Dying for a Chevy Volt, but....

On 2/24/2013 9:19 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:46:00 -0600, The Daring Dufas
> > wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
>> Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
>> push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
>> no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
>> President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
>> and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
>> cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
>> that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
>> transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
>> La La Land. ^_^
>>
>> TDD
>
>
> I won't call it junk science, but there is much need for improvement.
> Solar is just starting to get a foothold in the sunny regions and is
> still a very expensive alternative here in the northeast. The payback
> is just not there for most of us. It has been on the market for 40
> years already with minimal inroads.


I wouldn't call it junk science either. Things often get perfected after
we gain experience from using them. As far as electric vehicles being
"pushed on us" I have been to the latest car shows and also to many
dealers and most of the vehicles were fitted with gasoline engines and
you can buy gasoline engine cars without restriction.

>
> Electric cars may have a place in the future, but right now they are
> very impractical and expensive. If I lived in downtown New York
> Boston, Chicago, etc. and only popped around town a couple of miles,
> I'd probably consider a small car with electricity. If I can't make
> it to work and back, it is useless for me. Not to mention very
> expensive. It may become practical in the future, but I bet we are
> looking at 15 to 30 years and a limited market.
>
> CNG may be a better alternative for the small city cars.
>

The problem with CNG is the significant infrastructure update required.
Currently it is a great fit for say companies that have regional fleets
on the road because they can set up their own CNG refilling station at
their headquarters for example.

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:46:00 -0600, The Daring Dufas
> wrote:

>On 2/24/2013 4:52 AM, Existential Angst wrote:
>> Awl --
>>
>> After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the purchase of
>> one, but bleeve, it's hard.
>> I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a Volt would
>> proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.
>>
>> Now, about those electricity costs.....
>>
>> If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
>> At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.
>>
>> Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
>> Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you about c per
>> kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into what
>> you actually wrote on your check. Around NYC, that seems to be about
>> 25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.
>>
>> So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to charge
>> it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
>> If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
>> If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
>> Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per mile in
>> gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> WTF??
>>
>> You get similar numbers for the Leaf, and Volt.
>>
>> Now, it gets worse:
>> There's the ever-present thermodynamic kick-in-the-ass.
>> It will NEVER take only 85 kWhrs to charge an 85 kWhr battery -- it will
>> take proly 20% more.
>>
>> So even if the Tesla DOES get 200 mi per charge (and jb's article suggests
>> that it does not
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/au...ewanted=1&_r=0
>> )
>>
>> factor in the charging inefficiency, and you are just about EQUAL in $ per
>> mi cost of a 30 mpg vehicle.
>>
>> Anything less than 200 mi per charge, and the Tesla loses, and poss. loses
>> badly.
>>
>>
>> So at NYC electric rates, an electric car, not counting ANY other factors,
>> is actually MORE expensive than gas, at $4/gal.
>>
>> YET, you see these huge "equivalent" mpg numbers for electrics, typically
>> around 100 mpg, implying a $ per mile cost of less than 1/3 the cost of a 30
>> mpg vehicle..
>> But my calcs show that an electric will be *at least* as expensive as gas,
>> and likely considerably more than gas, as a fuel.... What gives??
>>
>> Holy ****.... there goes my Volt....
>>
>> Now factor in the high initial cost of electrics, inevitable battery
>> deterioration AND replacement cost, and wow, simply not viable. Unless I
>> made a mistake somewhere.
>>
>> Now, some may bleat, Oh OH, MY electric rates are 5c/kWhr.... and I would
>> repeat, do the net division on your bill to see what it REALLY is. At a
>> TRUE 5c/kWhr, yeah, it makes sense, you could divide all the above electric
>> costs by FIVE.
>> But I don't think anyone is really paying 5c, and quite a few places, like
>> CA, pay MORE than NYS utility rates.
>>
>> AND, if your small car gets 40 mpg, that's even tougher competition for
>> electrics.
>>
>> Idears?? Opinions?
>>
>
>The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
>Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
>push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
>no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
>President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
>and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
>cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
>that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
>transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
>La La Land. ^_^

They have a place. Around here (well, not actually in the town I live
in) many drive golf carts. The grocery stores all have cart spaces
(closer than the handicapped spaces). Even the high school has a golf
cart parking lot (cart driving age is 14). As a car replacement, it's
a stupid idea.

