What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

[__ Science __ ] Saving the planet with electric cars

Jim Parker

Jim Parker

Member
IF ELECTRIC CARS DO NOT USE GASOLINE, THEY WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN PAYING A GASOLINE TAX ON EVERY GALLON THAT IS SOLD FOR AUTOMOBILES, WHICH TAX WAS ENACTED SOME YEARS AGO TO HELP TO MAINTAIN OUR ROADS AND BRIDGES.
THEY WILL USE THE ROADS, BUT WILL NOT PAY FOR THEIR MAINTENANCE! Who will pay their taxes???????


In case you were thinking of buying hybrid or an electric car:

Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it. This is the first article I’ve ever seen and tells the story pretty much as I expected it to

Electricity has to be one of the least efficient ways to power things yet they’re being shoved down our throats. Glad somebody finally put engineering and math to paper.

At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro executive. I asked him how that renewable thing was doing. He laughed, then got serious. If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities. For example, a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service. The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than three houses with a single Tesla, each For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.

This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles. Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load. So as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy these things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive, new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system! This latter "investment" will not be revealed until we're so far down this dead end road that it will be presented with an 'OOPS...!' and a shrug.

If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are eco-friendly, just read the following Note: If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. It’s enlightening.

Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.

It will take you 4.5 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.

According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery. The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned, so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery. Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000-plus. So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country.


It's for the children....... really......


ReplyReply AllForward





BeaconReadMessageInline.htm
ping
 
Jim Parker said:
IF ELECTRIC CARS DO NOT USE GASOLINE, THEY WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN PAYING A GASOLINE TAX ON EVERY GALLON THAT IS SOLD FOR AUTOMOBILES, WHICH TAX WAS ENACTED SOME YEARS AGO TO HELP TO MAINTAIN OUR ROADS AND BRIDGES.
THEY WILL USE THE ROADS, BUT WILL NOT PAY FOR THEIR MAINTENANCE! Who will pay their taxes???????


In case you were thinking of buying hybrid or an electric car:

Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it. This is the first article I’ve ever seen and tells the story pretty much as I expected it to

Electricity has to be one of the least efficient ways to power things yet they’re being shoved down our throats. Glad somebody finally put engineering and math to paper.

At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro executive. I asked him how that renewable thing was doing. He laughed, then got serious. If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities. For example, a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service. The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than three houses with a single Tesla, each For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.

This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles. Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load. So as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy these things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive, new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system! This latter "investment" will not be revealed until we're so far down this dead end road that it will be presented with an 'OOPS...!' and a shrug.

If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are eco-friendly, just read the following Note: If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. It’s enlightening.

Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.

It will take you 4.5 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.

According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery. The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned, so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery. Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000-plus. So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country.


It's for the children....... really......


ReplyReply AllForward





BeaconReadMessageInline.htm
ping
Click to expand...
Not to mention... how are they producing this vast amount of electricity that is needed above and beyond what we need now, just to run our homes? Can the nation even supply all this electricity.... let alone the infrastructer necessary to get it to your house?

This whole issue is a political move.... "Look at us, were green, we love the environment, vote for us so we can keep our cushy jobs" Meanwhile.... it is just a money maker for the rich and their friends who fund them.
 
There's more too. I could be wrong but it has been my understanding that when all things are factored in, with the use of fossil fuels including coal, electricity today is one of the dirties forms of power from an environmental point of view. When we talk about electric heat it is usually promoted as a 100% efficient heating system. This is only true from an end-user's perspective. The reality is, that it is far from efficient to generate electricity and transport it due to line losses.

Electricity is also very expensive. Using home heating as an example, when I remodeled my home I installed electric heat throughout in part because our utility offers a "duel fuel" program where the electricity used for heating the home is delivered at 1/2 cost. In exchange, the heating system will be turned off during periods of high demand because the electrical grid can't handle the load placed on it. For me, it provides me with a third option for heating my home because we also have a forced air fuel oil furnace and an LP gas fireplace.

While the 1/2 price electricity sounds good, in the 15 years that we have had it, the only time it was more economical was when oil and LP prices were at their peak from about 2007 - 2015. I am not at home so I don't have my calculator spreadsheet handy but today, at $.05 per KwH it is still more expensive than using our home heating oil furnace (83% eff.) or our LP gas fireplace (80% eff.). At the full price of $.10 per KwH it was still more expensive even when oil was pushing $4.00 per gallon and higher.

People fall for the marketing of electric space heaters to save home heating cost when in reality it adds more expense unless you use it to heat a small area where you are and then lower the temperature throughout the rest of the home.
 
