PDA

View Full Version : The Future of American Cars????



road kill
09-02-2011, 10:40 AM
"The shocking truth about electric cars" By Donald Sensing

The shocking truth about electric cars - The Globe and Mail:

Electric cars aren’t necessarily green at all. Electric vehicles require large amounts of electricity – so much that Toronto Hydro chief Anthony Haines says he doesn’t know how he’d get it. “If you connect about 10 per cent of the homes on any given street with an electric car, the electricity system fails,” he said recently.


***You cannot repeal the second law of thermodynamics.***

Remember the electric-only Honda Clarity, that was advertised to use no gasoline at all?



The problem is that hydrogen is a fuel but not a resource. Hydrogen gas, H2, has to be made. It just can't be sucked out the air or water or earth. As I explained in "Buy a Honda, Kill a Polar Bear,"

where does the driver get the hydrogen to begin with? Hydrogen gas, H2, is not found free in nature. There are two ways to separate hydrogen from its compounds: hydrolysis and reforming. The former, most commonly and easily done with water, uses electricity and a catalyst to break H2O into H2 and O2. Reforming uses heat instead of electricity.

More than 90 percent of the hydrogen produced in the world is obtained by steam reforming of natural gas. It's not energy efficient since the energy gained from the hydrogen gas is less than the energy required to produce it. H2 produced in this manner is not used for fuel (except rocket fuel and some others exotics), but for industrial and chemical purposes. ...


That's the problem with fuel-cell or any other electrically-powered vehicle. There is no free way to produce the electricity. Since most electricity in the United States is produced by coal-fired plants, all that electric cars do is shift the environmental effects from the tailpipe to the power plant. This is not a good shift, since today's auto burn extremely cleanly already.

If the H2 is produced using electricity somewhere, then odds are that coal produces that electricity. So the CO2 production has been merely moved off the auto to another emitter. Also, does it take more energy to produce the H2, whatever the source, than the H2 supplies? If so, exactly what is the benefit of the Clarity?


The Globe and Mail makes the same point:

And if the extra electricity [needed to recharge electric cars] isn’t generated by renewable energy, then overall carbon dioxide emissions will go up, not down, Prof. Smil says. “The only way electric cars could reduce global carbon emissions would be if all the additional electricity needed to power them came from carbon-free energies.” He also makes the essential point that the world’s energy infrastructure is based on fossil fuels. Changing that will take decades.


Electric cars are not ready for mass market and never will be.







***Second law of thermodynamics***From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The second law of thermodynamics is an expression of the tendency that over time, differences in temperature, pressure, and chemical potential equilibrate in an isolated physical system. From the state of thermodynamic equilibrium, the law deduced the principle of the increase of entropy and explains the phenomenon of irreversibility in nature. The second law declares the impossibility of machines that generate usable energy from the abundant internal energy of nature by processes called perpetual motion of the second kind.

The second law may be expressed in many specific ways, but the first formulation is credited to the German scientist Rudolf Clausius. The law is usually stated in physical terms of impossible processes. In classical thermodynamics, the second law is a basic postulate applicable to any system involving measurable heat transfer, while in statistical thermodynamics, the second law is a consequence of unitarity in quantum theory. In classical thermodynamics, the second law defines the concept of thermodynamic entropy, while in statistical mechanics entropy is defined from information theory, known as the Shannon entropy.



Yup....we are in good hands.
A bunch of naive little children that have done nothing but sit in class their whole lives, figgerin out what's best for us.


RK

BHB
09-02-2011, 01:25 PM
I'm just a simple man... I don't know about all this scientific stuff but it does seem like common sense to me that just because the electric car gets it's energy from the power plant that operates on some kind of fossil fuel doesn't mean that the car is better for the environment. Somehow, somewhere that fossil fuel has got to be burned!

So, limiting me to 40 miles/charge with an electric car isn't going to help my "carbon footprint" at all! I'll stick with my diesel pick up!

Besides, only AlGore cares about carbon footprints... yeah right... with his $3000/mo electric bills on just one of his houses!

