what do you think?

I`m not sure if they`ll take off

Depends on how the charging electricity is generated? nuclear, wind, solar, tidal or oil or coal etc. is it a case of pollute now or pollute later? Then there is the batteries, what are they made of? how are they disposed of? but definitely a step in the right direction ( ah divent see anywhere to put a gunny sack of coal!)

Depends on how the charging electricity is generated? nuclear, wind, solar, tidal or oil or coal etc. is it a case of pollute now or pollute later? Then there is the batteries, what are they made of? how are they disposed of? but definitely a step in the right direction ( ah divent see anywhere to put a gunny sack of coal!)

it is a step in the right direction! now they need to pump some money into renewable energy otherwise theres not much point!

however if every one got an electric car where will the government get its fuel duty from? i can see electric prices shooting through the outer atmoshere! (as there already through the roof! )

it is a step in the right direction!

Afraid it's not. Electric cars are inefficient, expensive to make and completely reliant on power being generated from alternative means. They are, in truth, no less polluting than modern petrol or diesel vehicles.

There is a very good reason why the internal combustion engine still holds sway: because it's the best way of powering road going vehicles.

Rather than concentrating on heavy, battery laden electric vehicles which ahve been proven time and time again to be a red herring, the motor industry is - somewhat quietly - looking towards super efficient small capacity engines that include high tech supercharging methods; these are very impressive in terms of CO2 output (so little will emerge that all the trees will die) and don't need plugging in to charge up every night, thus causing a massive surge in electricity requirements when ten million people replenish their batteries every night (try building enough wind farms to deal with that, then.)

Afraid it's not. Electric cars are inefficient, expensive to make and completely reliant on power being generated from alternative means. They are, in truth, no less polluting than modern petrol or diesel vehicles.

There is a very good reason why the internal combustion engine still holds sway: because it's the best way of powering road going vehicles.

Rather than concentrating on heavy, battery laden electric vehicles which ahve been proven time and time again to be a red herring, the motor industry is - somewhat quietly - looking towards super efficient small capacity engines that include high tech supercharging methods; these are very impressive in terms of CO2 output (so little will emerge that all the trees will die) and don't need plugging in to charge up every night, thus causing a massive surge in electricity requirements when ten million people replenish their batteries every night (try building enough wind farms to deal with that, then.)

are you for real? thats the properganda from the oil industry! don't use electric cars there inefficient, expensive etc

you do realise the petrol wells will one day run dry and without putting money in now to develop the technology we'll all be driving flintstone cars! or riding donkeys

Edited December 7, 200916 yr by Monsta®

are you for real? thats the properganda from the oil industry! don't use electric cars there inefficient, expensive etc

Yes, i'm for real.

What is the average range, fully charged, of an Electric car these days? When were they first developed? How much electricity does it take to power one? How many batteries are needed? How long do those batteries last? What materials are needed to make the batteries? How do we create the power to charge up a country full of electric cars? How is it possible to use alternative energy sources to power a country full of electric cars when its well known we can't power the countruies homes that way? Why, after so long, has the electric car not become de riguer as, after all, the oil companies make billions supplying the fossil fuels for our power stations?

It's not as simple as 'Oh, great, we'll all build electric piowers and charge them up by windmill' - I wish it was, but it's not, and it never will be.

you do realise the petrol wells will one day run dry and without putting money in now to develop the technology we'll all be driving flintstone cars! or riding donkeys

When I finished school in, let me see, 1982 I was told that there would be no oil left in thirty years. Now we're told there will be no oil left in thirty years, or twenty, or fifty, or a hundred, depending on who you read. Furthermore, the hyper efficient IC engine does not necessarily need out-of-the-ground oil; there is already a prevalence of synthetic oil for lubrication, and the oil companies are working hard to produce synthetic fuels for the later range of efficient internal combustion engines.

meanwhile, the electric car of nowadays is no more efficient, cheap, or less polluting than those of fifty years ago. We haven't moved on since the milk float, and until - unless - someone comes up with a super efficient battery storage system that is big and powerful enough to power a car, doesn't involve the use of expensive exotic materials, and so on - and lets face it, they've been trying for a hundred years - we are not going to move on from the milk float. The electric car is a red herring, which is precisely why the current raft of 'energy efficient' vehicles are hybrids.