> wrote in message
...
On Feb 24, 5:52 am, "Existential Angst" > wrote:
> Awl --
>
> After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the purchase
> of
> one, but bleeve, it's hard.
> I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a Volt
> would
> proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.
>
> Now, about those electricity costs.....
>
> If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
> At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.
>
> Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
> Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you about c per
> kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into what
> you actually wrote on your check.

That isn't the correct way of doing the calculation. What
you want to find is the INCREMENTAL cost of charging a
car. That could be lower or higher than the rate with your
method. For example if you have a monthly fixed charge
of $25, you're paying that regardless of the car and it
should not be attributed to the car. And if you're
in an area where rates escalate if you exceed a certain
amount, then you're going to pay more for the car
charging than shown by your method.
================================================== ==

Absolutely. That's why I left the calc as it was.
Some places have, like, a 5c/kWhr rate, which quickly escalates to 50c/kWhr.
Iirc, CA goes up to pert near $1/kWhr.....!!!!

So my calcs are likely, and were intended to be, a BEST CASE scenario for
electrics, given the tier structure of most utility rates. And draconian
tier structure in some, or mebbe most.






> Around NYC, that seems to be about
> 25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.

Could be. Here in NJ it's been around 15c to 17c.


>
> So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to
> charge
> it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
> If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
> If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
> Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per mile in
> gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> WTF??

The Tesla is a performance car that does 0 to 60 in like
4 secs.
===========================================

They expanded their line beyond the original sports car.
All electrics are fast-ish to very fast off the block. The Tesla's are esp.
fast.










>
> You get similar numbers for the Leaf, and Volt.
>
> Now, it gets worse:
> There's the ever-present thermodynamic kick-in-the-ass.
> It will NEVER take only 85 kWhrs to charge an 85 kWhr battery -- it will
> take proly 20% more.
>
> So even if the Tesla DOES get 200 mi per charge (and jb's article suggests
> that it does
> nothttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highw...
> )
>
> factor in the charging inefficiency, and you are just about EQUAL in $ per
> mi cost of a 30 mpg vehicle.
>
> Anything less than 200 mi per charge, and the Tesla loses, and poss. loses
> badly.
>
> So at NYC electric rates, an electric car, not counting ANY other factors,
> is actually MORE expensive than gas, at $4/gal.
>
> YET, you see these huge "equivalent" mpg numbers for electrics, typically
> around 100 mpg, implying a $ per mile cost of less than 1/3 the cost of a
> 30
> mpg vehicle..
> But my calcs show that an electric will be *at least* as expensive as gas,
> and likely considerably more than gas, as a fuel.... What gives??

I don't know. But rather than winging the calcs, there must be
some actual real world test results available online. One key
factor is that you're assuming the battery fully discharges on each
cycle. They don't. How much is left IDK.


>
> Holy ****.... there goes my Volt....
>
> Now factor in the high initial cost of electrics, inevitable battery
> deterioration AND replacement cost, and wow, simply not viable. Unless I
> made a mistake somewhere.
>
> Now, some may bleat, Oh OH, MY electric rates are 5c/kWhr.... and I would
> repeat, do the net division on your bill to see what it REALLY is. At a
> TRUE 5c/kWhr, yeah, it makes sense, you could divide all the above
> electric
> costs by FIVE.
> But I don't think anyone is really paying 5c, and quite a few places, like
> CA, pay MORE than NYS utility rates.
>
> AND, if your small car gets 40 mpg, that's even tougher competition for
> electrics.
>
> Idears?? Opinions?
> --
> EA

I think your math may be off a bit, but I think the conclusion
is probably valid. That's why the govt is subsidizing these things
with big tax credits. They were picking up about 12K of the cost
of the Volts, don't know what the deal is now. And from what I
saw, even with that, the car still wasn't as good as a conventional
car.

