Consumer Reports: GM's Volt 'doesn't really make a lot of sense'

Page 3 of 6  
wrote:


Thanks for the tip. I had tried using a coathanger wire as mine, also a '97 was so plugged that the idle didn't even change much when I pulled the valve with it running, it helped for awhile and made the light intermittent but it has been solidly on since the beginning of winter. Luckily I have access to a 2 post lift and an OTC 4000 Enhanced scanner with the Pathfinder 96 software and it shows GM specific stuff. Having both always helps.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

from either a static rail or overhead cable. What's wrong in putting strips over hundreds of miles of motorway and allow cars to pick up juice on the move, batteries then only for towns and parking?
--
Clive


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/4/2011 3:01 AM, Roger Blake wrote:

How is any of this relevant?

It's frustrating talking to you guys. It's always the same thing - everybody knows the major problem is with the batteries. It's the reason we all ain't driving electric cars. WE GOT THAT, OK?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

generated somewhere and that generator uses fuel, all driving electric cars do is move the pollution to a different district.
--
Clive


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

For the idiot greenies that is sufficent for them to feel good about themselves and lord it over the rest of us.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
they're "green" at all. Electricity has to be

USA. This process may be as cheap as we have but is not as good as it gets.
There is some hydroelectric, of course, but not as in Scandinavia.
And, we shut the door on atomic power plants a long time back. It will take time to make up the lost ground, if we even reopen that technology.
We are diddling with wind power and solar, but that is also in its early stages.
I dont see that there is any clear answer, especially in a country where no one wants to cooperate with anyone else, and where the government is run by buffoons with their hands out.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I guess that atomic power will come back and then it will be electricity for the vehicles. They decided to stop atomic in many countries some decades ago but it is coming back now that oil is disappearing.
Whatever it will be after oil it will not be used directly in cars so the electrical path for cars is a sure thing whatever will be used to generate it.
You would not put coal in cars but using coal to create electricity is ok and new technology is possible to make coal power plants better and they need not pollute.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
put coal in cars but using coal to create electricity is ok and new technology is possible to make coal power plants better and they need not pollute.
****** They pollute automatically with the CO2 output.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message news:eb3bebcd-58e9-You

except co2 is not a polutant. thats greene bs KB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

CO2 is good and the plants need it.
People pump CO2 into greenhouses to make more vegetables.
Global warming comes and goes in the discussions just like Global Cooling and all such silly end of the world discussions.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And/or move it to a different material, yes. But that's something useful and important.
You also do get a little more efficiency from the electric because the electric motor is about as efficient at delivering low power as it is at full throttle, but the transmission losses may make up for that.
That's why money needs to be invested in reducing transmission losses and cleaner power production as well as in batteries. These things don't just benefit drivers either, they benefit all electric power users. --scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes

In theory, it may be more efficient to generate electricity and move it to the car battery. The gasoline engine is not very good at extracting all the power out of a gallon of fuel, so if a better converter is available, it may help. I say "in theory" because I have no idea of the efficiency of a coal plant. Nuclear may be better, as is hydro. Perhaps some slick new turbine is better at extracting power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_combustion_engine#Energy_efficiency Most steel engines have a thermodynamic limit of 37%. Even when aided with turbochargers and stock efficiency aids, most engines retain an average efficiency of about 18%-20%.[10][11] Rocket engine efficiencies are better still, up to 70%, because they combust at very high temperatures and pressures and are able to have very high expansion ratios.[12]
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Clive wrote:

It sells because most people think electricity comes from a little stream in Wisconsin.
Electricity is primarily from coal. Regarding dams, we've been ripping those out for years. The contribution from hydroelectric power is lower than in the 1940s.
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

50% of electrical generation in the US is through the burning of coal. This negates "green features" of this car. Depending on where you live, the electrical costs could be equal to or higher than the equivalent fuel costs. As we (the general American public) buy into the liberal hysteria about these types of vehicles, electrical distribution costs will go even higher as new infrastructure is needed. Imagine a few million of these in Cal, where rolling brownouts are the norm. If anything, the hybrid is a better choice, IMO.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I did realize that the electricity would have to come from a factory although I'm not so sure that it's cleaner to convert oil to gasoline using coal or oil and then transport it in some way using more coal or oil or gas or diesel and then use some electricity to pump it into our tanks and then finally burning the gas in a piston engine. My guess is that you'd be able to go a lot farther on a buck of electricity vs a buck of gas - although that's just a guess on my part. The way we distribute electricity will have to be rebuilt but I'm assuming that we can do it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The bottom line is that it is not the cure all, and not as cut and dried as either side would like you to believe. We Still will need a huge investment in distribution as well as generation, and an alternative to coal is needed.
Maybe we can switch to natural gas power generation, what with all the hydrofraking that has been legalized it must be in abundance.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Remember Julius and Ethel Rosenberg...Their future was also fully electric.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/1/2011 12:00 PM, hls wrote:

20 years ago I wouldn't have believed that our future was going to be almost totally digital.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I guess I would have.. Digital was the only intelligent course of technology. I used to be involved in radiocommunications, and digital coded pulse transmission seemed to be a no brainer.
With technology, however, robustness can falter. That is not to say that the problems wont be solved, but that there can be painful interim situations.
For every additional component, whether integrated onto a chip or hard wired into a board, the statistical possibility of failure increases.
We seem to be focused upon the trip. Is there a goal here somewhere??
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/1/2011 12:57 PM, hls wrote:

Well I guess it's too late to find out now. The price of computer RAM was about $45 a MB so you'd probably have a hard time imagining regular folks owing a computer with $200,000 worth of ram and drives which would cost about $10,000,000 at the time.
The only reason we're a digital world is that cheap RAM, data storage, and a method of moving info around at high speed exists. Without that, we'd probably still be using film, listening to CDs, going to Tower Records, and using computers with small sized OSes with limited memory.
My guess is that 20 years from now, we won't be doing fill-ups at gas stations and changing motor oil. I could be wrong but I hope not, for our sake.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.