Yes, i'm for real.

What is the average range, fully charged, of an Electric car these days? When were they first developed? How much electricity does it take to power one? How many batteries are needed? How long do those batteries last? What materials are needed to make the batteries? How do we create the power to charge up a country full of electric cars? How is it possible to use alternative energy sources to power a country full of electric cars when its well known we can't power the countruies homes that way? Why, after so long, has the electric car not become de riguer as, after all, the oil companies make billions supplying the fossil fuels for our power stations?

It's not as simple as 'Oh, great, we'll all build electric piowers and charge them up by windmill' - I wish it was, but it's not, and it never will be.

the range is about 160 to 230 depending on your wallet!

When I finished school in, let me see, 1982 I was told that there would be no oil left in thirty years. Now we're told there will be no oil left in thirty years, or twenty, or fifty, or a hundred, depending on who you read. Furthermore, the hyper efficient IC engine does not necessarily need out-of-the-ground oil; there is already a prevalence of synthetic oil for lubrication, and the oil companies are working hard to produce synthetic fuels for the later range of efficient internal combustion engines.

we have approx ten years before oil levels fall below international demand! (according to bp!)

meanwhile, the electric car of nowadays is no more efficient, cheap, or less polluting than those of fifty years ago. We haven't moved on since the milk float,

I beg to differ!

I beg to differ!

Oh it's pretty, Monsta, but what does it cost, and why does it cost that? How far does it go? What's it's annual running cost? Where does that electricity come from?

The tesla is less efficient than a future IC engine will be; it's a red herring, as all electric cars are.

Oh it's pretty, Monsta, but what does it cost, and why does it cost that? How far does it go? What's it's annual running cost? Where does that electricity come from?

The tesla is less efficient than a future IC engine will be; it's a red herring, as all electric cars are.

$45,000 (there are cheaper models coming from vauxhall, fiat and renault), about 160 to 230 as i just said, annual running cost of pennies! (about $5 or £3 for a FULL charge giving a range of up to 230 for the s range), a plug where electric noramlly comes from!

its not a fish its a car!

$45,000 (there are cheaper models coming from vauxhall, fiat and renault), about 160 to 230 as i just said, annual running cost of pennies! (about $5 or £3 for a FULL charge giving a range of up to 230 for the s range), a plug where electric noramlly comes from!

And you ask me if i'm for real? beyond reading about the Tesla and ogling over its admittedly great looks, have you actually considered the implications of running an electric car? You full charge on $5 is at US electricty prices; given the average day/night kw/h price over there is currently around 8.5c, and ours is around 11p, you can see where the problems set in. Furthemore, you clearly haven't got much idea about the battery situation. Very few electric cars come complete with batteries because they are very, very expensive: instead the norm is to lease them. You pay for them, in other words, on a monthly basis. This costs anywhere between £60 and £100 (or more, depending on your vehicle, considerably more in the case of the Tesla!) per month. That's a minimum of £700 quid a year. Given that the saving on fuel costs alone - at current US rates, not UK - is estimated at around £800, the chances are your electric car is going to cost more, not get you as far, and be more expensive to purchase than its equivalent in the first place. In addition, your 230 (miles or kilometres?) is at an optimum speed, just as mpg figures are quoted as an average.

In addition, if you want a fast charging point - not everybody, after all, can get all their journeys in in one go - it will cost you at the bare minimum £2000; for the three and a half hour quoted charging time for the Tesla it's at least three times that.

The conversation we are having here simply highlights how little the genral populace know about electric cars; you accused me of towing the oil compaines line (then later informed me BP are pessimistic about its future) while blindly take in all teh information about running costs and efficiency of electric cars without questions? They're not efficient, they are not 'non polluting', thy are not cheap.

Electricity, in its current battery form, is a blind alley; if you want to look to the future try investigating the hydrogen fuel cell method, but even that is littered with major problems. For the meant8ime, we're stuck with the ICE, and making it as efficient as possible is the way forward for now.

have you actually considered the implications of running an electric car?

