Political stuff: how'd this slip through the cracks?

[cptn janks]

Your examples assume that people never drive over 50 miles away from thier home. Untill electric cars are able to refill in a couple minutes and drive 200 miles before needing said fill-up they just are not viable as a primary car.

 

 

thats funny, because the average daily commute for an american is something like 15 or 20 miles. they are very viable as a primary car.

 

the vast majority of people take lots of short trips. they drive 5 blocks to the cleaners, or to mcdonalds, then back home. drive the kids 3 miles to soccer practice, then drive back home. drive 4 minutes to the grocery, then back home.

 

you dont need a 80000 mile range on your car... when you want to drive to iowa to go see grandma, get in your gas car and go.

[Ry_Trapp01647545522]

i would LOVE to know how a fucking pipeline kills bears. please, for the love of god, someone tell me how that works. wonder why it never came up during the election? maybe because there is no logical reason for it to be brought up. then again, same could be said about fucking clothes...

thats funny, because the average daily commute for an american is something like 15 or 20 miles. they are very viable as a primary car.

 

the vast majority of people take lots of short trips. they drive 5 blocks to the cleaners, or to mcdonalds, then back home. drive the kids 3 miles to soccer practice, then drive back home. drive 4 minutes to the grocery, then back home.

 

you dont need a 80000 mile range on your car... when you want to drive to iowa to go see grandma, get in your gas car and go.

the problem is that this is america, land of the spoiled. although we may drive maybe 50 miles a day, we want know that we can drive an extra 150 if we just feel like it, and have range to spare. if people only bought as much as they needed, then our economy would certainly be in a lot better shape since all those morons wouldn't have financed mansions that they couldn't afford.

[Nitrousbird]

RIght now, plug-in Hybrids are the answer IMO.

 

Not everyone can/wants 2 cars (I'm not one of those people, but just saying). A plug-in Hybrid that can get you 50-75 miles per charge, then dump over to the mini diesel generator.

 

That's the real answer right now. Reasonable day-to-day range. If you forget to charge it overnight, or are going on a long trip, you just run your diesel and be happy.

 

But god forbid realistic solutions that people would use. It's far better to make a little queer Prius that just gets good gas mileage.

 

We also need to work towards more wind and solar energy generation for homes as well. It's there, and it is expensive. That also needs to change.

[cptn janks]

i would LOVE to know how a fucking pipeline kills bears. please, for the love of god, someone tell me how that works.

'

 

by destroying their habitat.

[Ry_Trapp01647545522]

RIght now, plug-in Hybrids are the answer IMO.

 

Not everyone can/wants 2 cars (I'm not one of those people, but just saying). A plug-in Hybrid that can get you 50-75 miles per charge, then dump over to the mini diesel generator.

 

That's the real answer right now. Reasonable day-to-day range. If you forget to charge it overnight, or are going on a long trip, you just run your diesel and be happy.

 

But god forbid realistic solutions that people would use. It's far better to make a little queer Prius that just gets good gas mileage.

 

We also need to work towards more wind and solar energy generation for homes as well. It's there, and it is expensive. That also needs to change.

completely agree! i've been wondering since its inception why GM didn't go with one of their tiny european diesels in the volt in place of the small gas engine. i really dont think emissions would be much of an issue since they could detune it for the application. diesel sales have been WAY down as of late though.

 

as for homes, geothermal is the best option IMO. i just can not understand why it's taking so long to catch on, if not for homes then atleast for businesses. i'm sure someone that knows a lot more about all of this alternative energy stuff than my self might have an explanation though.

'

 

by destroying their habitat.

could you elaborate? they are designed with the habitat in mind. one of the biggest problems was that the pipelines would have to go through sections of permafrost and would have to be elevated so the ground didn't melt. they also have heat exchangers attached to further prevent the heat reaching the ground.

[bahd-ler]

Its kind of unclear what the Polar Bear population in Alaska is, I belive its around 1800. Alaska is about half the size of the lower 48 states.... 656,425 square miles to be exact. Thats one bear per 364.6 sq miles. Given they don't/won't use all thats space due to different variables. But how can you bitch about the price of oil and 364 sq miles not being enough room for a fat ass bear lay down. Now I see both sides of this "debate," but lets try to be more of a realist than an extremist. Now I'd hate to say it, and I know its harsh for some of you to hear it, so don't "bad rep me," But bears dont make us money, and we don't have money...sooo.... Maybe U.S. jobs and drilling our own oil isn't such a bad idea. Lets get out of this recession and then worry about saving the planet because we're not going to do it broke.

[bahd-ler]

RIght now, plug-in Hybrids are the answer IMO.

