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.
Location: The Frenchie Farm, Where We Grow 'em Big!
2,080 posts, read 6,942,172 times
Reputation: 1084
Advertisements
He has expressed (mind you this is the green sub-forum and not the Politics and 2008 election sub-forum....keep the bashing to a LOW! TY) that he would like to see 1M plug-ins on the road by 2015. Could this be done?
I would like to see this happen but I would rather government not get too involved. Even though I personally think electric cars are the future, many people think it will be hydrogen or natural gas. It is always more efficient to let the market drive the decision rather than government. Our ethanol situation is a good example of that. Government started mandating the burning of our food for fuel and now it appears that in addition to being more polluting there are some better alternatives.
I agree with Niner fan about letting the market decide what will be the next great motive force for automobiles.
Politics aside, 0's proposal is a bad idea because, with all of the experimenting going on today, electric vehicles may not even be a viable power source by that time. Perhaps electric will be the hot ticket in 2015, perhaps they will no longer even be on the drawing board.
To force automakers to build something that may well be obsolete by the deadline, show O's lack of understanding.
First of all, the batteries currently being used are far to inefficient. Much research has been done to improve batteries, but there is still nothing on the horizon to say batteries will be capable of efficiently powering automobiles in seven years.
Electric cars have their place today, but that place is not replacing the family car. Not even close. Imagine packing the minivan with the family and heading for Uncle Joe's house a thousand miles away.... Every one hundred miles you have to stop for a two hour batter charge. That's gonna be a tough sell.....
What are you talking about? The Plug-in hybrids have a 40 mile electric only radius and a total driving distance of almost 700 miles... that's MORE than double the range of my gasoline only car... and if you driving more, than stop by and get some more gas, you don't "need" electricity for the entire trip, it just decreases the amount of gas you use... the car still uses a gas engine... a more efficient one... One million plug-in hybrids? Probably will have that much by 2010-2011 so I am not sure why 2015 would even be an issue.. I guess setting the bar low so that you look like "you" are successful...
Quoted from the FIRST line in the article sited by the OP....
"an arduous goal to achieve in just seven years considering major carmakers are still years away from offering such vehicles for public sale."
Plug-in hybrids are expected to come in, in late 2009/early 2010... so "years" away is correct since it is only 2008... and you mentioned range of driving.. so I still don't understand "what" you are talking about..
Better get some coal plants built in a hurry!!!! Your gonna have to plug then into something..............
This is basically the issue that killed the 0 emission initiative in California over a decade ago. Automakers proved that they could produce the electric car, but experts convinced the California law-makers that the existing electric power generation available would result in more emissions not less.
I talked with people that drove the GM EV1 and the Toyota Rav4. Both cars performed well and had a range between 60 and 90 miles on a charge. They could both recharge in hours.
Luckily the current crop of emerging plug-in hybrids are waaaayy beter than the EV1 and Rav4... sure they still need to be plugged in and use electricity and the solution has always been to merge it with alternative energy sources... wind, solar, etc etc..
I agree with Niner fan about letting the market decide what will be the next great motive force for automobiles.
Competition is for suckers. Big industry like oil, autos and military get their guys in office to tilt the playing field in their favor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donn2390
Politics aside, 0's proposal is a bad idea because, with all of the experimenting going on today, electric vehicles may not even be a viable power source by that time. Perhaps electric will be the hot ticket in 2015, perhaps they will no longer even be on the drawing board.
To force automakers to build something that may well be obsolete by the deadline, show O's lack of understanding.
First of all, the batteries currently being used are far to inefficient. Much research has been done to improve batteries, but there is still nothing on the horizon to say batteries will be capable of efficiently powering automobiles in seven years.
Electric cars have their place today, but that place is not replacing the family car. Not even close. Imagine packing the minivan with the family and heading for Uncle Joe's house a thousand miles away.... Every one hundred miles you have to stop for a two hour batter charge. That's gonna be a tough sell.....
You don't have a clue about electric cars do you. Ten years ago EVs like EV1 & RAV4 had a 100-140 mile range and worked great. That's enough for the vast majority of drivers. Those that want a gas car can always buy one; those that want an EV can't.
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.