Yes! 18p per kwh, thats £8 quid for eight hours to charge over night! £1500 for the home charger! But realy you get stung like that with petrol and diesel cars, (£50 for floor mats!) and its a one off payment and would have pay for its self in less than a year!

Furthemore, you clearly haven't got much idea about the battery situation. Very few electric cars come complete with batteries because they are very, very expensive: instead the norm is to lease them. You pay for them, in other words, on a monthly basis.

This is a very good idea instead of being stung for a new battery every 50,000 miles, however you do get the opion to opt out and buy the battery!

The conversation we are having here simply highlights how little the genral populace know about electric cars; you accused me of towing the oil compaines line (then later informed me BP are pessimistic about its future) while blindly take in all teh information about running costs and efficiency of electric cars without questions? They're not efficient, they are not 'non polluting', thy are not cheap.

The electric car is non polluting and very efficent, how the power is generated is another conversation. How can you say £115 quid a month is expensive? Even with the £100 lease of the battery!

Yes! 18p per kwh, thats £8 quid for eight hours to charge over night! £1500 for the home charger! But realy you get stung like that with petrol and diesel cars, (£50 for floor mats!) and its a one off payment and would have pay for its self in less than a year!

You are joking? You don't have to buy floor mats; you need the charger. Come on, get sensible mate!

This is a very good idea instead of being stung for a new battery every 50,000 miles, however you do get the opion to opt out and buy the battery!

But you ARE being stung for a new battery every 50,000 miles (probably less.)

The electric car is non polluting and very efficent, how the power is generated is another conversation. How can you say £115 quid a month is expensive? Even with the £100 lease of the battery!

That is the biggest cop out i've ever read. How can you say that how the the power is generated is 'another conversation'? It's not! It's an integral part of the problem. Far from being 'non polluting' electric cars use 1)batteries that contain very dangerous pollutants and 2) need electricity, which needs to be generated, and which cannot be entirely generated by non-polluting means. Far from being very efficient, it's not efficient at all - what it needs to achieve its prupose is far in excess of even a standard internal combustion engine, never mind an advanced one: even the industry acknowledge this.

This is getting a bit boring with just you and me batting things around, and I wish others would pitch in because it's an important argument; we DO need to look at the future, but we need to recognise when something is not the answer and stop pursuing expensive dead ends.

Electric, battery powered cars are very much a dead end, which is why - despite a hundred years of development - they have got absolutely nowhere.

Here's a clue; the first car to pass 100kmh was driven by a pioneer of motoring, Camille Jenatzy, in 1899. That's 110 years ago. It was electric, for back then even the great minds were looking for ways to superceded the internal combustion engine. he did 65 mph and took the then world land speed record. 110 years ago, and where has the electric car gone since then? Into oblivion, that's where.

What needs to be looked at, as has already been said, is the advancement of synthetic fuels for IC engines (these exist already in basic forms) for these WILL be non polluting, and willenhance the efficiency of the already efficient IC engine.

There are enough problems with generating sufficient electricity worldwide without having to tax ourselves by adding tens of millions of motor vehicles to the list! It's a non starter.

I haven't read this thread in it's entirety just wanted to quickly chip in with this and then I'll go back and read over. Is it not more efficient to use more advanced power generation techniques at source instead of in the car? Surely it's more efficient to transport electricity over the grid than it is to have huge tankers and ships moving fuels around the world?

I haven't read this thread in it's entirety just wanted to quickly chip in with this and then I'll go back and read over. Is it not more efficient to use more advanced power generation techniques at source instead of in the car? Surely it's more efficient to transport electricity over the grid than it is to have huge tankers and ships moving fuels around the world?

A good point, but one that needs greater scrutiny. Transporting electricity across the grid is not efficient at all, and never will be. A great proportion of it gets 'lost' along the way. As a demonstration, build yourself a massive scalextric set or electric railway, and you will need to boost the power at various points around the circuit as it does not travel well. The same happens with power lines - it dissipates with distance.

This is a point that will always be with us, however, for we no other methods of transporting electricity - bar batteries, which have the same problem and more!

The idea for more 'advanced' power generation techniques is great, but what are they, where are they, and what do they cost?

