewiring the home for it.
Now with some of these numbers looking fishy to me, am I to trust the usage stated as well? Does 0.265 kwh per mile really seem accurate to you? It might be, but what if it is a doctored number, like the others appear to be?
If I drove my Trans Am that 10,102 miles, at my gas and electrical costs (I figure $3.90/gal $0.10851/kwh), that I would save $1829 in fuel. That's nothing to sneeze at, but I'm only figuring 18 MPG. If I wanted fuel efficiency, and picked up something with 30 MPG, it would be a savings of $953. Just how far must you drive this vehicle to pay for the savings? If we claim a ballpark savings of $1,000 per 10,000 miles, it takes a pretty long distance to save that money, especially if there were no subsidies on any of these costs.
Now can you imagine how much more power we need to generate if people actually drove 30,000,000 EV's as their primary transportation? Now I'm OK with that, but just where is that power going to come from?
Vern said:
And then there’s the patriotic aspect electric cars. They don’t help Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuala.
I'm OK with that. What I am not OK with is the huge subsidies involved to bring something to market before its time. Our national spending is already too damn high.
Vern said:
Could you imagine if President Obama advocated a plan that Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuala approved of. Oh the bumper sticker slogans the cons would post over and over. Geez, you guys raked President Obama over the coals because Haliburton didn’t approve of his Libyan policy. My goodness, how do cons explain complaining about something that’s greener, cheaper and patriotic. I can only guess Haliburton doesn’t approve. This article will help "clarify the patriotic angles".
Aren't we getting a bit silly here?
Vern said:
“This relentless partisan campaign against American products and American jobs has been so successful that GM CEO Dan Akerson suggested it contributed to lower than expected demand, “We did not design the Volt to become a political punching bag and that’s what it’s become.”
You mean like the Pinto scare? The NHTSA didn't consider it excessive for a recall, until, political force by public pressure. people die in accidents anyway, and to separate the difference with the fuel tank, when other cars can catch fire as well. Just at a less frequent rate...
Vern said:
Yesterday, in an astonishing burst of candor, Fox & Friends has set the record straight with its story, “Can the Chevy Volt help win the War on Terror?”
Fox News Debunks Right-Wing Lies About Chevy Volt: It's 'An Anti-Terrorist Weapon' And 'The Safest Car On The Road' | ThinkProgress
Sure, it has a very safe rating. So did the Pinto, but it had that "exploding tank" problem. In the end of that, with 3,173,491 cars sold, only 27 deaths can be attributed to that if I am to believe wiki, even though more were claimed. Now comparing that with the battery fires we have seen for so few Volts made, what is the reality? The volt doesn't even need to be in an accident.
OK...
Long reply. Hope I didn't miss something critical proofreading.