Obama Pitches for Clean Coal Technology

 
User avatar
watkinsdr
Member
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat. Mar. 24, 2007 8:14 pm
Location: Kensington, New Hampshire
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S260 Boiler

Post by watkinsdr » Sat. Mar. 08, 2008 3:28 pm

Any of you folks ever see the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car?" The movie was definitely developed from a tree-hugger's point of view; but, please check this documentary out, it's very interesting. The gist of the story is: California's Air Resource Board (CARB) mandated zero emission vehicles would be required by xx% quantitiy by xxxx year, I think it was 10% zero emission vehicles by 1995; but, don't quote me on that... So GM developed the EV-1 electric car to prepare for the mandate. During GM's EV-1 test program the following information was discovered:

1) Electric cars required virtually no maintenance or replacement parts compared to internal combusion engines.

2) Electric cars pay no fuel taxes.

3) Electric cars consume zero gas or oil; and, only need to be plugged in over night to recharge.

So essentially, GM's EV-1 electric car was killed by: GM, our Government, and the oil companies. None of them would allow this car to be a commercial success! All three basically ganged up on CARB and convinced them (via a large army of lawyers) to remove the zero emission mandate!

Further, the original GM EV-1 admittedly had a limited range of 80 to 100 miles. A lithium-ion battery (same as in today's laptops) was being tested which improved range to ~300 miles. Guess who bought that technology? Chevron.

I'm not a tree-hugger; but, given an electric car with 300 miles of range, I buy it. It's too bad the auto companies, our Government, and oil companies will not allow it to happen---unless a huge grass roots movement forced these geo-political players to allow the car to be sold. Check this movie out. Makes you realize how powerful and dangerous big business and big government really are.

 
User avatar
spc
Member
Posts: 1801
Joined: Sat. Jan. 06, 2007 9:51 am
Location: Rhode Island

Post by spc » Sat. Mar. 08, 2008 4:03 pm

How about everybody voluntarily doing 55 mph on the highways. People complain about high fuel cost but they are flying by me on the highway. We are a nation of people with very little discipline. I'm sick of complaints about fuel cost, heath care, gun control, blah blah blah. You want heath care cost to drop how about exercising & eating right. Gun control, how about better parenting, it all starts at home, family values. Maybe Dan Quayle had a point. Spoiled brats.

 
User avatar
Richard S.
Mayor
Posts: 15123
Joined: Fri. Oct. 01, 2004 8:35 pm
Location: NEPA
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

Post by Richard S. » Sat. Mar. 08, 2008 4:04 pm

watkinsdr wrote: 2) Electric cars pay no fuel taxes.
If there was 200 million on the road that would change quick.

3)
Electric cars consume zero gas or oil; and, only need to be plugged in over night to recharge.
And where do you think that electricity is coming from? Imagine the amount of power plants that would be required to supply the power needs for 200 million vehicles.


 
User avatar
Richard S.
Mayor
Posts: 15123
Joined: Fri. Oct. 01, 2004 8:35 pm
Location: NEPA
Stoker Coal Boiler: Van Wert VA1200
Coal Size/Type: Buckwheat/Anthracite

Post by Richard S. » Sat. Mar. 08, 2008 4:08 pm

spc wrote:How about everybody voluntarily doing 55 mph on the highways.
Or better yet mandate a 70 mph max/min limit and enforce it. The fuel wasted caused by poor driving habits such as driving in the fast lane forcing other drivers to decelerate when you belong in the right lane or alternating speeds is enormous. This would also do wonders for my blood pressure.

Having said that I really hate driving slow, you ever been out west? 55 is almost laughable. Me and my cousin were cruising along 90 95 almost constantly on some of the roads for hours on end.