BTW, do you know that if you ever let the Tesla battery go
completely dead, it's bricked? That it cost like 30 -40K to
replace it? That's a nice feature. Even better, you would
think that would be in big print in the owners manual. It's
buried somewhere in there, but not made obvious. The car
can self drain the battery in about a month from a FULL charge.
So, what happens if you drive to the airport, arrive with the
battery low and leave on a week long trip?

It does have a phone home system where it alerts Tesla
that it's about to go kaput. And they then try to contact
you. LAst resort, when they could not find the owner,
they have even used the GPS to find the car and dispatch
their own Tesla service folks to plug it in. Despite that,
some have been bricked. A homeowner put one in a
garage for a couple months and thought it was plugged
in. Something happened with the cord getting disconnected.
Battery bricked and it isn't covered under warranty.

Another nice feature for pioneers.... But they seem to be
hippies that are focused on the idea that the car is zero
emission, conveniently forgetting that in most cases that
power is still coming from coal, nukes, etc.
================================================== =====

Apropos of this (pretty shocking, btw) is
http://www.plugincars.com/real-world...-38-miles.html

Wow.... some of the comments disagree, but you'll quickly get the point.

Still, that doesn't affect my calcs in the electric's case, since
"short-charging" the battery affects the numerator and denomenator
similarly, rendering the net cost per mile the same.

Still, it DOES affect real-world convenience.

But, as I mentioned to Frank, I knew electrics "failed" from an *overall*
cost analysis, mostly due to initial cost, battery cost, and to some extent,
electric cost.

I had no idea they would fail *from the gitgo* on electric cost alone!!!!!

Which makes those 100 MPGe claims utter fraud.

I wonder if ALL Li-Ion car batteries "brick" or greatly shorten lifespan on
total discharge. I'm assuming virtually all car batts ARE Li-Ion??
Ackshooly, the Pruis may use nickel-hydride batts, but the same discharge
princ. may apply.

This is a MAJOR glitch in batt technology, sorta like an ICE that
sporadically loses oil, without letting the owner know -- a real damacles
sword. What a pita.....

Depending on the cost/life of Pruis's batts today, the Prius c, at a REAL 68
mpg (for the lightfooted, actual users claim), would seem to be the
real-world winner. The warranty varies with state, but in NY, CA, they are
full-warrantied for 10 years/150,000.... not bad. About $3,000. But
largely moot, if they last 150,000 miles.

Still, some claim that the ROI of the prius over the base Yaris is 5 years,
depending depending -- not so great either.

--

EA

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800 (PST), bob haller >
wrote:

<...>

>the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline
>making us less dependent on a finite resource.

Nonsense.

>although i think any only electric vehiicle should be designed to
>hitch on a trailer generator in case someone needs to take a really
>long trip. generator trailers could be sold or rented for occasional
>use

That's the *dumbest* idea you've ever come up with. ...and that takes
some doing!

On 2/24/2013 8:19 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:46:00 -0600, The Daring Dufas
> > wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> The P.L.L.C.F. are always trying to push junk science and technology.
>> Electric vehicles have their place but the Moonbats are determined to
>> push immature technology upon the citizenry especially when there is
>> no widely established infrastructure to support it. When you see The
>> President and congressmen traveling around in battery powered limousines
>> and The Capital and White House powered completely by solar
>> cells and windmills, the technology will be ready for the masses. Until
>> that happens I'll be very skeptical that the present national energy and
>> transportation infrastructure should be scrapped for something from
>> La La Land. ^_^
>>
>> TDD
>
>
> I won't call it junk science, but there is much need for improvement.
> Solar is just starting to get a foothold in the sunny regions and is
> still a very expensive alternative here in the northeast. The payback
> is just not there for most of us. It has been on the market for 40
> years already with minimal inroads.
>
> Electric cars may have a place in the future, but right now they are
> very impractical and expensive. If I lived in downtown New York
> Boston, Chicago, etc. and only popped around town a couple of miles,
> I'd probably consider a small car with electricity. If I can't make
> it to work and back, it is useless for me. Not to mention very
> expensive. It may become practical in the future, but I bet we are
> looking at 15 to 30 years and a limited market.
>
> CNG may be a better alternative for the small city cars.
>

