$5.00 Diesel - time to put her up on blocks!

Page 1 of 2  
$5 bucks for diesel at local station, $4.93 cash and $5.10 in town.
Walking is starting to look pretty good.
Today's Marin County Calif prices.

--

© 2008 T.G.Lambach. Publication in any form requires prior written
permission.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:39:35 -0700, "-->> T.G. Lambach <<--" <"T.G. Lambach at NoHamorSpamcomcast.net"> wrote:

sold my diesel last week, first time in a long time I'm driving a gas car __________________________________________ Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You know, if you price out the cost per mile in diesel and gas engine, you will find out that the cost is close enough.
I just did a calculation on the 01 E320 with 24 MPG average at $3.95 per gallon premium and comes up with 16.5 cents per mile.
My 95 E300D with 29 MPG average with $4.59 diesel is 15.9 cents per mile...
Of couse if your MPG is much lower... then your cost is higher for diesel. I am so glad I filled my cat at $4.39 before it jumped 20 cents! Last fill is $90.49... even the attendant was stumped when I told him.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
-->> T.G. Lambach wibbled:> $5 bucks for diesel at local station, $4.93 cash and $5.10 in town.

That looks like a bargain - in the UK it's GBP £1.20 a litre (@USD $2.35/litre or about USD $8.80 for a US gallon or USD $10.56 for an imperial Gallon)
--
Buzby
There's nothing more dangerous than a resourceful idiot
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On May 20, 5:39 pm, "-->> T.G. Lambach <<--" <"T.G. Lambach at NoHamorSpamcomcast.net"> wrote:

I'm paying less than $4 a gallon for B100 in Sonoma Tom. Maybe you should have kept that diesel.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
-->> T.G. Lambach <<-- wrote:> $5 bucks for diesel at local station, $4.93 cash and $5.10 in town.
Ugh, yeah $4.999 at the Chevron by the freeway in Carlsbad, north of San Diego, tonight. Ridiculous. I went to Costco yesterday and saw that the 35lb soybean oil jugs are $26.39 a piece, which is also like $5.75/gallon. Good lord.
I'm starting to consider getting a 107 and putting an electric motor into it. I think that'd make for a fun car to drive...
-tom!
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've been looking into doing something like this for weeks now. It is a huge initial investment though. If you can build an electric car for under 6k you did it cheaply, and then you will only have a range under 30 to 40 miles. It takes an investment in the teens to twenty thousands to get range over 100 miles.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The only other problem with this is if it's done in any numbers significant enough to impact fuel demand, the additional electricity has to come from somewhere. And unless it's from more coal, the price of the electricity isn't going to be what it is now. Also, the infrastructure has to be increased to support the new demand.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
...The only other problem with this is if it's done in any numbers significant enough to impact fuel demand, the additional electricity has to come from somewhere. And unless it's from more coal, the price of the electricity isn't going to be what it is now.
Coal? Why coal? Nuclear power is cleaner safer and cheaper than any stinking coal plant.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 24 May 2008 17:34:30 -0700, "Roger Shoaf"

clueless! __________________________________________ Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Take a look at this report put together by professionals for Congress comparing the estimated costs of energy from new coal vs nuclear plants. Without subsidies, nuclear costs 5.6 cents per KWH, compared to 4.6 cents for an advanced coal plant.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33442.pdf
Plus, keep in mind that regardless of what is used to generate the electricity, to start using electricity to power cars on any widespread basis is going to require beefing up a lot of the existing infrastructure. That isn't going to be cheap and has to be paid for. Most of what is being used to distribute electricity today was put in place decades ago, when construction costs, permitting, environmental studies, remediation, etc were all significantly less.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Take a look at this report put together by professionals for Congress comparing the estimated costs of energy from new coal vs nuclear plants. Without subsidies, nuclear costs 5.6 cents per KWH, compared to 4.6 cents for an advanced coal plant.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33442.pdf
Plus, keep in mind that regardless of what is used to generate the electricity, to start using electricity to power cars on any widespread basis is going to require beefing up a lot of the existing infrastructure. That isn't going to be cheap and has to be paid for. Most of what is being used to distribute electricity today was put in place decades ago, when construction costs, permitting, environmental studies, remediation, etc were all significantly less.
Ahh, but coal has a price not mentioned in the report you cited. While it mentions CO2 emissions, it does not mention the tons of radioactive emissions from the combustion of coal. That right when coal is burned it releases the uranium and thorium contained in the coal and it ends up in the smoke and the ash.
See http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html for the details.
Also to be considered is the effect of not making electricity from nuclear power. First consider that it is a relatively simple matter to convert a gasoline or diesel truck or automobile to burn natural gas, but it is very expensive to build and operate an electric car or truck. Also to run an electric car you have to generate electricity where you suffer an energy loss from the process of converting the gas or coal into electricity, and then you have losses in transmission of the electricity, and then you have losses when you charge the batteries in the electric car. The result is that you have to burn more fossil fuel to move the car down the road via electricity rather than by burning it in the engine of the car.
Nuclear also has the possibility of generating cheap off peak electricity to convert water to hydrogen that could be burned and it would also have other economic benefits as well. Consider if you will the production of portland cement. This requires a great deal of energy to run the kilns to produce the cement needed for use in concrete. Cheap power means cheap concrete for construction, and that means that the cost of building with concrete goes down and hence the cost of roads, housing and everything else drops accordingly. This would also reduce the demand for timber and that would also reduce costs to the economy.
The downside to nuclear power is the fear. It seems to me that the fear of catastrophic disaster is not justified by the reality. Education of the ignorant is the answer here.
--