BHB

BonMallari
09-02-2011, 02:24 PM
the internal combustion engine powers the country, trains,planes and automobiles,its like trying to reinvent the wheel,the resources are out there, but we continue to squabble and fight for oil in lands far away at the cost of human lives, instead of using our domestic resources right beneath our own ground

Cody Covey
09-02-2011, 03:33 PM
the internal combustion engine powers the country, trains,planes and automobiles,its like trying to reinvent the wheel,the resources are out there, but we continue to squabble and fight for oil in lands far away at the cost of human lives, instead of using our domestic resources right beneath our own ground

I agree with you but it's not like if we drill the resources would stay here anyway...everything would go to the global market. What I don't understand is if it is greed pushing everything to the global market or if there is some regulation that requires it to be sold there.

BonMallari
09-02-2011, 04:51 PM
I agree with you but it's not like if we drill the resources would stay here anyway...everything would go to the global market. What I don't understand is if it is greed pushing everything to the global market or if there is some regulation that requires it to be sold there.

not only sold here, but IMHO it should be owned here too, sure dont want some turban wearing desert dweller (not meaning las vegas) owning the oil fields in Alaska, Penn, or Texas..it should almost be like the FCC regs regarding radio and TV stations being owned by domestic groups only

Gerry Clinchy
09-02-2011, 07:11 PM
I'm just a simple man... I don't know about all this scientific stuff but it does seem like common sense to me that just because the electric car gets it's energy from the power plant that operates on some kind of fossil fuel doesn't mean that the car is better for the environment. Somehow, somewhere that fossil fuel has got to be burned!

BHB

And our local electric company was paying people to replace their electric home heating with fossil fuel furnaces!

Why? Because the state has mandated the elec company reduce electric consumption by certain quota amounts, and switching customers off electric heat will help do that! If the target usage is not reached, the elec company will be assessed a penalty.

Of course, then they will just raise elec rates even higher :-) Thank you, Gov. Rendell & State legislature for not thinking further than the end of your nose.

Buzz
09-02-2011, 09:23 PM
I feel dumber for having read that.

Electrics don't have anything to do with "green." It's all about bringing other fuels into the transportation mix. :rolleyes:

Any a guy working for a power company making a statement like that? Connecting vehicles to the grid in 10% of households will crash the grid? Has he not educated himself on smart grid technologies? Apparently he has not.

Gerry Clinchy
09-02-2011, 09:47 PM
Buzz, what would be the point in bringing new fuels into the transportation mix if the net result does not decrease dependence on oil?

The present administration has indicated it wants to eliminate coal as a fuel. Nuclear is in disfavor. Solar and wind seem to be a long way from providing enough kwhs to "fuel" a large grid at anything resembling a reasonable cost.

Electric may be valid for the transportation mix when applied to mass transportation, but there are many areas that are not effectively served by mass transportation that works in urban areas like NYC.

It seems more reasonable to heat/cool homes with other forms of fuels, and use oil for the cars. In heating homes the delivery system doesn't have to be "portable"; don't need a network of fueling stations; bulk & weight are not big issues for stationery uses.

It then gives more time to develop some kind of engine that could actually perform close to the gasoline engines for cars.

If you're still using oil to make the electricity, and the oil is not being used as efficiently per mile traveled in the electric car, then we haven't accomplished anything.

road kill
09-02-2011, 10:16 PM
I feel dumber for having read that.

Electrics don't have anything to do with "green." It's all about bringing other fuels into the transportation mix. :rolleyes:

Any a guy working for a power company making a statement like that? Connecting vehicles to the grid in 10% of households will crash the grid? Has he not educated himself on smart grid technologies? Apparently he has not.

Buzz, are you disputing Clausius' theory?

RK

zeus3925
09-03-2011, 10:25 AM
The amount of petroleum is finite. They ain't making any more. There is some untapped sources but they are going to be very expensive and difficult to reach.

We can keep sending our sons and daughters, as well as treasure to war to protect our sources OR we can get our scientific folks cracking to find a solution. Defense of the gas guzzler is going to bury us. The party is coming to an end.

road kill
09-03-2011, 11:07 AM
The amount of petroleum is finite. They ain't making any more. There is some untapped sources but they are going to be very expensive and difficult to reach.