Well Ed, perhaps I should call it pie in the sky. The folks pushing the
nonsense lack any understanding of the real world and what it takes to
run it. The cloud hugging, tree kissing, bunny buggering Greenies want
zero emission peddle cars for everyone because it makes them believe
they're saving the world in Gaea's name. Moonbats think and make their
decisions based on emotion rather than logic and rationality. Their
knowledge and understanding of the technology they wish to push on all
of us is nonexistent. Whenever I have a discussion with one of the well
meaning buffoons, I ask them to explain how the tech works and how to
apply it. All I get is a blank stare and guttural vocalizations of the
sound "duhhhhh". I wish I was on our family farm on the side of a
mountain in the Northeast part of the state so I could build and
experiment with wind power and other forms of alternative energy but I
don't have the health and resources to do something like that which I
would really enjoy. When I mention to a Greenie that there is a very
good nonpolluting source of energy called nuclear power, they freak out
and howl about how dangerous it is and how it is bad for your health
then they light up another cigarette. O_o

TDD

> wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800 (PST), bob haller >
> wrote:
>
> <...>
>
>>the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline
>>making us less dependent on a finite resource.
>
> Nonsense.

Really??

>
>>although i think any only electric vehiicle should be designed to
>>hitch on a trailer generator in case someone needs to take a really
>>long trip. generator trailers could be sold or rented for occasional
>>use
>
> That's the *dumbest* idea you've ever come up with. ...and that takes
> some doing!
>
>

Actually, in principle, it's an excellent idea, altho I would ditch the
trailer.
A portable rooftop generator was my idea.... altho that's not a slam -dunk
either, weight-wise.

So, not a dumb idea at all. Which doesn't mean it can be practically
implemented, but given YOUR track record, you'd hardly be the one qualified
to make any final judgment.
--
EA

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 10:21:35 -0500, "Existential Angst"
> wrote:

> wrote in message
...
>On Feb 24, 5:52 am, "Existential Angst" > wrote:
>> Awl --
>>
>> After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the purchase
>> of
>> one, but bleeve, it's hard.
>> I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a Volt
>> would
>> proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.
>>
>> Now, about those electricity costs.....
>>
>> If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
>> At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.
>>
>> Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
>> Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you about c per
>> kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into what
>> you actually wrote on your check.
>
>That isn't the correct way of doing the calculation. What
>you want to find is the INCREMENTAL cost of charging a
>car. That could be lower or higher than the rate with your
>method. For example if you have a monthly fixed charge
>of $25, you're paying that regardless of the car and it
>should not be attributed to the car. And if you're
>in an area where rates escalate if you exceed a certain
>amount, then you're going to pay more for the car
>charging than shown by your method.
>================================================= ===
>
>Absolutely. That's why I left the calc as it was.
>Some places have, like, a 5c/kWhr rate, which quickly escalates to 50c/kWhr.
>Iirc, CA goes up to pert near $1/kWhr.....!!!!

We all know you're a liar. Everyone got your message. You can stop
posting now.

>So my calcs are likely, and were intended to be, a BEST CASE scenario for
>electrics, given the tier structure of most utility rates. And draconian
>tier structure in some, or mebbe most.

But you didn't use the incremental cost, so you didn't even accomplish
that. IOW, more lies.