How about this:

we could have removable batteries, so when you go to "fill up" they take yours and replace it with a full one, using some sort of 'drive over' machine that drops the old one out below the car and fits the new, full battery in its place without the need for you to even get out of the car!

It can be done so it uses no fossil fuels at all, if solar, wind and tide power are used.

As for the question "why is there no breakthrough in 100 years"? thats simple, and i cant believe no-ones mentioned it.

Money.

Its a simple fact that oil companies have governments in their pockets. They supply cheep oil to governments, who then tax the hell out of it and make billions.

No more oil, No more taxes on it.

The government will never admit this, but they will not allow a solution to this problem until all the oil is gone. They simply make too much money from it.

Same goes for tobacco and alcohol, but they will never admit it. Why, if tabacco is so harmful, do they not just say "right, from now on, anyone born after the year 2000 cannot use tobacco BY LAW. then the legal limit increases each year with their birthdays, untill every current smoker is dead. Average age of death these days is early 80s yes? 80 years and tobacco is gone. A much better game plan than the current "lets say its bad and hope people make the right choice" approach. But thats another argument!

How about this:

we could have removable batteries, so when you go to "fill up" they take yours and replace it with a full one, using some sort of 'drive over' machine that drops the old one out below the car and fits the new, full battery in its place without the need for you to even get out of the car!

It can be done so it uses no fossil fuels at all, if solar, wind and tide power are used.

It's a lovely idea, and one that would make things much more viable, but still doesn't get away from the fact that simply 'dropping a battery in place' is a far cry from what is needed. Have you any idea how many batteries these things actually use?

As for the question "why is there no breakthrough in 100 years"? thats simple, and i cant believe no-ones mentioned it.

Money.

Its a simple fact that oil companies have governments in their pockets. They supply cheep oil to governments, who then tax the hell out of it and make billions.

No more oil, No more taxes on it.

The government will never admit this, but they will not allow a solution to this problem until all the oil is gone. They simply make too much money from it.

There is some truth in this, but when taken in the context of the 100 years it doesn't add up. Granted, these days the fuel companies have a stranglehold - but the reason is more that they have something essential, not that they are stifling the development of alternative fuels.

When Jenatzy made his breakthrough in 1899 there were no major fuel companies with their hands around the necks of alternative fuel proponents. If you take that further, the power that the fuel comapnies now hold over us did not manifest in any serious way until the middle of the 1960's.

Despite people's ignorance to the matter the electric car has been a subject of great interest for all of that time, and was particularly during the period 1930 to 1950 when serious problems with accessibility to fossil fuels were very real indeed. Some of the technological advances that took place in that time (particularly during the war years) were quite astonishing and developed much, much faster than they should have. The electric car, or electric propulsion systems in general got where? Nowhere. There ar many reasons, not least the inherent reliability on inefficient, expensive and difficult to store battery dependant electricity.

Same goes for tobacco and alcohol, but they will never admit it. Why, if tabacco is so harmful, do they not just say "right, from now on, anyone born after the year 2000 cannot use tobacco BY LAW. then the legal limit increases each year with their birthdays, untill every current smoker is dead. Average age of death these days is early 80s yes? 80 years and tobacco is gone. A much better game plan than the current "lets say its bad and hope people make the right choice" approach. But thats another argument!

Shot yourself in the foot a bit there, mate; the ban on smoking in pubs has resulted in a colossal reduction in tobacco sales. That's a different matter, though.

Well, i do see what it takes to run a forklift for 8 hours, so i can imagine. However battery development is turning corners. The Laptop industry is seeing to that. wether this can be turned into something useful for cars is another matter.

Having a "battery pack" made of many smaller batteries works for the forklift, and can be lifted out as a whole, although this is a pain to do with the current design.

Incorperating many batterys into the cars floor so they can be removed from below would be viable, but heavy. hence the "from below" idea.

I dont see why that couldn't be an option, that way the batterys are charged and stored in the same places, and can be recycled properly from there.

Theres nothing in a battery that "cannot" be recycled, it just takes time and money to do it properly.

EDIT: And THATS where the Viability comes into play.