WIP said:
There's more too. I could be wrong but it has been my understanding that when all things are factored in, with the use of fossil fuels including coal, electricity today is one of the dirties forms of power from an environmental point of view. When we talk about electric heat it is usually promoted as a 100% efficient heating system. This is only true from an end-user's perspective. The reality is, that it is far from efficient to generate electricity and transport it due to line losses.

Electricity is also very expensive. Using home heating as an example, when I remodeled my home I installed electric heat throughout in part because our utility offers a "duel fuel" program where the electricity used for heating the home is delivered at 1/2 cost. In exchange, the heating system will be turned off during periods of high demand because the electrical grid can't handle the load placed on it. For me, it provides me with a third option for heating my home because we also have a forced air fuel oil furnace and an LP gas fireplace.

While the 1/2 price electricity sounds good, in the 15 years that we have had it, the only time it was more economical was when oil and LP prices were at their peak from about 2007 - 2015. I am not at home so I don't have my calculator spreadsheet handy but today, at $.05 per KwH it is still more expensive than using our home heating oil furnace (83% eff.) or our LP gas fireplace (80% eff.). At the full price of $.10 per KwH it was still more expensive even when oil was pushing $4.00 per gallon and higher.

People fall for the marketing of electric space heaters to save home heating cost when in reality it adds more expense unless you use it to heat a small area where you are and then lower the temperature throughout the rest of the home.
Click to expand...
Heat pumps which i have aren't as costly .
 
American inventor Stanley Myer built a water powered car that separated the hydrogen from the oxygen in water on demand using high frequency. he was a Christian wanted to share it with all and had a meeting with government officials ''DoD'' at lunch and died that same day .. Another inventor built an offset electric generator that offset magnets at 45 degrees that basically eliminated or balanced load to near nothing and easy to turn .. Not to mention Nick Telsa stolen tech .. This Japanese car appeared then disappeared ..
 
brujaq said:
American inventor Stanley Myer built a water powered car that separated the hydrogen from the oxygen in water on demand using high frequency. he was a Christian wanted to share it with all and had a meeting with government officials ''DoD'' at lunch and died that same day .. Another inventor built an offset electric generator that offset magnets at 45 degrees that basically eliminated or balanced load to near nothing and easy to turn .. Not to mention Nick Telsa stolen tech .. This Japanese car appeared then disappeared ..
Click to expand...
This world is run by greed.

I'm pretty sure that Tesla was going to give free electricity to the world as it can be tapped out of the atmosphere. He sold, or gave, the patent to Westinghouse as part of his employment deal.... never heard from it again. This was because there was no way to make a prophet from free energy.

Tesla built a huge tower to access this power. When it went online it blew all the generators at the existing power generation station. They said that he over drew the electricity but he said it was the opposite... that he put too much power to the grid and supply station. I believe that he paid to have the station fixed....

After the government or other powers found out that he was actually capable of doing this... they burned his lab down and he lost an enormous amount of data and journals.
 
Jacks Bratt said:
it is just a money maker for the rich and their friends who fund them.
Click to expand...
BINGO!
The Obama administration subsidized about 36 of these "green" companies (all CEO'd by friends of the DNC) and they all failed. (But not before the DNC-freindly CEOs' bank accounts got very large)

The Green Energy propagandists know very well that we do not have the infrastructure to support their nonsense. It's feel-good propaganda for the useful idiots who are arrogant enough to think they can save the planet.

Meanwhile, with the 30% increase of CO2 in the atmosphere over the last 3 or 4 decades, the amount of green plant life has increases (wait for it......) - - - - 30 % in the same time!!

Imagine that! Plants are doing exactly what God designed them to do: take carbon dioxide from the air; use the carbon to grow and return the oxygen to the atmosphere.

Why do we find a walk in the woods invigorating?
Because we are being bathed in an oxygen rich atmosphere created by the trees...maybe?
 
Last edited:
Jacks Bratt said:
I think you should know that when you burn Hydrogen.... it produces water and sometimes small bits of nitrogen in the form of oxides.
Click to expand...
It's the the violatilty of element, hydrogen reacts with anything .that aND the extraction can't come from water but gas ,oil has it.you could use deuterium.
 
jasonc said:
It's the the violatilty of element, hydrogen reacts with anything .that aND the extraction can't come from water but gas ,oil has it.you could use deuterium.
Click to expand...
I apologize. I thought you were saying that burning hydrogen would compromise our water supply.

I'm pretty sure that at the point that the hydrogen is separated from the oxygen..... until the point that it is combusted, in a hydrogen generator type engine... it is a very short amount of time and distance while the quantity is small.

I could be wrong though.
 
Jacks Bratt said:
I apologize. I thought you were saying that burning hydrogen would compromise our water supply.