<snipped impossible to follow posting technique>

On Feb 24, 10:21*am, "Existential Angst" > wrote:
> > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Feb 24, 5:52 am, "Existential Angst" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Awl --
>
> > After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the purchase
> > of
> > one, but bleeve, it's hard.
> > I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a Volt
> > would
> > proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.
>
> > Now, about those electricity costs.....
>
> > If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
> > At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.
>
> > Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
> > Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you about c per
> > kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into what
> > you actually wrote on your check.
>
> That isn't the correct way of doing the calculation. *What
> you want to find is the INCREMENTAL cost of charging a
> car. *That could be lower or higher than the rate with your
> method. * For example if you have a monthly fixed charge
> of $25, you're paying that regardless of the car and it
> should not be attributed to the car. * And if you're
> in an area where rates escalate if you exceed a certain
> amount, then you're going to pay more for the car
> charging than shown by your method.
> ================================================== ==
>
> Absolutely. *That's why I left the calc as it was.
> Some places have, like, a 5c/kWhr rate, which quickly escalates to 50c/kWhr.
> Iirc, CA goes up to pert near $1/kWhr.....!!!!
>
> So my calcs are likely, and were intended to be, a BEST CASE scenario for
> electrics, given the tier structure of most utility rates. *And draconian
> tier structure in some, or mebbe most.

Yeah, if as I said, you're not paying some $50 a month
"connection fee" or similar. If you are, then you've overestimated
the cost of charging an electric car.


>
> > Around NYC, that seems to be about
> > 25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.
>
> Could be. *Here in NJ it's been around 15c to 17c.
>
>
>
> > So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to
> > charge
> > it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
> > If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
> > If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
> > Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per mile in
> > gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> > WTF??
>
> The Tesla is a performance car that does 0 to 60 in like
> 4 secs.
> ===========================================
>
> They expanded their line beyond the original sports car.
> All electrics are fast-ish to very fast off the block. *The Tesla's are esp.
> fast.
>

Which was my point. I don't know how their technology choices
for a high-end $100K+ performance car effects their use of
electricity. So, Tesla is not a car I'd focus on when there are
other, more mainstream cars.




>
> But, as I mentioned to Frank, I knew electrics "failed" from an *overall*
> cost analysis, mostly due to initial cost, battery cost, and to some extent,
> electric cost.
>
> I had no idea they would fail *from the gitgo* on electric cost alone!!!!!
>
> Which makes those 100 MPGe claims utter fraud.

As I said, instead of winging it on assumptions and purely theoretical
calculations, it would be better to find some real, measured data:

http://news.consumerreports.org/cars...o-operate.html

"The pure electric Nissan Leaf costs just 3.5 cents a mile based on
the national average of 11 cents/kWh of electricity. That’s less than
half of what it costs to drive the most fuel-efficient four-door car
we’ve tested, the Toyota Prius. (This calculation doesn’t include
other costs such as maintenance or depreciation. But maintenance on an
electric car is theoretically miniscule compared with gasoline cars.
And depreciation is unknown for such a new technology.)

The Chevrolet Volt, which runs on electricity for the first 35 miles,
is heavier and therefore costs a little more to run—about 3.8 cents
per mile on electricity. "

Even allowing for 2X electric rates, if what CR is saying is correct,
the electric cars still cost substantially less per mile than using
gas. Not enough to make up for all the other drawbacks though,
but not nearly as bad as you claim either. I'm sure there is plenty
more real world data out there. It's not like these cars have not
been thoroughly reviewed, analyzed, tested....


>
> I wonder if ALL Li-Ion car batteries "brick" or greatly shorten lifespan on
> total discharge. *I'm assuming virtually all car batts ARE Li-Ion??
> Ackshooly, the Pruis may use nickel-hydride batts, but the same discharge
> princ. may apply.

The problem is particular to the high performance batteries
Tesla uses, AFAIK.