 

Not everyone can/wants 2 cars (I'm not one of those people, but just saying). A plug-in Hybrid that can get you 50-75 miles per charge, then dump over to the mini diesel generator.

 

That's the real answer right now. Reasonable day-to-day range. If you forget to charge it overnight, or are going on a long trip, you just run your diesel and be happy.

 

But god forbid realistic solutions that people would use. It's far better to make a little queer Prius that just gets good gas mileage.

 

We also need to work towards more wind and solar energy generation for homes as well. It's there, and it is expensive. That also needs to change.

 

Kind of like a mini train....

We have the technology but whos benefiting from it?.... no one. Why couldn't I buy a diesel car in the U.S. from '05 to '09? Hmmm, maybe because for the last 40 years those little bastards have been capable of getting around 50mpg's. I belive GM and Ford do have little 2.something litre's in the car's over seas, but I am to lazy to look it up. If there was a car that ran of H2O it would never go into production, atleast not right away. Think about if you invented an engine that ran off of a reusable non-polluted source, or maybe something other than oil. Something that can't really be profitted off of (water, air). You would be rich, not from your invention but from your payoffs. Uncle Sam and the oil companies would pay to keep or mouth shut. The government currently taxes by the gallon of fuel that is sold to you... Do you really think they want you to be getting good mpg's, or as good as you could be? And when we get the bleeding to stop, they'll just chop off our leg. Taxation on mile driven is yet to come, but closer than you'd think.

[OGRE]

thats funny, because the average daily commute for an american is something like 15 or 20 miles.

 

85% of statistics are made up on the spot.

the only statistic i could find:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_national_average_of_miles_each_American_driver_drives_per_day

 

 

 

About pipelines destorying bear habitat BULLSHIT@!%(&%)%*%

When the alaska pipeline was built scientists and tree huggers were crying that it would kill the moose population. Fact is that hundereds of moose were killed yearly my truck traffic hauling oil. Also Moose thrived near the pipeline where the oil flowing through the pipes kept them warmer, moose thrive today.

 

-

[supldys]

average daily commute is one thing. Vacations, getaways, concerts, games, moving...all another thing. You can't tell me the majority of Americans do not drive over 200 miles in one trip, ever.

[Draco-REX]

average daily commute is one thing. Vacations, getaways, concerts, games, moving...all another thing. You can't tell me the majority of Americans do not drive over 200 miles in one trip, ever.

 

And how often? Maybe once a year? So the couple thousand $$ a year in gas is worth it to have a 200mile range for one, maybe two trips?

 

You could have an electric that would cover your every day needs for a couple hundred in "fuel" costs in a year, then RENT a long hauler for your trip and save a grand a year.

 

Or like most families, have two cars, one fuel, one electric, and take the burner for the trip and just save the gas money from the other.

[supldys]

You're thinking of a perfect world. But in the real world people will drive around all day and then possibly go out that night, easily driving 100+ miles in one day without ever getting home and waiting for hours for the car to charge up. All-electric cars just aren't feasible until you are able to charge them up in minutes and throughout the town...kinda like gas.

[supldys]

Kind of like a mini train....

We have the technology but whos benefiting from it?.... no one. Why couldn't I buy a diesel car in the U.S. from '05 to '09? Hmmm, maybe because for the last 40 years those little bastards have been capable of getting around 50mpg's. I belive GM and Ford do have little 2.something litre's in the car's over seas, but I am to lazy to look it up. If there was a car that ran of H2O it would never go into production, atleast not right away. Think about if you invented an engine that ran off of a reusable non-polluted source, or maybe something other than oil. Something that can't really be profitted off of (water, air). You would be rich, not from your invention but from your payoffs. Uncle Sam and the oil companies would pay to keep or mouth shut. The government currently taxes by the gallon of fuel that is sold to you... Do you really think they want you to be getting good mpg's, or as good as you could be? And when we get the bleeding to stop, they'll just chop off our leg. Taxation on mile driven is yet to come, but closer than you'd think.

 

I agree with you to a point. But think about this, why is it profitable to only use oil and gas? because it is a scarce resource. What happens if cars run off of water or air or something? It becomes a scarce resource. You know what kind of shit show it would be if there was a drought and people had to either drink water to live or put it in the car to get grandpa to the hospital?

[cptn janks]

85% of statistics are made up on the spot.

the only statistic i could find:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_national_average_of_miles_each_American_driver_drives_per_day

 

ok so what? 33 miles per day is close enough. the point still stands. an electric car with even a 100 mile range would work fine for that.

 

 

About pipelines destorying bear habitat BULLSHIT@!%(&%)%*%

When the alaska pipeline was built scientists and tree huggers were crying that it would kill the moose population. Fact is that hundereds of moose were killed yearly my truck traffic hauling oil. Also Moose thrived near the pipeline where the oil flowing through the pipes kept them warmer, moose thrive today.