We can keep sending our sons and daughters, as well as treasure to war to protect our sources OR we can get our scientific folks cracking to find a solution. Defense of the gas guzzler is going to bury us. The party is coming to an end.
And trifling in solar and electric powered cars is a WASTE of taxpayers money!!


Open drilling to companies that earmark a certain % of profits towards R&D of new alternative fuel sources and offer tax incentives as well.
I am not a huge fan of Gov't. regulation, but in order to get these tax breaks and drilling rights this research would need to be overveiwed as to the validity of the efforts.

Short term, fossil fuel prices at the pump go down, jobe are created instantly and long term we find an answer due to financial incentive.

You know.....good old capitallism!!!!:D

If I can think of a plan like this, and you all think I am pretty simple, why can't Ivy League elitists???
You know who I mean....those folks who have spent their entire lives sitting in classrooms and now run the country!!!!:shock:

Just askin'......


RK

caryalsobrook
09-03-2011, 12:04 PM
The amount of petroleum is finite. They ain't making any more. There is some untapped sources but they are going to be very expensive and difficult to reach.

We can keep sending our sons and daughters, as well as treasure to war to protect our sources OR we can get our scientific folks cracking to find a solution. Defense of the gas guzzler is going to bury us. The party is coming to an end.
The view "that they ain't making it anymore" is now in dispute. In fact it has been argued that there is more hydrocarbon(petrolium) released into the oceans naturally presently than there is from human oil spills.

zeus3925
09-03-2011, 12:47 PM
The view "that they ain't making it anymore" is now in dispute. In fact it has been argued that there is more hydrocarbon(petrolium) released into the oceans naturally presently than there is from human oil spills.

Forgive me for being skeptical. Hydrocarbons released in the ocean are not going to give us relief under any foreseeable technology.

There is some interesting work going on in methane hydrates. Applications for transportation is still a long way off.

Sooner or later the market will reflect reality. Driving around in a tennis court with two sofas is going to cost too dang much.

Having grown up in Michigan in the 50's, I love big cars as much as the next guy. But, like the dinosaur, they are the thing of the past.

caryalsobrook
09-03-2011, 01:36 PM
Forgive me for being skeptical. Hydrocarbons released in the ocean are not going to give us relief under any foreseeable technology.

There is some interesting work going on in methane hydrates. Applications for transportation is still a long way off.

Sooner or later the market will reflect reality. Driving around in a tennis court with two sofas is going to cost too dang much.

Having grown up in Michigan in the 50's, I love big cars as much as the next guy. But, like the dinosaur, they are the thing of the past.
Sounds like you are talking about wind and solar energy. You think?

zeus3925
09-03-2011, 04:26 PM
Sounds like you are talking about wind and solar energy. You think?
No, I'm talking about the coming end of petroleum. Now what replaces it is an attempt to predict the future. I am only as good at that as the next guy.

The problem with wind and solar is that it is not available 24/7. And you can't put it in your gas tank.

Julie R.
09-03-2011, 05:41 PM
There is some interesting work going on in methane hydrates.




I think he's referring to those recent studies where they're using panda poop (http://www.grist.org/list/2011-08-29-panda-poop-could-revolutionize-biofuels) to generate power. ;-)

caryalsobrook
09-03-2011, 05:45 PM
No, I'm talking about the coming end of petroleum. Now what replaces it is an attempt to predict the future. I am only as good at that as the next guy.

The problem with wind and solar is that it is not available 24/7. And you can't put it in your gas tank.
If oil is finite then why tell people they can't drill for it and they can't make engined for it? If solar and wind are cost competitive with oil then why take other's people's money to invest in it. tell you what YOU put our money in wind and solar without government subsities and I will invest in oil and internal combustion engines. Get the government out of the way and LET'S SEE WHO IS SUCCESSFUL. Put another way, I WILL PULL MY OWN WAGON AND YOU PULL YOUR OWN. Without the gov. to subsidize wind and solar you are broke.

