Posts by neostar

    Almost four pages of nothing to do with the upcoming 2020 Slingshot.

    Little late to request a new thread on vehicle tech power and preferrences.

    Yeah, it's just wrong for a thread to stray off topic talking about new propulsion pro and cons and upcoming competition offerings. I mean looking at all the postings on this board you never see a thread adding more to a discussion like this. This needs to stop. :rolleyes: Now back to the 2020 sling and all the info that hasn't been talked about.

    You may want to look at some advancements in the Hydro world. Many of your arguments regarding Hydro sound very similar to the arguments against electric.... Just saying....…gy-economy-hytech-storage

    Sorry but my advanced degree in engineering tells me that fuel-cell tech is a cost prohibitive, inefficient and dangerous dead-end technology. Just because the exhaust is pure water and the tech has had celebrity status in NASA does not make it right. Remember we are talking about a compressed tank of explodable gas stowed in a car, okay. What part of ass-backward does this not show?

    Battery electric vehicles that can be purely supported by renewable energy (in one own's home for pete's sake) and is currently in use in 100s of thousands of cars with a proven track record (of close to 15 years) tells me it's the right way to go. It's foolish to invest into fuel-cell, Honda now realizes this and Toyota will soon follow suit.

    No way is this similar to the dead-end and dangerous tech of fuel cell.

    Come on use common sense, why would you introduce a combustible gas into a electrical system that already gets the job done (and very efficiently at that).

    That article you cite continuously throws in diesel as a comparison as if to make fuel cell look better since anything next to diesel does look better and cleaner by default. :)

    This article smacks of big oil propaganda to push hydrogen gas. Because in the end you will still need to supplement additional fuel sources to get enough electrical current to produce hydrogen gas in viable quantities which defeats the purpose of just relying on renewable energy..

    In my opinion the future is here...

    Finally someone mentioned fuel cell....let me tell you about fuel cell.

    First off, contrary to what fuel cell pushers want you to believe, hydrogen gas is not simple to make. Sure one way to make it is electrifying water and capturing the gas but what they won't tell you is how much electrical energy it takes to make said hydrogen gas. There's the rub.

    Hydrogen gas takes more energy to make than petrol production or electrical generation via sources like coal,petrol or natural gas.

    Here's the other kicker, by volume hydrogen gas doesn't come close to gasoline for available transferable energy for a propulsion system.

    So not only does it take more energy to make hydro gas it doesn't return that much energy for actual propulsion via a battery system.

    Because of this, the only cost effective way to make hydrogen gas is with guess what, yup good old gasoline/oil. So guess what group has been quietly funding Toyota and Honda these past 10 years in researching and producing fuel-cell cars, yup BIG OIL.

    In fact if (won't happen) fuel-cells were to take off, than big oil would magically transform their massive gas station networks into a hydrogen gas hybrid stations virtually over night with their deep pockets of cash. Oh and the price shock of hydrogen gas on fuel-cell owners faces would be priceless because hydrogen gas would not be cheap at the pump. This is why Toyota and Honda were handing out 3-year coupon books (courtesy of big oil) for free hydrogen gas for their fuel cell cars.

    Nissan wanted nothing to do with this hence why they never went down the fuel cell route.

    Honda has finally seen the light and is slowly backing out of fuel-cell car efforts and investing heavily into electric cars. In fact their initial electric car offering has already sold out in Europe.

    Only Toyota stubbornly holds on to fuel-cell car making but it's days are numbered. I guess Toyota won't admit that their prius hybrid glory days are finally over and are hoping to have a game changing unique offering like fuel-cell. Prob is fuel cars are extremely expensive (use of rare metals) and very complex (compared to just a battery car). No to mention a hell of a lot more dangerous. Who wants to drive around with a highly compressed tank of explosive hydrogen gas in the back of their fuel-cell car??

    And no hybrids are not the same as a full electric car. Not only are you still dependent on gas and gas stations but the electric capability is a joke to the tune of 20 mile range or less so yeah hybrids are dying out fast. And no, when at a full stop, electric cars waste no energy unlike gas cars.