> wrote in message
...
On Feb 24, 9:17 am, bob haller > wrote:
> On Feb 24, 7:50 am, " >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 24, 5:52 am, "Existential Angst" > wrote:
>
> > > Awl --
>
> > > After a recent thread on the Volt, I'm really tryna justify the
> > > purchase of
> > > one, but bleeve, it's hard.
> > > I figger my gas cost per year is $1600 or so, and payments for a Volt
> > > would
> > > proly be $6,000 year.... PLUS electricity costs.
>
> > > Now, about those electricity costs.....
>
> > > If you calculate the $ per mile of gas, you get something like this:
> > > At $4/gal, with 30 mi/gal, it costs 13c/mi in fuel.
>
> > > Now, how much does it cost to charge a battery?
> > > Don't for a minute believe what your ripoff utility tells you about c
> > > per
> > > kWhr.... Do the math on your bill, divide the kWhr on the bill into
> > > what
> > > you actually wrote on your check.
>
> > That isn't the correct way of doing the calculation. What
> > you want to find is the INCREMENTAL cost of charging a
> > car. That could be lower or higher than the rate with your
> > method. For example if you have a monthly fixed charge
> > of $25, you're paying that regardless of the car and it
> > should not be attributed to the car. And if you're
> > in an area where rates escalate if you exceed a certain
> > amount, then you're going to pay more for the car
> > charging than shown by your method.
>
> > > Around NYC, that seems to be about
> > > 25c/kWhr -- which is outrageous.
>
> > Could be. Here in NJ it's been around 15c to 17c.
>
> > > So let's figger that Tesla's 85 kWhr battery takes, well, 85 kWhr to
> > > charge
> > > it..... that's about $20 in electricity.
> > > If the Tesla gets 200 miles on that charge, that's 10c/mile.
> > > If it only gets 100 miles, that's 20c/mile..... !!!!
> > > Split the diff, that's 15c/mile.... MORE than what I'm paying per mile
> > > in
> > > gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> > > WTF??
>
> > The Tesla is a performance car that does 0 to 60 in like
> > 4 secs.
>
> > > You get similar numbers for the Leaf, and Volt.
>
> > > Now, it gets worse:
> > > There's the ever-present thermodynamic kick-in-the-ass.
> > > It will NEVER take only 85 kWhrs to charge an 85 kWhr battery -- it
> > > will
> > > take proly 20% more.
>
> > > So even if the Tesla DOES get 200 mi per charge (and jb's article
> > > suggests
> > > that it does
> > > nothttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highw...
> > > )
>
> > > factor in the charging inefficiency, and you are just about EQUAL in $
> > > per
> > > mi cost of a 30 mpg vehicle.
>
> > > Anything less than 200 mi per charge, and the Tesla loses, and poss.
> > > loses
> > > badly.
>
> > > So at NYC electric rates, an electric car, not counting ANY other
> > > factors,
> > > is actually MORE expensive than gas, at $4/gal.
>
> > > YET, you see these huge "equivalent" mpg numbers for electrics,
> > > typically
> > > around 100 mpg, implying a $ per mile cost of less than 1/3 the cost
> > > of a 30
> > > mpg vehicle..
> > > But my calcs show that an electric will be *at least* as expensive as
> > > gas,
> > > and likely considerably more than gas, as a fuel.... What gives??
>
> > I don't know. But rather than winging the calcs, there must be
> > some actual real world test results available online. One key
> > factor is that you're assuming the battery fully discharges on each
> > cycle. They don't. How much is left IDK.
>
> > > Holy ****.... there goes my Volt....
>
> > > Now factor in the high initial cost of electrics, inevitable battery
> > > deterioration AND replacement cost, and wow, simply not viable. Unless
> > > I
> > > made a mistake somewhere.
>
> > > Now, some may bleat, Oh OH, MY electric rates are 5c/kWhr.... and I
> > > would
> > > repeat, do the net division on your bill to see what it REALLY is. At
> > > a
> > > TRUE 5c/kWhr, yeah, it makes sense, you could divide all the above
> > > electric
> > > costs by FIVE.
> > > But I don't think anyone is really paying 5c, and quite a few places,
> > > like
> > > CA, pay MORE than NYS utility rates.
>
> > > AND, if your small car gets 40 mpg, that's even tougher competition
> > > for
> > > electrics.
>
> > > Idears?? Opinions?
> > > --
> > > EA
>
> > I think your math may be off a bit, but I think the conclusion
> > is probably valid. That's why the govt is subsidizing these things
> > with big tax credits. They were picking up about 12K of the cost
> > of the Volts, don't know what the deal is now. And from what I
> > saw, even with that, the car still wasn't as good as a conventional
> > car.
>
> > BTW, do you know that if you ever let the Tesla battery go
> > completely dead, it's bricked? That it cost like 30 -40K to
> > replace it? That's a nice feature. Even better, you would
> > think that would be in big print in the owners manual. It's
> > buried somewhere in there, but not made obvious. The car
> > can self drain the battery in about a month from a FULL charge.
> > So, what happens if you drive to the airport, arrive with the
> > battery low and leave on a week long trip?
>
> > It does have a phone home system where it alerts Tesla
> > that it's about to go kaput. And they then try to contact
> > you. LAst resort, when they could not find the owner,
> > they have even used the GPS to find the car and dispatch
> > their own Tesla service folks to plug it in. Despite that,
> > some have been bricked. A homeowner put one in a
> > garage for a couple months and thought it was plugged
> > in. Something happened with the cord getting disconnected.
> > Battery bricked and it isn't covered under warranty.
>
> > Another nice feature for pioneers.... But they seem to be
> > hippies that are focused on the idea that the car is zero
> > emission, conveniently forgetting that in most cases that
> > power is still coming from coal, nukes, etc.
>
> on telsa or any vehicle where a stone dead battery can kill the
> battery it should have a automatic total disconnect relay of some type
> to protect the expensive battery, self discharge of a disconected
> battery should be low. plus a built in solar panel in case its
> outdoors when the battery gets low.
>
> the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline
> making us less dependent on a finite resource.
>
> although i think any only electric vehiicle should be designed to
> hitch on a trailer generator in case someone needs to take a really
> long trip. generator trailers could be sold or rented for occasional
> use- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