I love the line "Iam from the gov. and I am here to help you." Again JUST PULL YOUR OWN WAGON.

zeus3925
09-03-2011, 06:31 PM
If oil is finite then why tell people they can't drill for it and they can't make engined for it? If solar and wind are cost competitive with oil then why take other's people's money to invest in it. tell you what YOU put our money in wind and solar without government subsities and I will invest in oil and internal combustion engines. Get the government out of the way and LET'S SEE WHO IS SUCCESSFUL. Put another way, I WILL PULL MY OWN WAGON AND YOU PULL YOUR OWN. Without the gov. to subsidize wind and solar you are broke.

I love the line "Iam from the gov. and I am here to help you." Again JUST PULL YOUR OWN WAGON.

Whoa there, Cary! Go find a wind/solar advocate to vent your wrath. I don't believe they are the magic bullet.

You can drill til you're tired of it, but, eventually you won't want to pay the price for petroleum..

Gerry Clinchy
09-03-2011, 07:00 PM
Sarge, I don't think we can "defend" the gasoline engine since it is dependent upon a finite fuel source (as you say, finite within the technology we would anticipate in the foreseeable future).

I think Julie's panda poo article is really interesting. Methanol is not cost-effective, but bamboo grows "wild" (problem is stopping it from growing once it starts!). And there may be a clue in the panda digestive enzymes that could make it a viable biofuel. And one that would require only a modest modification of the internal combustion engine?

I don't think that solar or wind are viable for cars, but somebody should come up with a way to make them viable for home uses. Geo-thermal is also another concept, and that one is constant, unaffected by external conditions.

zeus3925
09-03-2011, 07:22 PM
Sarge, I don't think we can "defend" the gasoline engine since it is dependent upon a finite fuel source (as you say, finite within the technology we would anticipate in the foreseeable future).

I think Julie's panda poo article is really interesting. Methanol is not cost-effective, but bamboo grows "wild" (problem is stopping it from growing once it starts!). And there may be a clue in the panda digestive enzymes that could make it a viable biofuel. And one that would require only a modest modification of the internal combustion engine?

I don't think that solar or wind are viable for cars, but somebody should come up with a way to make them viable for home uses. Geo-thermal is also another concept, and that one is constant, unaffected by external conditions.

Geothermal isn't without its problems. Most of the geothermal is produced from wet rock areas. That means there is sufficient water present to transfer the energy to a power plant. Sources of wet rock geothermal are generally limited geographically. One problem not generally acknowledged with geothermal is that heated water from geothermal sources can contain some nasty stuff like arsenides and acids, like hydrofluoric, sulfuric,etc. Not only do you not want to have this stuff loose in the environment but it can be a major engineering headache. As time goes by geothermal plants tend to cool down their heat source.

Sandia Labs did some work in the 80's on dry geothermal. It was stated back then we had enough dry geothermal potential to power the entire country for 400 years. They did a pilot plant which worked well but when they set up a full scale plant, it was a bust.

Panda pooh? Were you around in the 70's when hippies were running around in old school buses powered by chicken crap?

A high school classmate is a nuclear engineer. He made an interesting point. A little bit of hay will propel a 1000 pound horse. Maybe some day we will just throw a bail of hay in the trunk before we head to the grocery store.

caryalsobrook
09-03-2011, 08:09 PM
Whoa there, Cary! Go find a wind/solar advocate to vent your wrath. I don't believe they are the magic bullet.

You can drill til you're tired of it, but, eventually you won't want to pay the price for petroleum..
You are the one that said you wanted wind and solar energy available 24/7. Well it is so why don't you pay for it. Let me guess, IT IS TOO EXPENSIVE!!!!


You can't drill. Ever heard of the moratorium of drilling in the Gulf enacted by that brilliant POTUS? At least if you want to do business in this country.

I have always wondered the logic of our energy policy. Let me give you a question.

What sense does it make to spend 600 billion dollare for oil from the middle east but not drill for it here?

zeus3925
09-03-2011, 09:29 PM
Re-read the post, Cary. I said wind /solar is NOT available 24/7. Can you point to the post where I said wind/solar is the ticket? In fact, I distinctly said they are NOT the answer. Your apology, please!