    Oh and fuel cell owners have to deal with these random events as well....

    Northern California fuel-cell drivers still left dry since June explosion

    Since a June explosion at a Bay Area facility, hundreds of drivers of hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles are have found their commutes and routines interrupted.

    Eric C. Evarts September 5, 2019

    Never say never. I might end up running around a golf course community in my cart someday. Or around Walmart in my Rascal!

    Check out this golf cart....hooo doggie betcha you are going to rule the golf course in that one.

    or better yet this...Image result for electric mustang

    Just make sure you make a custom bumper sticker that says "but it's still a golf cart!" when you swallow your pride and own an electric vehicle in the future.

    if I wanted an electric car I really would have my own charging station in my garage and not just an extension cord tied to coal generated power plant like you have

    Ok this statement of yours made me chuckle. First off here are the VA power source stats....

    18 percent of Dominion's total electric production comes from coal, 22 percent comes from nuclear power, 32 percent comes from natural gas, 9 percent comes from oil, 12 percent comes from Hydro and other renewables, and 7 percent from other sources

    Second, you make it sound like you are better off not getting an electric car because of being forced into using the evil dirty power of the common power grid. Are you serious?

    You think owning a gas car that directly pollutes the air is better than an electric car that gets power that is comprised of 18% coal and 9% oil sources?

    And spare me the "but making and disposing of car batteries is very polluting" malarkey that big oil has been pushing for years.

    If I didn't know better I think you feel you are qualified to crap all over electric car tech because you happen to own solar panels.

    Meanwhile I currently own both electric and gas vehicles and feel strongly that gas power is on it's way out and quickly at that because I have researched, own and operated both technologies extensively.

    And you keep throwing this pollution thing at me as if it's the primary reason why anyone would buy an electric car when in fact it's only a positive side-effect.

    The real reasons to own an electric car, are efficiency and simplicity in design, extremely low operating costs and fantastic performance.

    oh yes - and please think about this. I live in the desert, it gets very hot here and heavy AC use is needed just to live here. SCE our utility uses a tiered billing system where the more you use the more they charge per kWh. Before my wife and I had the solar system installed our lowest monthly electric bill was usually around $360 - - and in the summer months of June - August our bills ranged from the $900's to over $1,200 - - - almost every month of the year and especially in the summer our rates were pushing well into the highest billing tier.... of 42 cents per kWh - at this price charging a Nissan Leaf Pluses 62 kWh battery would cost around $26 - which according to the EPA would get me 226 miles - - - on the other hand it cost around $30 to fill my wifes car with gas 9 gallons and that about 340 miles - - - - as you can see at our electric rates an EV might actually cost more than gas

    To address this point specifically, desert environments can be the worst for electric cars that don't have active cooling and even with you are still looking at below average life spans for batteries.

    Yet even with these drawbacks are there are still lots of testimonials from electric car owners that the desert can and will work with EVs and the costs are still lower than gas.

    I grew up in Phoenix and I know for a fact that power companies have incentive programs to where if you use your utilities overnight you save. Since most normal electric car use only require overnight charging in the garage with a level 2 charger then it is economically feasible to own electric over gas.

    The average residential electricity rate in Phoenix is 11.96¢/kWh. This average (residential) electricity rate in Phoenix is 5.93% greater than the Arizona average rate of 11.29¢/kWh. The average (residential) electricity rate in Phoenix is 0.67% greater than the national average rate of 11.88¢/kWh.

    And yes there are now electric cars with 240+ range like the Chevy Bolt and Hyundai Kona.

    Here is a video blogger who owns a chevy bolt as his primary vehicle and routinely documents his long range driving from LA to Vegas.

    Here is his take on the brand new 2020 bolt with 259 mile range.

    But the argument is real - I am full blown solar on my home and it doesn't change the fact that it still isnt clean because it still relies on a grid that isnt clean - - and no matter how many solar farms they build or how wind farms they build it will sill not be clean until they find a real way to store the power these clean sources make - - when the wind stops and the sun goes down there currently is no financially workable way to store excess power - battery technology might be to where it can work for a car, but its not even close to being able to support a grid so that non clean sources are not needed

    Sorry but there are now several examples all over the world of power companies establishing battery farms to capture and store the excess energy of massive solar panel farms. It's happening right now. Once good example is what Tesla is doing right now in Nevada at their car plant and that's just one example.

