How Not To Save Detroit

[failure to attribute sources]

It can be "re-charged" in 5 minutes.

Kwh? That's energy; not power.

10kW is a lot more than 10 hp. As a steady-state output, it's fine. Certainly for a city-based car with a top speed not needing to be more than 120 km/h and NO STEEP HILLS.

One can have a hybrid power system wherein the fuel-cell charges a battery/super-cap and peak power (e.g. acceleration) requirements are met by drawing from both in parallel.

OTOH, a 30kW fuel cell is enough for accelerating a normal city car and maintaining a high cruising speed, even on moderate inclines. i.e. a larger fuel cell has the potential for a simpler, more-reliable vehicle than a battery hybrid.

But I'm extremely worried about the colourless, odourless, HIGHLY-TOXIC fuel. Carbon monoxide isn't something that I'd want distributed in large quantities to the apathetic consumer.

Honda's FXC fuel stack produces 86 kW from hydrogen.

Hydrogen production and distribution is complicated, but the infrastructure required is closer to feasible in terms of scalability.

NB: The FXC Clarity also has a small LI-Ion battery pack (288V) to replace the ultra-cap in the FCX.

Desperate society? Which one would that be; and why?

Sorry, but you're simply ignoring the real limitations of the far more limited range and slow re-"fueling" speed of electric vehicles as compared to IC vehicles.

My Miata easily goes 400km on a tank and it takes so little time to re-fill that I never need to consider whether or not to fill up.

If there's an emergency that requires me to drive 400km all of a sudden, filling it takes only a few minutes.

Sorry, but there's no information at Wikipedia that supports your claim.

If you feel the information exists on the movie's website, you'll need to give me a specific link.

How would that demonstration support your claim that "the battery was sold to Exxon who closed the company and BURIED the battery."

N> like engineering degrees? I guess so.

And yet for all your bluster you offer not a shred of proof of anything you say. Instead you demand that we just take your claim for it, while *I* have offered multiple sources for the things I have said. The funny part is when you claim all that is "propaganda" and none of it true. What do you offer to establish that? "earth wind and fire" and I don't mean the band. In the 2 months this topic has been going your contribution has been solely confined to global warming. (Hot air.) You have claimed that the Eliica doesn't run. Your proof? Your claim of expertise. Nothing external just your bloviating here on the group. It is impossible for me to take you seriously.

N> Well, sure. this is why the Tesla is based on a Lotus, which makes N> sense, as opposed to that monstrosity that KRP is pushing. The N> problem is that a) a Lotus is smaller than most people want (not me N> mind you; I'd be happy to find a home for any spare Loti you have N> floating around) and b) the real, practical electric car, given the N> current state of the art, would have to be smaller and lighter yet to N> get real practical range.

You call it a "monstrosity." Many people find it elegant. The car has amazing handling characteristics according to race car drivers who have driven it on a race track. Exceptionally stable. My bet is that it would not be deterred by snow or icy roads. There are people who believe that the Pontiac Aztec is a work of art. Modern art has admirers, even though to me it looks like anger time in a special education class. I have a feeling that when the car actually goes into production it will look somewhat different. But then I am not working to pick it apart.

I am reminded of the "reviews" of the first Star Wars film. The predictions of disaster. It was universally panned. Yet Star Wars set records and is a revered franchise to this day more than 30 years later. The

1957 Chevrolet was panned in its day - yet is considered one of the most beautiful and collectible cars of all time.

Your problem is that you have a blind spot against electric cars. Perhaps you have some personal or economic axe to grind or you are just one of those people who fight change their entire lives because they can't handle it. In Florida I see loads of old geezers like that. Still with a 19 inch LOW definition CRT TV set they bought 25 years ago. My mother was like that. I gave her a VCR one year for Christmas. She begged he to take it back. Florida has frequent power interruptions. Which meant the clock would flash. She was certain it was signaling aliens. One thing I have adapted to in my life is that technology keeps changing, you are either at the front of the loop or you are roadkill. When I was a kid there was 78 rpm records. Today even MP3 is old tech. Clinging onto the past is a sure way to brain death. Learning and adapting to change is what keeps us alive.