Last I checked the moratorium in the Gulf is largely lifted save for some very risky sites. You can get a nice drilling job in North Dakota. There's lots of drilling going on all over the country, in fact.

Oil prices are subject to a lot of different influences. It isn't only a question of supply and demand. There has been much speculation in the oil market for some time that has effectively short circuited the normal supply/demand pricing. You said you want to invest your money in petroleum. Good for you. Go right ahead.

caryalsobrook
09-03-2011, 11:01 PM
Re-read the post, Cary. I said wind /solar is NOT available 24/7. Can you point to the post where I said wind/solar is the ticket? In fact, I distinctly said they are NOT the answer. Your apology, please!

Last I checked the moratorium in the Gulf is largely lifted save for some very risky sites. You can get a nice drilling job in North Dakota. There's lots of drilling going on all over the country, in fact.

Oil prices are subject to a lot of different influences. It isn't only a question of supply and demand. There has been much speculation in the oil market for some time that has effectively short circuited the normal supply/demand pricing. You said you want to invest your money in petroleum. Good for you. Go right ahead.
I do apologize, you said problem with wind/solar was that it is not available 24/7. Extremely careless of me.

Actually, the 24/7 is not a problem from a suplier standpoint. i won't speak of all states but Tennessee is one I am somewhat familiar. By law which I believe to be Federal and as such to apply to all states, kelectric companies are obligated to purchase power generated by bot solar and wind. Based on the demand for and the supply of wind/solar(w/s) energy, the companies can adjust their plant output.

A friend of mine just put in a solar system at the cost of about $350,000.00.
He figured based on his cost estimates and return on investment, he would probably break even after 30 years. This was also the anticipated life of the system. But after reimbursement from the Fed Gov, the state of Tennessee from the stimulus money and also money from TVA totataling almost $250,000.00 and also the fact that TVA would have to pay him 110% of the price they charged him for electricity, and the fact that even though his expense for the system was about $100,000.00, he would be able to depreciate the whole $350,000.00 even though he only had to put out about $100,000.00. The result would be that he would recoup his investment in about 3 1/2 years, thanks to the taxpayor. As he said he is "laughing all the way to the bank with the free money that the gov. gives him from the taxpayor. He always lets me know that he is getting my tax money due to the absolute stupidity of the gov.

I just tell him that I get it back due to the subsity on gas containing ethanol, resulting in higher corn prices, compliments of the stupidity of the gov. the problem with this is those that don't grow corn or were not able to take advantage of the solar sweetheart deal are screwed.

If the gov can and is willing to place a moratorium on drilling then it assumed that they can and will do it again in the future. This has long lasting effects on the willingness of one to invest in such drilling in the future. A clasic example of the effect of this kind of gov policy was during the time of the Carter Administration. He put an embargo on grain shipments to the Soviet Union as a result of the invasion of Afganistan. Even though it was lifted after the Carter Admin. we never got the business back until just recently.

zeus3925
09-03-2011, 11:13 PM
Apology accepted!

In response to your earlier post asking for a defense of the energy policy. I am not in a position to write one, but the short answer is there is no such animal. I'd like to see one but Washington is just too busy trying to score points on each other.

Gerry Clinchy
09-04-2011, 01:47 AM
Interesting stuff, Sarge, on the dry geo-thermal plant. Why did it fail?

Speaking of the panda poo again, there are some people running their diesel cars on used cooking oil. They get the oil free from places like McDonalds who are glad not to have to pay for disposal of the oil. Wonder if this could also be a way to re-cycle engine oil? The car owners do have to invest in some retrofitting of the diesel engines to accommodate the different fuel. Not quite sure how they would re-fill for long-distance trips, but works for local travel.

Can't imagine a geo-thermal system that would cost $350K! Must have been for a large installation? For a normal residence, it might cost around $30K around here. In this area, the ones I hear of use a well for the water source. The water is circulated back into the well. In such a system the circulating pump and the heat pump that uses the BTUs from the water would be the two "replacement" parts.