 
User avatar
watkinsdr
Member
Posts: 243
Joined: Sat. Mar. 24, 2007 8:14 pm
Location: Kensington, New Hampshire
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S260 Boiler

Post by watkinsdr » Sat. Mar. 08, 2008 5:04 pm

Richard:

Typically the vast majority of electric cars would re-charge during evening/night non-peak hours when electrical grid power demand is negligible. It would actually help solve one of the biggest problems with our electrical supply grid---there's no current means to economically store power on the national grid. Our power plants run virtually idle (very inefficiently idle) during off hours at night. Charging cars at night wouldn't require any power demand our existing power plants couldn't handle. Our existing power plants would meet all charging requirements with capacity to spare.

Obviously, power plants consume oil, gas, coal, and nuclear energy. With any luck we'll get smart and start using a lot more nuclear energy in the future; hopefully, before we've sent all our dead presidents to OPEC---and before the United States is relegated to 3rd world status.

Again, obviously, electric cars would have to pay their share of road maintenance taxes---annual registration time would make sense to me. It was simply interesting to see the GM EV-1 electric car got shot down not because of technology limitations; but, the exact opposite. With modern technology the electric car actually solves the problem too well. So well the car companies, oil companies, and Federal government wouldn't allow the car to be sold.

 
stockingfull
Member
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon. Oct. 16, 2006 7:59 am
Location: Hudson Valley, NY

Post by stockingfull » Sat. Mar. 08, 2008 5:11 pm

spc wrote:Why aren't we building more nuclear power plants & drilling in ANWR? Take a guess.
Hmmm, the "libs?" :yearight:

C'mon, nukes were out, now they're back. Edwards was the only candidate of either party to be against new nuke plants.

And, everybody knows if it comes down to a war, or an embargo, vs. ANWR, you can bet they'll drill there.

But more oil isn't the only way. We can reduce the demand pressure on oil and natural gas pretty quickly by comparison to, say, developing hydrogen-fueled cars for the mass market. And, if we can, why wouldn't that be the obvious thing to do? Burn coal like we all do, build coal-fired power plants, approve and build new nuke plants, downsize our vehicles, use fluorescent lighting, install solar roof panels to supplement heat and/or power.... All these are things that could be brought online relatively quickly to contribute toward energy independence.

And the $$$$ we're squandering in Iraq could go a long way toward making some or many of those things happen much more quickly.

But, as watkinsdr points out, if it doesn't work for big oil, so far we haven't been able to do it. So which is the problem, ANWR or Exxon/Mobil? :roll:

Dan Quayle??? :what: The original "Mr. Potatoe Head?" Talk about spoiled brats. Ya gotta give it to the Bush boys in one sense; they sure guaranteed that nobody would want to impeach them and get their VP's in the bargain. :lol:


 
NorthernNewYork
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed. Feb. 06, 2008 8:42 pm
Location: upstate NY

Post by NorthernNewYork » Sat. Mar. 08, 2008 6:30 pm

But more oil isn't the only way. We can reduce the demand pressure on oil and natural gas pretty quickly by comparison to, say, developing hydrogen-fueled cars for the mass market.

It currently takes more energy to produce hyroden (fuel) then it saves. We just don't have the technology to make the most of it right now. Hydrogen in the short run just doesn't make sense.
spc wrote:How about everybody voluntarily doing 55 mph on the highways. People complain about high fuel cost but they are flying by me on the highway. We are a nation of people with very little discipline.
My thought exactly on this topic! I don't know if its ignorance or stupidity. Most people don't realize that the most efficient speed for the average vehicle is about 45 MPH. I laugh when someone blows by me on the highway doin 85, I soon pass them pulled over. So not only are they wasting fuel, they now have a $100+ ticket to pay.

 
User avatar
Ed.A
Member
Posts: 1635
Joined: Thu. Aug. 30, 2007 7:27 pm
Location: Canterbury Ct.
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Alaska Channing III/ '94 Stoker II
Coal Size/Type: Rice

Post by Ed.A » Sun. Mar. 09, 2008 10:24 am

stockingfull wrote:Better to kill people fighting wars over oil, I guess. :roll:
Whose doing that? I'd love to hear the rational behind that bogus remark....opps I'm sorry, that would be like listening to Rosie tell everyone the Metal doesn't melt :woot:

Post Reply

Return to “Coal News & General Coal Discussions”