Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i think you overestimate the demand for electric cars. at $5 a gallon gas i'd probably agree with you but with gas at $2, there is next to zero demand for the things especially when you consider the drawbacks in cost, range, power, performance and reliability. the point that i'm trying to make is that we have to question why oil is so cheap. At $5 a galon it's still cheaper than bottled water. i say kill subsidies and if we're going to have wars for oil and deploy our troops in saudi, iraq, and everywhere else where there is oil we need to factor that cost into the price of gas.
when that happens the market will be glad to switch to alternatives. if gm jumps the gun beforehand and starts selling electrics today it'll be a disaster
Dunno that I can track the "disaster" aspect. Right now they are looking at bankruptcy. How much worse does it get? Their old EV1 was very popular, but they collected them up and scrapped them.
Only way Oil stays down is either we go off of Oil or we stay in depression/recession. Even with the Dep/Rec option we are living production is falling and likely to start at least drifting the prices back up, as we are seeing now.
Overall, I am no fan of the batteries, either. But rather than drilling all the countryside, seaside and beyond and still not having enough oil or screwing with batteries -- would it not be easier to open up the highway system to the electric grid and just let US drive on our home grown and produced electricity?
what would you use to power the electric grid? it would certainly be better to use natural gas to power vehicles if we did go off oil and we at least have that resource widely available in our own country. (natural gas is cheaper than oil anyway). i still wouldn't see why we couldn't drill for oil offshore as well, at least for the potential of a large oil field. they have indeed found massive amounts of offshore oil in brazil.
what would you use to power the electric grid? it would certainly be better to use natural gas to power vehicles if we did go off oil and we at least have that resource widely available in our own country. (natural gas is cheaper than oil anyway). i still wouldn't see why we couldn't drill for oil offshore as well, at least for the potential of a large oil field. they have indeed found massive amounts of offshore oil in brazil.
We suck the equivalent of large fields dry daily.
The US Oil Consumption numbers are some big numbers to get your mind around. About like Federal Budget numbers. Here are some of the basic data >>>
We can dig into the exact details if you like, but the bottom line is we lose if anyway we go if try to stay on Oil.
As far as switching over to Electric power -- presently the Grid is in surplus, and a large amount of Renewable Wind and Solar is coming on line, with no other real use for it. Slowly switching ground transportation at a few percentage points per year could keep US ahead of the collapsing Oil production.
that really was an interesting table especially in light of the fact that many oil producers, including mexico and north sea offshore production, are in decline but even those numbers don't scare me as much as the federal budget numbers!
there is a lot of maldistribution on the grid (where the power is needed vs where it is produced)and a lot of the transmission equipment is nearing the end of its viable life. wind and solar only work part time so you would need something else to pick up the slack. all of this would only be feasible with massive financial support.
i still think natural gas would keep us ahead of the collapsing oil industry better than wind and solar will, although this is all something to kick around.
that really was an interesting table especially in light of the fact that many oil producers, including mexico and north sea offshore production, are in decline but even those numbers don't scare me as much as the federal budget numbers!
At least the budget numbers are just dollars and those are all make-believe.
Quote:
there is a lot of maldistribution on the grid (where the power is needed vs where it is produced)and a lot of the transmission equipment is nearing the end of its viable life. wind and solar only work part time so you would need something else to pick up the slack. all of this would only be feasible with massive financial support.
It is not so grim as some of the hype would indicate. When Pickens and others were talking about building new transmission from the Wind Farms in West Texas to Dallas and the Central Texas cities, ERCOT (Our Texas grid operator -- Electric Reliability Council Of Texas) freaked out that they would not be the big kids and coughed up the money in less than a month to do it. Sort of comical to watch. Only $5 Billion? Where do we send the check?
Same way on the power production world I play in. Some days they let me burn a million a day. About like the Army in that regard. I joke with the budget guys that we will just count the zeroes.
As far as the Time Of Use -- what you are observing about intermittent production with Renewables. That is what I really like about Solar Thermal. Works most every day, and coasts into the evening. And that is the time of day span of when most Electric Power is used. The overall grid goes very surplus deep in the night.
I am supposing that is a good time for overnight Electric trucking and trains, just to keep Coal and Nukes from going under with the transitions.
Have studied the Solar Thermal Electric use pretty deeply, and think so well of it that is what I am putting on our own Electric Farm. And my checkbook is much tighter than the Utilities'.
Quote:
i still think natural gas would keep us ahead of the collapsing oil industry better than wind and solar will, although this is all something to kick around.
We do some of that, and it does tend to be an effective buffer -- but the downside is that NG, like the oil before it, becomes a terminal end.
Burn it, toast the atmosphere, and all gone. Game Over.
Dunno that I can track the "disaster" aspect. Right now they are looking at bankruptcy. How much worse does it get? Their old EV1 was very popular, but they collected them up and scrapped them.
Only way Oil stays down is either we go off of Oil or we stay in depression/recession. Even with the Dep/Rec option we are living production is falling and likely to start at least drifting the prices back up, as we are seeing now.