I'm pretty sure that at the point that the hydrogen is separated from the oxygen..... until the point that it is combusted, in a hydrogen generator type engine... it is a very short amount of time and distance while the quantity is small.

I could be wrong though.
Click to expand...
accidents, that and well leaks, remember piping can fail. most don't burn hydrogen. hydrolosis where you use electricity to produce the hyrdrogen is what I meant by reduction of water supply. its the means you are stating water is scarce here and in California. filling a car with reuse water(grey water for that just doesn't sound right).
 
Jim Parker said:
IF ELECTRIC CARS DO NOT USE GASOLINE, THEY WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN PAYING A GASOLINE TAX ON EVERY GALLON THAT IS SOLD FOR AUTOMOBILES, WHICH TAX WAS ENACTED SOME YEARS AGO TO HELP TO MAINTAIN OUR ROADS AND BRIDGES.
THEY WILL USE THE ROADS, BUT WILL NOT PAY FOR THEIR MAINTENANCE! Who will pay their taxes???????


In case you were thinking of buying hybrid or an electric car:

Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it. This is the first article I’ve ever seen and tells the story pretty much as I expected it to

Electricity has to be one of the least efficient ways to power things yet they’re being shoved down our throats. Glad somebody finally put engineering and math to paper.

At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro executive. I asked him how that renewable thing was doing. He laughed, then got serious. If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities. For example, a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service. The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than three houses with a single Tesla, each For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.

This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles. Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load. So as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy these things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive, new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system! This latter "investment" will not be revealed until we're so far down this dead end road that it will be presented with an 'OOPS...!' and a shrug.

If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are eco-friendly, just read the following Note: If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. It’s enlightening.

Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.

It will take you 4.5 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.

According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery. The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned, so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery. Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000-plus. So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country.


It's for the children....... really......


ReplyReply AllForward
Click to expand...
Source: (one of many) http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=5028&mn=80148&pt=msg&mid=17494942


Electric cars. One wonders if proponents are unaware of where electricity comes from. Then realizes, yes, they are.
 
jasonc said:
accidents, that and well leaks, remember piping can fail. most don't burn hydrogen. hydrolosis where you use electricity to produce the hyrdrogen is what I meant by reduction of water supply. its the means you are stating water is scarce here and in California. filling a car with reuse water(grey water for that just doesn't sound right).
Click to expand...
I understand your concerns about such a flammable and combustible gas, in the presence of an oxidizer... oxygen. However, in today's age of technology, this can be made to be perfectly safe. Consider the fact that my home has two very large cylinders full of liquid propane. Accidents will happen, but we live in a world that makes use of technology that exposes us to many dangerous situations which are utilized and navigated everyday of our lives, without incident.
 
Jacks Bratt said:
I understand your concerns about such a flammable and combustible gas, in the presence of an oxidizer... oxygen. However, in today's age of technology, this can be made to be perfectly safe. Consider the fact that my home has two very large cylinders full of liquid propane. Accidents will happen, but we live in a world that makes use of technology that exposes us to many dangerous situations which are utilized and navigated everyday of our lives, without incident.
Click to expand...

Nothing ,I assure like hydrogen.you can't use water,nor anything but a halogen to put that out.worse then a metal fire.halogen woukd kill the persons in the car they are trying to rescue.
 
A propane tank will burn out,aND can be sealed, a hydrogen tank maybe much harder
Propane,you can vent that and it won't reacr.a hydrogen leak will react with you,the air .
 
jasonc said:
A propane tank will burn out,aND can be sealed, a hydrogen tank maybe much harder
Propane,you can vent that and it won't reacr.a hydrogen leak will react with you,the air .
Click to expand...
I understand your concerns. I'm just more certain that technology is available to make it safe.
 
jasonc said:
There's a reason why we don't have hydtogen Balloons.
Click to expand...
Ya, I know, they were very dangerous and hot air works very well.

Comparing hydrogen balloons and dirigibles to a hydrogen generator and internal combustion engine, is like saying foot ball without helmets can be compared to figure skating without a helmet.
Risk assessments are done on things like this. That's why we can skydive, drive motor cycles, scuba dive, cook on a propane barbecue and heat our homes with natural gas or propane. All with minimal risk.

Don't worry though. The agenda of the higher powers of corrupt men..... it's not interested in hydrogen cells... It's already made it clear that it's mode of choice is the fantastically inefficient solar and wind power combined with electric cars..... and they present it as "green" and saving the planet... etc etc...all the self proclaimed earth saving people who are so naive that they cannot see that they are blinded by their own self righteous earth protection agenda's that they fail to look at the big picture and see that it is not helping one bit. Meanwhile, it's just a method to take more money out of your and my pockets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top