So you fear the electric car. I see it is technology's next step and believe there is something new coming to replace even that. I used to race cars years ago. Last night I had a long discussion with a guy into some of the same stuff as I was. The AMX and Javelins and Trans Am racing etc. Racing in general, reminiscing about people we knew and raced with. My times to gas burners is long and runs very deep, but that was long ago and are fond memories. Some day cars, buses, trains, airplanes will all be gone. Look to the day that Scotty will "beam" you anywhere you need to go and the world will change radically. You could live in Paris and work in Chicago. Or you could live in Bermuda and work in New York. Maybe even on the moon.

I am not "pushing" anything Nate. Just riding the surf of the inevitable future. Enjoying the ride, thrilled by it and not afraid like you.

I don't need to, you're the one making outlandish claims and stamping your feet, pouting, etc. because everyone's making fun of you for being a moron.

Like Wikipedia? You're a moron.

A working knowledge of physics. I could explain but it'd go right over your head and you're not worth the time it takes to type out a more detailed response.

Honestly I really don't care if you take me seriously or not. Nobody takes you seriously and your uninformed opinions make as much difference as a rat's fart. I'd have killfiled you by now but I don't think you've received enough abuse for your stupidity yet.

Why is it that we, as a society, aren't nearly rude enough to stupid people so that they eventually learn to STFU instead of going on and on about things that they don't know anything about?

nate

10kW= 13.9 HP. And that could be okay as a steady state output, depending on your driving conditions.

I don't buy it. 50kW I might buy. 30kW is in the Rabbit Diesel range.

This is true, but we already trust those guys with gasoline, which is even scarier.

--scott

What the hell do you think is wrong with 45 rpm records, you pig-ignorant, cowardly weakling?

snipped-for-privacy@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in news:h2bkbb$jfs$ snipped-for-privacy@panix2.panix.com:

NO car should be expected to survive a head-on hit with a semi. That's the problem with people these days,they expect too much,that cars should be armored and give total protection. Cars have gotten heavier and their mileage suffered.

I prefer small cars,too. I learned to drive in a 57 Cadillac,but all but one of my own cars have been small cars.They are SO much easier to drive,and economical.

Nothing wrong with 45's. I do have to lift the turntable and slip the belt onto another set of pulleys, but it works for me.

Speaking of 45 rpm records: Where would one buy a car that looks like Lady Penelope Creighton-Ward's Rolls-Royce; albeit somewhat less pink?

Oh yeah ... you could hire it:

Buy a car from a university? And then see if you can get it licenced and insured for road use. Good luck.

There are NO indications that the car is in PRODUCTION. I can find no evidence of any type approval, anywhere. I can't even find the university listed as a car maker.

You may be right in saying that they can sell all that they can make. Because it appears that they can't make ANY.

Huge is the word. By my calculations, energy needed to charge an electric car is roughly equal to the total energy use of the rest of a household.

Ah, but many of the same people who are all for electric cars are also against burning fuel, splitting atoms, damming streams, covering up the desert, harnessing wave power (might screw up ocean currents), harnessing geothermal energy (yes, really), and against building distribution and transmission lines as well. There's no placating them.

The United States, because we're headed for a "Falling Angels" scenario where environmental alarmism combined with government opportunism results in severe rationing in the midst of plentiful resources.

("Falling Angels" is a Larry Niven book, the background of which is a world where fear over global warming resulted in severe restrictions on the use of energy... only the Earth was actually headed into an ice age which anthropogenic energy use was staving off)

Sorry, typo on my part, I meant to say 'that of getting a bad PACK' not 'a bad BACK'...

That might work, but I haven't seen it done (probably because you hit the limit on practical power delivery before then, without dedicated infrastructure) . That moves the limit down to what it takes to charge a single cell.

There is no proof of the Ellica's range.

And ifs are just ifs.

Really? You think that's likely? Have you ever bought a new battery? Get lots of BAD ones? Do you accept batteries that aren't tested? Don't you think the stations would have a clue that a battery pack wasn't holding a charge, Scott? Or is it that you think that battery testing equipment is the same as it was in 1940?

"Pathological"? No, I doubt it. But exaggerating for their own benefit? It happens all the time.

And yet one wonders WHY it was shown on the documentary and both Mitsubishi and an American car magazine certified the results? A conspiracy?

Straight from the manufacturer? A few. (I used to work for a company which bought quite a number). Yes, we got a few batches of bad batteries. You couldn't tell they were bad until they failed prematurely.

No. For one thing, a common failure mode of lithium batteries is not that they don't charge or hold a charge, but that they drop off prematurely during discharge. The stations aren't going to cycle the batteries to find those batteries; for one thing, doing so would halve the life of the batteries.