    But the problem with your viewpoint is your treating it in a binary fashion. You expect to go from unable to feasibly store the energy to power a small city at night to doing that no prob 100%. That's not going to happen any time soon.

    It's a gradual process that will take decades but progress is happening year over year and slowly but surely this cause of pollution will be reduced. Lots of other pollution sources to worry about as well.

    The irony of your specific house setup is that you could very well be feeding into battery storage that your power company might already have or will have. It's the same concept as cited below.

    One interesting concept that has been floating around since 2012 is once electric cars have penetrated the majority of households in a regional area, is to setup programs where the power company could tap into the car batteries that are plugged in but are not being used (compensating the owner) during peak surge times in summer (middle of the work day etc). This would happen at work and at home. Unfortunately more electric cars need to be owned before that becomes a reality.

    Like I said to you earlier, your current setup will not work for an electric car. You need a 50kWh (minimum) battery station to capture and hold your daily solar power generation.

    This would allow you to charge an electric car at level 2 rate and also power your house comfortably on a daily basis only tapping into the grid during long stretches of cloudy weather. In other words all it takes is a decent battery storage unit and you are basically grid-free (paying only attachment fees to the local grid).

    Is it cheap to have 50kWh battery stack in your house, hell no. It will cost you around $15k but it's possible. Nissan and Tesla have been toying with the idea of putting their used car batteries on the market for just this purpose. Don't know where they are with that now.

    So I agree with you that you are not ready for an electric car but keep your eyes peeled for a good price on home batteries because you are only a few years away.

    About your 2nd point. Heh, sorry but a 220 mile round-trip is NOT a quick trip. I bought my 2nd gen. Leaf knowing I would never make such a quick trip to DC (210 mi range). But I have planned out (extensively) a 7-hour travel day trip to DC and back to Norfolk with just one recharge (30 minutes) each way at Richmond which would double as my restaurant/meal stop. Such a trip is convenient and comfortable in my 220 mi (HWY range) LEAF because as I said before I would be recharging at the 100 mile mark.

    For 7 years I have only had an electric car (no gas car). The first 5 years was with my 1st gen LEAF (80 mi range) with a cross-town (@highway speeds) 40 mile work commute. I always had enough power left over when I got home to do errands (mall, grocery store, movies). Only needed to recharge overnight. I did this for 5 years and never once did I get stranded with my electric car due to any piss-poor planning. I always made sure I had enough battery charge to deal with any unexpected trips in town. I did this for 5 years in all weather climates to include 7F record lows one year.

    Now with my 240 mile (city range) 2nd gen LEAF I no longer have to bother with worrying about charging because all I need to do is charge once a week overnight (to the tune of $6.60). This is more convenient then if I owned a 25mpg gas car going to the gas station.

    To polaris's credit, the unique beauty and ride (not the performance) of the slingshot got me to buy a gas vehicle again. I swore to myself for years I mean for 7 friggin years, I would never ever own a gas vehicle again but Polaris pulled me back in. But now that I have finally got my slingshot fix to the tune of 7k miles in 3 months, I am so ready to put this last gas vehicle I will ever own behind me late next year.

    This is why I visit the vanderhall website every few weeks hoping for more news on their electric model. I figure when I have the sling paid off next year, I will have put on 20k miles on her and gotten my money's worth and then it's all electric all the time baby!!!

    no need to call names - I am very far from being part of any anti electric crowd - I have 59, 265 watt panels on my roof. My system is rated at roughly 15.64 kw

    I am not calling names I am simply informing you of the standard anti-electric arguments that have been out there since 2012. Trust me I have heard them all, the worst are from the heavy diesel and gas users (massive truck and SUV owners). They always put out the worst un-informed arguments out there justifying their view that electric cars are a stupid idea. Well they use to until the buzz on high-performance electric cars starting ramping up these past two years.