 

-

 

i was just guessing about the destruction of habitat. i dont know how a pipeline kills polar bears either... i should have put a question mark on the end

[Ry_Trapp01647545522]

i was just guessing about the destruction of habitat. i dont know how a pipeline kills polar bears either... i should have put a question mark on the end

damn, i was ready for a battle royal too:D

[SPLN SUX]

The main problem is this. No one cares. Who remembers this?

 

http://americanhistory.si.edu/onthemove/img/media/xl/503.jpg

 

This was in 1987... 22yrs ago. We had the technology back then to run 90mph for hundreds of miles using one charge and the sun. You cant tell me that in 22yrs, the technology has had enough time to develop... BULL SHIT. People stopped caring about it and just didn't bother with it. That's Regan and Bush Sr. for you. Think about a 1987 Corvette... and a 2009 Corvette... you don't think that if any of those car companies invested half as much money in R&D in a solar electric car, as GM did into the Corvette in those 22yrs, there couldn't be on available for the masses? Any answer but no is the wrong answer gentlemen.

 

And then we have the EV1 story... 1994, 15yrs ago... The EV1 was born due to a mandate by C.A.R.B. Then in only 7yrs, they were all crushed. Perfectly good cars. Plenty of interior space and storage, quicker than a 300zx turbo, and 120mile range, more than enough for a normal day. That was 15yrs ago... BEFORE the Tesla Roadster. People see $$$, not realism. People stopped caring. now if you want an electric car, you have to build it yourself.

[Ry_Trapp01647545522]

its reagans and bushs fault that no one gives a fuck about electric car??? the GM EV1, ford ranger EV, chrysler TEVan, honduh EV plus, and toyota rav4 EV form the clinton era sure were succesful! i may just go down to my local dealer and pick one up! oh, wai...

you want to know why these vehicles aren't around any longer? good ol' CARB.

[SPLN SUX]

its reagans and bushs fault that no one gives a fuck about electric car??? the GM EV1, ford ranger EV, chrysler TEVan, honduh EV plus, and toyota rav4 EV form the clinton era sure were succesful! i may just go down to my local dealer and pick one up! oh, wai...

you want to know why these vehicles aren't around any longer? good ol' CARB.

 

Yes, Regan and Bush halted the Energy revisions put in place by Carter in 1980. Had the budgeted programs been followed, there's a damn good chance that we would have already had electric cars in the late 90's w/o the CARB mandate... and CARB isn't the one who took the cars away. CARB required manufactures to sell a certain percentage of zero-emissions vehicles in the state of California, or they couldn't sell cars there. What happend was, the manufactures, led by GM, teamed up with the federal government and tried to sue the state government... well as it ended up, the federal government forced CARB to hold a hearing to revise the mandate and determine its constitutionality... it was rolled over and removed from the mandate list and then the manufactures just crushed the cars. If CARB had held its ground, things may have been different. Why did the manufacturers crush the cars? After market. Think about all the money made with maintaince on a gas powered vehicle... you're talking about crushing deals with AC Delco, BOSE, Autolight, etc. billions would have been lost up front for an unknown... so they opted for the big bonuses.

[oh8sti]

fuck it. eat the bears, drill. make mo monies!! then :jerkit:

[Ry_Trapp01647545522]

word it how you want, but CARB still eliminated the ZEV requirement and replaced it with the much more realistic and attainable PZEV, ULEV, and SULEV requirements. if CARB would have held their ground, all of the participating manufacturers would have continued to lose money on programs that were utterly pointless. if the governemnt(including under clinton) really cared, they would have helped fund these stupid expensive programs. fact is, the program is about lowering automotive emissions, not forwarding the development of electric cars. by not having balls and changing the program requirements, major steps in emissions reductions have been achieved without costing the car companies stupid amounts of money for a product that no one wants(gas prices went up last year, dealers were charging a mark up on the prius and it was selling like crazy. a few months later when gas prices dropped, dealers couldn't sell them at a discount. electric cars wouldn't be any different).

[SPLN SUX]

word it how you want, but CARB still eliminated the ZEV requirement and replaced it with the much more realistic and attainable PZEV, ULEV, and SULEV requirements. if CARB would have held their ground, all of the participating manufacturers would have continued to lose money on programs that were utterly pointless. if the governemnt(including under clinton) really cared, they would have helped fund these stupid expensive programs. fact is, the program is about lowering automotive emissions, not forwarding the development of electric cars. by not having balls and changing the program requirements, major steps in emissions reductions have been achieved without costing the car companies stupid amounts of money for a product that no one wants(gas prices went up last year, dealers were charging a mark up on the prius and it was selling like crazy. a few months later when gas prices dropped, dealers couldn't sell them at a discount. electric cars wouldn't be any different).