Roger Shoaf

About the time I had mastered getting the toothpaste back in the tube, then
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If nuclear power is such a great idea, why won't the private insurance companies insure it? Without government guarantees, all nuclear plants would have to shut down today because no private insurance is available.
The best idea here in California for electric cars is to mount solar panels on your roof to capture sunlight and convert it to electricity to charge the batteries in the car.
On an industrial scale and a central power generation model, large solar farms can be built out in the desert and used to separate hydrogen and oxygen to fill fuel cells which can be transported to fueling stations for hydrogen powered cars.
Here is a link to a very popular web site about a zero carbon home on one of the most northern islands of Great Britain. So you don't have to live in California to make zero carbon technologies work.
http://www.zerocarbonhouse.com/Home.aspx
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Guess they would have to shut down France also.

Ok explain the economics to me here. How much would it cost for the panels? and how much would it cost for the equipment to charge the batteries? If I work during the day it would also seem to me that my car would be at work, so I guess I would need two sets of batteries and swap them out either when I get home from work or in the morning before I go to work.

Really? How many acres of solar panels would it take to make enough hydrogen to run a semi accross country (3,000) miles?

Nuclear power is zero carbon.
--
Roger Shoaf
If you are not part of the solution, you are not dissolved in the solvent.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roger Shoaf wrote:

What about the costs of guarding the nuclear waste for thousands of years?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A new religion and a new priesthood.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Trust me, the desert is huge. There are environmental preservation factors that have to be considered there as well, but I read recently that 19% of the vacant desert area of Arizona receives enough sunlight to provide all the energy needs of the current U.S. economy. And there are pro capitalist Chamber of Commerce types here in the desert where I live on our local Board of County Supervisors who see this as a huge opportunity for our depressed rural economy and are pursuing solar farms with great vigor.
Semis, and I know it is unfortunate for the many truck drivers who make a pretty decent living, will have to become a thing of the past. Freight will be moved by electrically powered trains because steel on steel is the most energy efficient form of transport.

It is not zero carbon. Huge amounts of carbon are released into the atmosphere in the construction and mining and refining phases. You can't just dig up uranium ore and put it into a reactor and you are not going to be able to do that work with nuclear powered tractors.
And it is not plutonium free or strontium 90 free or cesium 137 free, and those are really a bitch.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
heav turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:

I was reading in popular science about the rebirth of the mirror generators. Using sunlight direct to DC is inefficient and expensive, while sunlight to heat a steam (or oil) turbine is very cheap. We have one in southern california, and apparently are going to get several more soon.
Still, having a solar array on my roof wouldn't be bad either. I've been looking at it for some time.
Either that or somehow take extra - erm - methane after the pizza parties and converting that a-la Mad Max.
--
www.perfectreign.com || www.filesite.org

powered by the lizard: www.opensuse.org
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
PerfectReign wrote:

OK, enough of these grand edge of tomorrow ideas, what about the backyard. I live in the suburbs of Phoenix. I have the world's best (and free) source of drying and heat about 350 days a year. BUUUUUUUUTTTTTT, my HOA does not allow a clothesline or a water solar panel, even if the street or my neighbors can't see it.
Chip
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chip turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:

HOA's - the #1 reason for advocating anarchy! :P
You could also install a nuclear power reactor. Just go to the local 7-11 and purchase some U
Here in California, I've found that the state will offset some portion of the costs
http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/erprebate/tax_credit.html
I'm also seriously considering this type of system now - http://www.greendiesel1.com/index.html - I know the big issue with many is having to start in cold weather. However, in an area where the temperature never drops below 50 Fahrenheit, I can't see the problem. Considering I've seen $5.01 and up for diesel and I can get veggie oil delivered for $2.50, it is a no-brainer.
The only thought is between Lovecraft or Elsbett and running something like 50% WVO. I suppose I could go with a two-tank system, but not sure of the actual benefits for a warm climate like here.
I'm thinking that - even if it costs a bit more in the short-term - the benefits long-term will be substantial.
--
www.perfectreign.com || www.filesite.org

powered by the lizard: www.opensuse.org
  Click to see the full signature.
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.