How many cars do you think you'd sell when you advertise the fact
that for a long trip you need to go rent a trailer with a generator?
================================================== ===========

LOL!!! A deal killer f'sure....

And my roof-top portable generator is proly not far behind!!!!
I don't know if a rooftop generator smacks more of Chevy Chase or Sanford &
Son..... lol

But, still, an idea that in principle has merit -- a kind of piece-meal
Volt.

My 15,000 W genset measures, iirc, about 30" long, by 16" wide, by 21"
high.... and a "very heavy" 230#.
And THAT is VERY compact for a generator that size.
I don't know how you could make it more compact, for mebbe a permanent
placement somewhere (soundproofed lol) in the car, and just manually hook
it up in a pinch, or for the long-ish drive or low batt.

So, a good idea, that might be difficult to implement. But mebbe someone
will figger it out.
--
EA

On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 10:28:30 -0500, "Existential Angst"
> wrote:

> wrote in message
.. .
>> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 06:17:30 -0800 (PST), bob haller >
>> wrote:
>>
>> <...>
>>
>>>the big advantage of electric vehicles is that they save gasoline
>>>making us less dependent on a finite resource.
>>
>> Nonsense.
>
>Really??

Really!!

>>>although i think any only electric vehiicle should be designed to
>>>hitch on a trailer generator in case someone needs to take a really
>>>long trip. generator trailers could be sold or rented for occasional
>>>use
>>
>> That's the *dumbest* idea you've ever come up with. ...and that takes
>> some doing!
>>
>>
>
>Actually, in principle, it's an excellent idea, altho I would ditch the
>trailer.

It does sound like an "idea" you'd come up with.

>A portable rooftop generator was my idea.... altho that's not a slam -dunk
>either, weight-wise.

Or any other wise (i.e. *not* wise).

>So, not a dumb idea at all. Which doesn't mean it can be practically
>implemented, but given YOUR track record, you'd hardly be the one qualified
>to make any final judgment.

It certainly *is* a dumb idea. If you must go down this road, perhaps
because of some love for pain, rent the whole damned car. You really
are an idiot (no surprise to anyone here).