    Negative, I have been in ice cold weather (12F) in my 1st gen LEAF (78 mi max range) and didn't get stranded so no cringing from me because I plan ahead and know the limitations of my vehicle in any weather state. Only short-sighted and lazy individuals get stranded in electric vehicles in all kinds of weather. I say that as a general statement not specifically to your case.

    Oh and long term power outage will only occur if my area gets hit with a hurricane. Guess where I will be, yup 100 miles away in Richmond parked at a hotel/motel charging overnight with a level 2 or level 1 charge or nearby a commercial fast charger ready to make the return trip when the all clear signal is given. And if god forbid no charging is available (highly unlikely), I will still have 110 mile range to get back home and there will be at least 5 fast chargers between me and my home so chances are I will get my car recharged. Meanwhile I will be passing by all kinds of gas lines at all the gas stations while the masses try to get fuel on the way back.

    neostar you have obviously educated yourself on this subject and are passionate about it but your comments show how we differ. I love the smell of petro going into the tank. I embrace the smell of it coming out the exhaust. I accept the cost of fuel before I ever buy a vehicle that uses it. I enjoy the process of changing oil and accept the $35 cost as part of my ownership. I am never demoralized by the difference between what I spend and what I could be spending. I have earned every penny I spend and am proud that I have enough money to make some discretionary choices. And at the end of the day, if an electric vehicle works for me, I will certainly own one and that won't change any of the statements I just made.

    This is not intended to be confrontational. This discussion has been a good one and I appreciate your insights.

    Well said.

    One of my biggest motivators to saying goodbye to my slingshot next year occurs every time I go to a gas station and fill up. It's bad enough I have to inhale those noxious gas fumes but to see me paying four times more for the same amount of range I get in my electric LEAF is demoralizing.

    Adding injury to insult is having to burn money changing oil every 5k miles knowing I will never have to worry about that with my electric car.

    These facts just don't hit home unless you own and drive an electric car.

    This is the classic argument posed by the anti-electric crowd. First off, as much as I like the fact that electric power CAN come from clean sources it isn't why I am a big proponent of it. I don't care if electricity comes from coal, petrol or natural gas.

    The fact that it can, in the end, reduce pollution is a plus. And there are lot of studies that debunk this nonsense that electric cars pollute more through car fabrication and electric consumption. That's just BS from the oil propaganda arm.

    In my state of Virginia already the power companies are advertising their pilot efforts in installing massive solar panel farms and are right now locally lobbying for wind farms off the shore. They also have consumer incentives in place…1gXAO1EAAYAiAAEgJIAvD_BwE

    This from a state that is known for it's coal industry (alongside West VA), an industry that is dying despite what Trump says. Natural gas and renewables are rendering coal obsolete in this country. And no I am not a fan of natural gas because fracking is effing evil! There are a lot of documentaries on the topic and fracking was responsible for a very rare earthquake here in Virginia ten years ago. Pretty sure that was a wake-up call for the local politicians.

    I am a fan of electric because it allows me to have my own fuel station in my garage which means I am not dependent on the greedy whims of the oil industry and their past behaviors of manipulating supply and demand to jack up prices and fleece consumers whenever they felt like it.

    The power companies work under a different set of regulations and therefore can't manipulate their supply like oil has done. Furthermore if all of a sudden the electric power industry corrupted enough officials to start changing the regulation rules, capitalism comes to the rescue and you have solar panel companies offering home install packages (with enough battery capacity) that would allow me to MINIMIZE my dependence of the grid from the now greedy power companies. This was never an option for the oil consumer.

    Power companies know that this threat exists this is why it will never be as bad as oil was. And yes you can obtain enough battery storage right now to minimize your dependence of the grid hence power companies are also jumping in on renewable sources to help keep grid prices low so consumers continue to support the grid infrastructure. Can solar power replace natural gas, hydro and petrol? Nope not with the current tech but it sure as hell can reduce the costs and one day the tech will be advanced enough to replace natural gas,nuclear and petrol in due time.