For home heating, pellet stoves seem to be a good option. No chimneys to maintain. The pellets are essentially "waste" from other wood products. Pellets made from corn can also be burned in some stoves, but the augers need more frequent cleaning due to the higher moisture in the corn. (I think they use corn cobs, but won't swear to that).

zeus3925
09-04-2011, 09:57 AM
I think Cary was talking about a $350,000 solar power array and all the government subsidies that came with it.

Whether we like it or not ours is a subsidy driven society. Every phase of our living is supported by some sort of subsidy whether it is energy or food production, student tuition or sports stadiums. Overdone? I think so.

But, sometimes the market forces are such that there is no interest in developing alternatives in the face of an oncoming crisis. Government subsidized R&D is warranted at that point. After all the government supported the research that led to the development of nuclear power. Government subsidized research led to safety standards for cars and a s a result thousands of lives have been saved.

As for geothermal I guess I was speaking to a megasystem while Gerry was speaking about a microsystem for home heating. Home geothermal involves the use of a heat pump to heat a home. It extracts heat from the ground in the winter and pumps it back in in the summer. A friend in Wisconsin is a ground water geologist. He heats his home with heat extracted from ground water. He states you need 3 gal/min. flow in the well to make it work. There are problems if too many people pump from the same aquifer. You need a place to discharge the water after it runs through the system. Then there is the cost of pumping the water.

The Sandia project's problems, if I recall correctly had a lot to do with the engineering of the wells to provide the heat source. They were not designed with a big enough reservoir to provide heat for the plant. They weren't able to get enough power to drive the pumps. But in the 80's, the concept was in the early development stage and failures are the normal course of business at that stage.

Geothermal like wind/solar won't go into your gas tank unless better batteries become available. But, anything that that weans stationary power plants off petroleum frees up the supply for other uses in the interim.

I did a search for dry geothermal. There is a lot of interesting stuff out there. Here is just one link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_geothermal_system

Gerry Clinchy
09-04-2011, 10:54 AM
As for geothermal I guess I was speaking to a megasystem while Gerry was speaking about a microsystem for home heating. Home geothermal involves the use of a heat pump to heat a home. It extracts heat from the ground in the winter and pumps it back in in the summer. A friend in Wisconsin is a ground water geologist. He heats his home with heat extracted from ground water. He states you need 3 gal/min. flow in the well to make it work. There are problems if too many people pump from the same aquifer. You need a place to discharge the water after it runs through the system. Then there is the cost of pumping the water.




Yes, Zeus, I was talking about individual systems.

Discharging water is cheaper than returning it to the well (closed loop). A pond can also be used as an alternative to a well.

My well gets 40 ga/min. Well pumps can only pump 10 gal/min ... so my existing well has "excess" ... but I would only want a closed loop, so that water is not "wasted".

The theory is that the circulating pump used to circulate the 55 deg water uses far less electricity than the resistance heating that might otherwise be used.

I'm not good at engineering stuff, but it would seem that, in the closed loop system, was the loop has been filled initially, the circulating pump would keep the water moving.

Some systems put coils in the ground below the frost line, and circulate a liquid (not necessarily water) through the coils. Penn State dubbed their system the "slinky" from the appearance of the multiple coils. Most effective when installed during new construction due to the excavation issue.

I do agree that tax incentives can help promote such systems to take some of the pressure off oil for home heating.

There are other ways we could conserve oil as well. I have a heat pump water heater. Uses 1/3 the annual electricity of a similar-size, traditional water heater. In warm climates, like FL, they are placed in garages and there is never a shortage of BTUs in the surrounding air.

luvmylabs23139
09-08-2011, 12:56 PM
I think he's referring to those recent studies where they're using panda poop (http://www.grist.org/list/2011-08-29-panda-poop-could-revolutionize-biofuels) to generate power. ;-)

In NC it's chicken poop. Of course with a governor named Perdue, should we expect anything else?

Gerry Clinchy
09-12-2011, 05:02 PM
http://www.nesea.org/openhouse/listings/?feature=&fuel=&state=PA&submit=GO

I found this interesting. I think that photovoltaic & geothermal offer options for home use. Perhaps not in large scale installations, but these examples of "green" housing show promise. The key would be finding how to make installations more affordable for "man on the street".