Overall, I am no fan of the batteries, either. But rather than drilling all the countryside, seaside and beyond and still not having enough oil or screwing with batteries -- would it not be easier to open up the highway system to the electric grid and just let US drive on our home grown and produced electricity?
there is no way that gm will be able to produce an electric profitably. i agree with you about the ev1 but to my knowledge these were subsidized vehicles and gm couldn't significantly reduce the cost to a point where people would purchase them at a profit.
the tesla example is not really valid. they were one of the first to launch a production sports ev. every environmentally minded actor with a spare $100-$200 grand put their name on the list. the model s currently weighs in at $60 grand and once again is the first of the sporty type sedan ev. then you are going to have to consider that you'll probably need a similar sedan to use when your destination is out of range or the battery is charging from your last trip. so that kinda excludes everyone with less than $100 grand to spend on a car. the market really is quite small and if 20 manufacturers all entered the fray with a similar vehicle there'd be a problem. add to that the reality that the global warming doomsdayers are losing ground. more and more scientists are openly questioning the polemic so the fadish 'save the world' craze won't drive demand for long. these cars can only survive if they make economic sense.
i'm totally with you phil t in not liking oil. it pollutes and we don't have enough of the stuff. to say however that gm would survive if they sold an extra 20000 (yearly production for the tesla s) autos a year is unfounded. for gm to survive they need to sell an extra million cars a year.
Anybody who ever picked up a paycheck for GM is responsible for this mess. From the guy who sweeps the floor to the line workers to the guys in the executive suite. Every. Single. Freaking. One. Of. Them.
For thirty years now, Detroit's market share has been eroding. For thirty years, the Big Four (Remember American Motors) ignored the better Japanese quality, instead taking the cheap, patriotic way out by touting American made. Well, the American people got tired of cars that didn't last as long as the car payments, and now General Motors is standing in the shadow of the gallows. I say let GM swing as a warning to the others.
Ford, on the other hand, is actually showing signs of strength under the guidance of Mulally. Maybe the UAW will take a clue and not run that company into the ground, too.
detroit will not will not stop making gas guzzlers.
pig cars. our government lied gas prices are in fact highly sensitive to consumption.
electric cars will devastate OPEC which is what former chief of CIA tried to advise us to do stop making our enemies rich.
do it.
there is no way that gm will be able to produce an electric profitably. i agree with you about the ev1 but to my knowledge these were subsidized vehicles and gm couldn't significantly reduce the cost to a point where people would purchase them at a profit.
Are you saying that a basic car body + Electric Motor and Drive costs MORE than a basic car body + Gasoline Engine + Transmission + Catalytic Converter, etc.? Does that make sense to you? Or are you assuming that all electrics need large battery packs? (the major component cost).
Quote:
the tesla example is not really valid. they were one of the first to launch a production sports ev. every environmentally minded actor with a spare $100-$200 grand put their name on the list. the model s currently weighs in at $60 grand and once again is the first of the sporty type sedan ev. then you are going to have to consider that you'll probably need a similar sedan to use when your destination is out of range or the battery is charging from your last trip. so that kinda excludes everyone with less than $100 grand to spend on a car. the market really is quite small and if 20 manufacturers all entered the fray with a similar vehicle there'd be a problem. add to that the reality that the global warming doomsdayers are losing ground. more and more scientists are openly questioning the polemic so the fadish 'save the world' craze won't drive demand for long. these cars can only survive if they make economic sense.
Largest environmental argument I see for Electrics is Air Quality. Same thing that drove the development of the Prius. (btw, not fuel mileage, which tended to sell it). I agree with you that large battery systems on many cars is economically foolish and not viable.
But if by your scenario of 20 manufacturers putting out a road-grid powered car/truck (which would be much cheaper than a gas burner or battery car), with government and industry co-operation for a roadway standard . . . . with the energy costs at a fraction of gas/diesel . . . . I am guessing sales could not keep up with demand.
Quote:
i'm totally with you phil t in not liking oil. it pollutes and we don't have enough of the stuff. to say however that gm would survive if they sold an extra 20000 (yearly production for the tesla s) autos a year is unfounded. for gm to survive they need to sell an extra million cars a year.
[/quote]
Problem I see with GM is that they are dawdling at the hand-off.
Ever see a relay race? All other things being equal, the winners are decided in the hand-offs. Nail the hand-off, stay in your lane and run -- Run. They are not doing that. Looking back, sideways, not even sure on their lane ahead. Hard to run to straight looking back.
Oil is a Dead Man walking. It is transition (or die) time. Maybe think of a guy stepping off the dock. Get off the dock and into the boat. Standing with one foot on each is just a mess.
....and if they don't shut gm down soon, what's left of our auto industry will die along with our country. gm is not profitable. for years it has relied on cheap and EASY credit to drive its sales. we all know where that got us. to be fair, the high was good while it lasted but it was never sustainable. what you fail; to realise is that by the state subsidising gm/ford and chrysler, they're killing other manufacturers by pricing them out of the market!
It wasn't just easy credit. It was also people using their homes as ATMs to buy new toys. I never saw as many new SUV's and pickup trucks as I did during the years of 2005-06 when overbidding and speculation was driving home prices up by 3% a month, and the refinancing kept pace. Idiots, the whole lot of them, but they kept GM on life support for quite a while there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here are some of the basic data >>>