    I must have missed that ;). Seriously, I am aware of the huge lobbying force of Big Oil and it's role in thwarting new technology. It will be interesting to see what the next 30 years will bring (then I'll be 90 years old and won't care any more). You have alluded to even newer technologies that will outmode electric propulsion. The rate of technological change today makes it look like we were on 'pause' for 100 years and I don't have the knowledge or imagination to project what might be coming. However, replacing the millions of fossil fuel vehicles in existence today, and those still being made, will take decades, not years.

    I've always said I was born 200 years too late. I should have ridden a horse out West and claimed my homestead. I would've never known what I was 'missing'!

    You have me mixed up with someone else, electric is the future for personal vehicle propulsion I don't see any other tech that will replace this.

    Of course it will take decades for all fossil fuel cars to be off the roads just like it took decades for airbags in every car. As for me, I have been driving electric (no hassle, no range anxiety) for almost seven years. So the future is already here for me. Last week Porsche announced their first all electric sports car. We already have established brands with mainstream electric cars the road in the hundreds of thousands. Nissan already has over 250k LEAFS on the road.

    We were on pause for 100 years because greed in the form of the oil monopoly stifled electric propulsion from taking off. Go study the rise and fall of the EV1 twenty years ago. Take note at how big oil bought up all the battery companies and their patents and shut them down afterwards. The battery tech in the ev1 were acid type and were the only show in town for electric cars like the EV1 (and prior) so big oil thought they shut down that threat by buying up all the patents.

    Little did they know that that the unassuming li-ion batteries only existing in phones and laptops at the time would be the tech that would bring them down twenty years later.

    ..... I haven't heard any hypothecation about what 'green' source of fuel might power something like this:

    Going back to this point, you have to think out of the box before you see the solution to that monster engine. Look at how high-performance electric car propulsion is being designed today.

    Instead of going for a massive motor the size of a V-8 engine etc, the engineers place small powerful motors at each wheel-base. Not only does this design match the power output of a massive central gas engine but it far exceeds it.

    It is this type of design flexibility that electric propulsion brings to the table that will eventually solve the needs for that massive piece of metal in your pic. The only reason we even have such a monstrosity is because the oil barons have kept ground propulsion-tech advancements stagnating for the past 100 years.

    Now that the electric genie is out of the bottle, radical new electric-propulsion designs will be emerging in the coming years.

    By the way in case you don't know, electric cars were a threat a hundred years ago until the oil monopoly squashed it with a penny a gallon pricing for gas. No electric start-up was able to survive that move 100 hundred years ago.

    The M1 Abrams is a turbine powered tank. The engine can use a variety of fuels, including jet fuel, gasoline, diesel and Marine Diesel. All of these except gas are a form of diesel, JP that is Jet Propulsion comes is several blends according to how much kerosene is in the blend. I think the term "gas turbine" refers more to the exhaust gas which is what turns the turbine that is connected directly to the compressor, not to the fuel being gasoline.


    Looks like we are focusing on two different facets of "diesel". You are focused on the fuel itself where my point is diesel engines as classically defined are no longer being used by the military in modern propulsion systems. Gas turbine systems have the flexibility to use diesel fuel but are using kerosene type fuel like JP-5 as their primary fuel for safety (higher flash points) and pollution reasons (cleaner burning).

    Make no mistake once electric propulsion systems can meet the power requirements of military tasks they will be adopted fairly quickly. Navy is already banking on electro-magnetic propulsion for their catapults on the new carriers.

    This conversation started out about personal transportation but once you introduce long-haul trucks it takes a turn. With regard to worldwide transportation and distribution of goods, there is a saying about diesel motors: If you bought it, they brought it. So if fossil fuels are to get phased out completely, there will be a solution or replacement for ocean freighters, trains and airliners. After all, the long-haul truck is usually the last leg of the journey. I haven't heard any hypothecation about what 'green' source of fuel might power something like this:

    There is no green source for such a thing. Electric motors are also scale-able. Combustible fuel will be around for a long time but not at the consumer level and will eventually phase out once battery tech advances to the point where such power requirements can be met.

    If diesel was the greatest of all gas-tech then the military would still be using diesel-powered motors instead of gas-turbines etc.