 

yes but emissions wasnt the point. The point was FUEL CONSUMPTION. ZEV cars have ZFC. Carter knew back in 79 and 80 the shit was going to hit the fan YEARS before Saddam even set fire to the oil fields and fucked things even worse. Thats why avg fuel milage under his term went from around 15 to about 22 and its been roughly the same ever since. This is because of the piggy back mandates by federal government for vehicle classification... the reason for the PT Loser to be classified as a truck, the development of whats now called a cross-over, to help boost the EPA's standards for class fuel economy. Its always been about fuel consumption... emissions was the idea that started it all, but if that was the case for the follow through, they'd just ask GM and Ford to build propane taxi's or have Volvo build a propane bus or something that the city itself could use to be cleaner. By having ZEV's on the road, they were reducing fuel consumption drastically, and with as many drivers on the roads as there are in CA... that would have been a massive difference in just a years time.

[supldys]

yes but emissions wasnt the point. The point was FUEL CONSUMPTION. ZEV cars have ZFC. Carter knew back in 79 and 80 the shit was going to hit the fan YEARS before Saddam even set fire to the oil fields and fucked things even worse. Thats why avg fuel milage under his term went from around 15 to about 22 and its been roughly the same ever since. This is because of the piggy back mandates by federal government for vehicle classification... the reason for the PT Loser to be classified as a truck, the development of whats now called a cross-over, to help boost the EPA's standards for class fuel economy. Its always been about fuel consumption... emissions was the idea that started it all, but if that was the case for the follow through, they'd just ask GM and Ford to build propane taxi's or have Volvo build a propane bus or something that the city itself could use to be cleaner. By having ZEV's on the road, they were reducing fuel consumption drastically, and with as many drivers on the roads as there are in CA... that would have been a massive difference in just a years time.

 

When carter was in, yes it was probably about fuel consumption. When clinton was in, it was about emissions. Oil embargo vs. Al Gore.

You can spout electric cars as the ZFC savior but not really, electric bills wouldnt be cheap, and then the power plants would be pumping out more coal and oil to take up the slack of not using gas. but for some reason nuclear plants just weren't being built...

 

But still I reiterate my point, electric cars just aren't feasible yet, not much is set up for them. How do you handle apartment complexes where parking is a toss up every day, like in every city across the country? How do you handle kids that go off to college and have to park their car in a far lot during the week? What about people that lose their job and live out of their car? You need to have a system in place like a gas station where you can charge the car literally in minutes, and thats just not going to happen with today's power grid and battery technology

The reason solar cars haven't gone anywhere is because you really cant get the needed power from a few square feet of solar paneling. They still do the solar car challenges every year and every year they make improvements, but those cars are nothing but a solar panel with wheels, not something a person could actually drive.

[Ry_Trapp01647545522]

yes but emissions wasnt the point. The point was FUEL CONSUMPTION. ZEV cars have ZFC. Carter knew back in 79 and 80 the shit was going to hit the fan YEARS before Saddam even set fire to the oil fields and fucked things even worse. Thats why avg fuel milage under his term went from around 15 to about 22 and its been roughly the same ever since. This is because of the piggy back mandates by federal government for vehicle classification... the reason for the PT Loser to be classified as a truck, the development of whats now called a cross-over, to help boost the EPA's standards for class fuel economy. Its always been about fuel consumption... emissions was the idea that started it all, but if that was the case for the follow through, they'd just ask GM and Ford to build propane taxi's or have Volvo build a propane bus or something that the city itself could use to be cleaner. By having ZEV's on the road, they were reducing fuel consumption drastically, and with as many drivers on the roads as there are in CA... that would have been a massive difference in just a years time.

your missing my point. whether it was about emissions or fuel consumption, it wasn't about the furthering of the electric car. fact is, electric cars are one of the worst soloutions because of their expense. sure, they do the best job, but hybrids, diesels, etc. are FAR more realistic in the realm of cost.

[Bobby Lee]

All this talk about fully electric personnal vehicles, yet the fact that our commercial transportation industry (tractor trailers) produces more pollution through emissions than any other type of vehicle combined hasn't been mentioned.

 

Yes, there has been serious work at making diesel fuel and the engines that burn it cleaner and more efficient here in the recent decade, but that doesn't change much when your talking in the trillions of miles traveled. Many believe that is the starting point. You convert the trucks that transport majority of our goods throughout the country to electric, and you will have put a much larger dent in this so called energy and environmental crisis than any other.