Edited December 9, 200916 yr by Mr Darn

Battery pack! good idea so would built in solar panels or wind turbines to charge the batterys as you travel. thing is elctric powered cars did stall as people were only interested in petrol and diesel cars. saying that the advance in batterys has jumped forward a great deal in the last ten years. can anyone remember the first motorolla batterys and compare them to todays phone batterys. same thing goes for the batteries in cars!

I wouldn't hesitate to agree that battery technology has advanced greatly in recent years, and will continue to do so, but we're talking about batteries to power personal road vehicles for everyday use, all the time, by the vast majority of the population.

Electric cars didn't stall because people were only interested in the alternative, but because the alternative was - and still is - vastly superior in every way, shape and form. The idea o cars fitted with solar panels has been tried - it doesn't work. Fitting windmills is a classic idea - but how do you then incorporate the extra weight and gubbins that come with the charging devices?

Has it occured to you - and I mean anyone touting the electric car as the future - that these ideas have all been broached by some very bright and forward thinking people, over a great deal of time?

There is an inherent problem in political thinking that seems to think radical change is the answer to roblems such as this; why not concentrate on what we have - the increasingly efficient (and with the technology upcoming ever more so efficient) internal combustion engine but using synthetic fuels? most everyday cars now run with synthetic oil as a lubricant and, as I've said, synthetic fuels are well on the way to being readily available. If the alternative is to change the entire fuelling infrastructure of our cars to accomodate electronic charging points and/or Mr darn's battery exchange stations, what's th point in spending all that extra when we can simply switch fossil fuel for a synthesised variety? It makes no sense.

what's th point in spending all that extra when we can simply switch fossil fuel for a synthesised variety? It makes no sense.

tell that to him! they chopped down his habitat to grow palm oil thats the synthesised variety used to make bio fuels!

tell that to him! they chopped down his habitat to grow palm oil thats the synthesised variety used to make bio fuels!

Those bio fuels are not what i'm talking about, and are another red herring. I'm talking about synthesised petrol, which can be made in different ways. One is by a form of effectively concentrating the amount of oil needed to make the fuel, thus reducing vastly the amount of oil needed to create petrol and the rest are pure, synthetic, fuels using other basic ingredients.

Furthermore, your picture of the orang utan is great and has a point (albeit one that missed the target) but have you seen the damage to the environment the extraction of Lithium (which, incidentally, will also run out - like oil - what then?) causes? It creates deserts where there were non before, making the environment devoid of life, it's just as destructive. Why haven't you highlighted that? Why has that escaped your comments?

I'm not having a go at you - far from it, it's a viable and interesting discussion - but to throw up the plight of the orang utan and miss the fact that the mining of a substance essentual to th viable future of the electric car poses one of teh greates ecological rapes this planet has seen is somewhat curious.

e

What is this synthesized veriety made of? and where do the materials come from?

Are they unlimited?

I ask because i dont know, not to make a point.

What is this synthesized veriety made of? and where do the materials come from?

Are they unlimited?

I ask because i dont know, not to make a point.

Some of the synthesized petrols are made from a concentrated method of distilling oil. Others are being developed that are chemically created in laboratories. No, they are not unlimited, and neither are the substances that we need to make batteries. Over half of the Lithium deposits known to exist are in a particular part of Bolivia. this area has now been ripped to shreds to the poin that no life can exist there, the local infrastructure is ireeversibly poisoned, and so on.

The concept of 'unlimited' electricity is a myth; renewable energy sources exist, but we are a long, long way from developing methods of creating enough via these sources to power our country (and others) let alone our cars.

Some of the synthesized petrols are made from a concentrated method of distilling oil. Others are being developed that are chemically created in laboratories. No, they are not unlimited, and neither are the substances that we need to make batteries. Over half of the Lithium deposits known to exist are in a particular part of Bolivia. this area has now been ripped to shreds to the poin that no life can exist there, the local infrastructure is ireeversibly poisoned, and so on.

The concept of 'unlimited' electricity is a myth; renewable energy sources exist, but we are a long, long way from developing methods of creating enough via these sources to power our country (and others) let alone our cars.

You obviously don't know much about battery technology! Never heard of EEstors? read this! Your lithium argument just fell on its face as did your myth theory!

:lol: