Alternative Fuels Discussion Thread

[homeforsummer]

i wait for hydrogene.

...

For me batteries is the same.
Sweden has hydrogene and produces it for more than 20 years.
Hell in highschool in chemisty we even produced hydrogene with hydrolyse.

The trouble with hydrogen electrolysis is that it takes a massive amount of energy to produce electricity from. More that you actually get out of it from a hydrogen fuel cell.

Do you know what the easiest way to get hydrogen is? Extracting it from hydrocarbons... though the same cracking process by which you extract petrol, diesel and other fossil fuels. In other words, you have to drill for oil (edit: tree'd by Niky... didn't read his post before writing mine! )

Not quite so much of a step forward, is it?...

Honda clarity and the topgear report about it shows how it needs to go.

That was said by Jay Leno and it was not about electic cars but it was the report about the Honda Clarity

As James may said : the futur can not be that we take a step back from current standards. That's the case of E cars. (drive 200 km, charge 5 hours) How are you supposed o go into holidays??
+ you need less weight to get a +- good range on Ecars, meaning plactic (carbon will not be affordable for average Joe), meaning a coffin on tries (honestly a crash in a plastic car and 500kg of batteries at your back, i doubt the security side)

For everyone who hasn't seen that Topgear report. Look it here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMjOxTnu_wc
Probably the most serious report in Topgear history

The Top Gear report wasn't very good. And it was uncharacteristically poor of James May too, so I'm suspecting it's a Top Gear script he was reading from rather than a piece of his own.

The comment about batteries is a little wide of the mark too. Recent research has revealed that the whole battery making process (for lithium-ion batteries, at least), when taken into consideration with the construction and use of an electric car, still has much less environmental impact than a regular gasoline car. It's reckoned that only 2.3% of an EV's total environmental impact is from the mining of Lithium.

 

[homeforsummer]

Thread-dig time again (I started this thread anyway - sue me ). Considered a new thread, but not sure it really warrants a thread to itself. Also considered incorporating it into the 1-Series GT thread which is what reminded me of the BMW ActiveE, but feared the traditionalists might explode with anger at FWD and electric BMWs...

Basically, I'm reviving it because it's an electric car of reasonable significance, and now starting to hit the streets in the U.S, Europe and China.

I've been following this car closely for a year or so now as it has quite an important job to do. Along with the MINI E trial that's been running for the last few years and recently came to an end, the ActiveE trial is being used to gather data for the BMW i3 and i8, the two "Project i" electric cars BMW is set to release in 2013/2014.

In particular, the i3 as that car will be all electric. It's likely to use the same powertrain as the ActiveE, only weigh a lot less since it'll be carbon fibre/aluminium rather than a conversion of a heavy steel car.

Anyway, my editor has recently driven it and decreed it significantly nicer to drive than the MINI E was.

Here are a few photos from Geneva last year, when I had a closer look at the car. I really liked it - typically high-quality BMW feel (lots of white leather about the place in this car - lovely, almost certainly a bugger to keep clean ), and the odd sensation of being able to start it on a motorshow stand as it's completely silent...

BMW ActiveE by Vitesse Photography, on Flickr


BMW ActiveE by Vitesse Photography, on Flickr


BMW ActiveE by Vitesse Photography, on Flickr


BMW ActiveE by Vitesse Photography, on Flickr​

Anyone have any thoughts on the car, or on BMW's Project i in general?

 

[ExigeEvan]

I think the ActiveE is a good proof of concept, but really needs a blank-sheet engineering approach (though not design, the more they look the same as ICE the better IMO). So I'll wait on the i3.


Also, a point my dad raised the other day, how easy is it to steal a charging cable from an on-street charging station? Or even just unplug it?

Just imagine, driving near the edge of your range for a commute, parking it up to charge, coming back, some idiot has stopped the charging. How are you going to get home? Wait 8 hours for it to charge?

 

[niky]

That's a bridge to cross when you get there. As it is, enough idiots already drive away with gasoline hoses...

I suppose a pay-charging station that you have to unlock with a credit card would be the best solution. If you forget to lock it after and the hose is stolen, it goes on your account.

-

BMW is already doing the clean-sheet design with the i3 concept... something that other manufacturers have yet to accomplish in production. Consider, the Volt and Leaf share a whole lot of architecture with the Cruze and the Versa, when they could have been better on their own platforms. The Prius is its own platform, but it's still a relatively traditional car with an engine in front driving the front wheels.

I've always felt the way forward was lighter, with something that isn't a car in the classical sense. As to whether that neo-car will be powered by electricity, we still don't know. Batteries are still a very expensive item for non-Americans/Japanese/First-worlders.

 

[White & Nerdy]

Every time I see a thread like this, I'm amazed and appalled by the number of so called "enthusiasts" who are ready to accept the end of the internal combustion engine, or of the traditional car in general.

 

[Joey D]

Every time I see a thread like this, I'm amazed and appalled by the number of so called "enthusiasts" who are ready to accept the end of the internal combustion engine, or of the traditional car in general.

And every time I see a comment like this, I'm appalled at the narrow mindedness of so call enthusiasts.

Gasoline is going to get to the point where it no longer make any economical sense to run cars on. We are going to have to switch over to something different at some point in time. Just because internal combustion will start to disappear at a very slow pace, doesn't mean we are going to end up with crap. In fact companies will have to go all out to make alternative vehicles more attractive to buyer to get the first group on board, so they probably will be exceptionally well made.

Wait till the next car generation takes over, they're going to know nothing else but hybirds, EV's, and other alternative fuel sourced vehicles. I assure you, they will find a way to make them fun, once they do that companies will take notice and start building factory production sport models. I mean really do you think when the Honda Civic came out in the 1970's people would think there would be 8 second Civics 30 years later? Ya probably not. I think you are vastly underestimating human ingenuity.

Sure making a sports version of an alternative fuel vehicle will take a different approach, but so did tuning diesel engines. I mean I've seen some pretty wicked TDI's that can pull some impressive numbers. It's all about finding the formula that works and then exploiting the hell out of it till it's hopping up all sort of vehicles.

And really, you don't think a MINI or BMW 1-series wouldn't be fun to drive? Both of those cars could be consider modern enthusiast vehicles to a degree. From everything I've read about the two cars, I've heard nothing but good things on the driving experience. Or what about a Tesla? It's an electric Lotus Elise essentially, tell me an Elise isn't an enthusiast car.

 

[1241Penguin]

Every time I see a thread like this, I'm amazed and appalled by the number of so called "enthusiasts" who are ready to accept the end of the internal combustion engine, or of the traditional car in general.

They'll end when the oil runs out. Or when the planet is about to blow up.

Whatever, in the future, ICEs will be seen like we see the steam engines todays: ancient, inefficient.

 

[Tornado]

Every time I see a thread like this, I'm amazed and appalled by the number of so called "enthusiasts" who are ready to accept the end of the internal combustion engine, or of the traditional car in general.

Every time I see you posting in a thread like this, I'm amazed at your inability to even attempt to debate the topic other than stating ad nauseum how true auto enthusiasts are only the ones who are neatly arranged under your (vague and often contradictory) definition of the term.

 

[1241Penguin]

As far as I'm aware, the majority of car buyers buy a car because they need a car, that is, something to get them from point A to point B.

Bring on hydrogen!

 

[Jubby]

Bring on hydrogen!

This. End of story.

If done properly, it can be cheap as dirt(literally). Hydrogen can power a vehicle and potentially be as powerful, or even more so than common cars today. Imagine the power of a Tesla at the price of a Civic. It can be as easy to fill up your car as it is today, but at your own home. Yes, the start-up costs will not be pennies, but over time, it will make things so unbelievably cheap and easy.

I know it does not totally eliminate fossil fuels right now, but imagine eliminating all of the gasoline/petrol use in the majority of the vehicles. It's the start we need. The technology is here, and has been for 10 years or more. It's almost a conspiracy that we don't have it en masse.

 

[Tornado]

And in regards to "enthusiasts," it is all well and good if you want sports cars and whatever to be ICE powered forever. More power to you, and I basically agree.



But what benefit does it serve the beige Camry driver that makes up 95% of the traffic for his car to be powered by an ICE, and how does keeping them on ICE vehicles benefit us?

 

[Keef]

But what benefit does it serve the beige Camry driver that makes up 95% of the traffic for his car to be powered by an ICE, and how does keeping them on ICE vehicles benefit us?

The Camry driver enjoys abundant, relatively inexpensive gasoline. If gasoline-powered cars were a small minority, gasoline services would become very difficult to find and probably very expensive where you do find them. When a market shrivels to such a small size, the producer is left to either find a small niche willing to pay a very high price, or just abandon the market altogether.

 

[Tornado]

He enjoys that now. The beige Camry driver also couldn't care less what his car was powered by, and most of them would just as soon not drive at all if they could get away with it (though because they want to be able to shave and get dressed while driving, public transportation is right out).

 

[Keef]

He enjoys that now.

He does enjoy that, and he will enjoy that until the actual supply of gasoline begins to run short. Until then, in terms of ICE feasibility, it's in the best interest of everyone to keep producing and using as much gasoline as is necessary. Do that, and ICE will be a perfectly acceptable norm until electric cars are developed to a widely marketable point.

 

[Jubby]

The Camry driver enjoys abundant, relatively inexpensive gasoline. If gasoline-powered cars were a small minority, gasoline services would become very difficult to find and probably very expensive where you do find them. When a market shrivels to such a small size, the producer is left to either find a small niche willing to pay a very high price, or just abandon the market altogether.

Half correct, but half wrong(theoretically). We'd still be importing crude, and since we can determine what it gets used for, the price could actually be lower. It'd be buffered by the reserves we've kept and the lowered expectation on OPEC, but that's another discussion.

Conversely, I wouldn't be surprised if it went up. Someone would find a way to jack up the price for nothing.

 

[Tornado]

He does enjoy that, and he will enjoy that until the actual supply of gasoline begins to run short. Until then, in terms of ICE feasibility, it's in the best interest of everyone to keep producing and using as much gasoline as is necessary. Do that, and ICE will be a perfectly acceptable norm until electric cars are developed to a widely marketable point.

Supply and demand doesn't directly apply when the supply is controlled by a cartel.

 

[Keef]

Half correct, but half wrong. We'd still be importing crude, and since we can determine what it gets used for, the price could actually be lower. It'd be buffered by the reserves we've kept and the lowered expectation on OPEC, but that's another discussion.

I'm assuming that supply and demand are decreasing proportionally. If demand was cut swiftly, oil producers would be left with a large supply and would need to slash prices in order to move the excess product. Eventually it would settle in the same place, at a higher average price than it was before.

Supply and demand doesn't directly apply when the supply is controlled by a cartel.

It does when the cartel wants to stay in business. The only reason they get away with what they do is because oil is a necessity. But if we didn't have to have it, such as if most cars weren't powered by gasoline, the cartel would have much less leverage. Competition would be the end of their system.

 

[White & Nerdy]

Wait till the next car generation takes over, they're going to know nothing else but hybirds, EV's, and other alternative fuel sourced vehicles. I assure you, they will find a way to make them fun, once they do that companies will take notice and start building factory production sport models. I mean really do you think when the Honda Civic came out in the 1970's people would think there would be 8 second Civics 30 years later? Ya probably not. I think you are vastly underestimating human ingenuity.

People didn't think there would be 8-second street legal cars period, as I recall.

Sure making a sports version of an alternative fuel vehicle will take a different approach, but so did tuning diesel engines. I mean I've seen some pretty wicked TDI's that can pull some impressive numbers. It's all about finding the formula that works and then exploiting the hell out of it till it's hopping up all sort of vehicles.

With an electric car, that formula is likely to be "put a new suspension under it, then add some tape stripes and scary animal stickers to it so it looks (but not goes) fast." Just like in the 70s.

Besides, even if they were as easy to upgrade, my guess is they'd still be dangerous for DIY mechanics. So unless you like relying on other people to do everything for you, that's totally not gonna fly.

And really, you don't think a MINI or BMW 1-series wouldn't be fun to drive? Both of those cars could be consider modern enthusiast vehicles to a degree. From everything I've read about the two cars, I've heard nothing but good things on the driving experience. Or what about a Tesla? It's an electric Lotus Elise essentially, tell me an Elise isn't an enthusiast car.

The Elise is an enthusiast car. The Tesla is an Elise with 5 forward speeds, the exhaust noise, and a lot of grip removed, a few hundred pounds of battery and a few hundred more of environmentalist attitudes added.

Every time I see you posting in a thread like this, I'm amazed at your inability to even attempt to debate the topic other than stating ad nauseum how true auto enthusiasts are only the ones who are neatly arranged under your (vague and often contradictory) definition of the term.

OK then, tell me where I've contradicted myself.

This. End of story.

If done properly, it can be cheap as dirt(literally). Hydrogen can power a vehicle and potentially be as powerful, or even more so than common cars today. Imagine the power of a Tesla at the price of a Civic. It can be as easy to fill up your car as it is today, but at your own home. Yes, the start-up costs will not be pennies, but over time, it will make things so unbelievably cheap and easy.

I know it does not totally eliminate fossil fuels right now, but imagine eliminating all of the gasoline/petrol use in the majority of the vehicles. It's the start we need. The technology is here, and has been for 10 years or more. It's almost a conspiracy that we don't have it en masse.

I'm beginning to wonder if you aren't right. Hydrogen's ability to please just about every consumer at once makes it a blindingly obvious solution, but yet everyone is screaming that we must have batteries, batteries, batteries as if the planet will literally explode if we don't have them, even though they're harder to deal with, don't give much range, take ages to recharge, aren't very green to make, and offer absolutely nothing to excite those who see cars as anything more than large, expensive appliances.

And in regards to "enthusiasts," it is all well and good if you want sports cars and whatever to be ICE powered forever. More power to you, and I basically agree.

But what benefit does it serve the beige Camry driver that makes up 95% of the traffic for his car to be powered by an ICE, and how does keeping them on ICE vehicles benefit us?

Because if electric power were to completely take over an entire market segment, it could freeze out people who need, say, a compact car, or who can't afford anything better. I applaud Mazda for their refusal to associate "affordable" with "boring" or to be sold lock, stock, and barrel on hybrids and EVs like everyone else, I fault Toyota for doing the exact opposite.

He enjoys that now. The beige Camry driver also couldn't care less what his car was powered by, and most of them would just as soon not drive at all if they could get away with it (though because they want to be able to shave and get dressed while driving, public transportation is right out).

Public transportation also destroys your dignity, is a good way to catch various and sundry illnesses, and is a death trap in the event of a terrorist attack or similar disaster. And, because it serves a group instead of an individual, it will almost never take you right where you want to go unless there's a bus stop right outside your favorite [insert location here]. Convenience stores won't be so convenient anymore when you have to walk an unknown, possibly quite long distance from the nearest bus stop. Then go back and wait for the next bus that goes somewhere close to home.

Half correct, but half wrong(theoretically). We'd still be importing crude, and since we can determine what it gets used for, the price could actually be lower. It'd be buffered by the reserves we've kept and the lowered expectation on OPEC, but that's another discussion.

Conversely, I wouldn't be surprised if it went up. Someone would find a way to jack up the price for nothing.

We have oil in our own country that we aren't doing anything with, despite the need to reduce dependence on foreign oil. Things like the Deepwater Horizons fiasco aren't inherent to drilling. That happened, according to a newspaper article that came out in the wake of the disaster, because the people running the rig were cheating saftey tests to minimize downtime.

 

[Northstar]

Public transportation also destroys your dignity, is a good way to catch various and sundry illnesses, and is a death trap in the event of a terrorist attack or similar disaster.

I'm going to need to see a link or something, I'll admit I rarely ride the bus, but the few times I have I got off alive and well.

And being anywhere near a terrorist attack is pretty much a death trap.

And, because it serves a group instead of an individual, it will almost never take you right where you want to go unless there's a bus stop right outside your favorite [insert location here]. Convenience stores won't be so convenient anymore when you have to walk an unknown, possibly quite long distance from the nearest bus stop. Then go back and wait for the next bus that goes somewhere close to home.

You mean I might have to walk a whole block or two, THE HORROR!!!!

I have to walk 1.5 miles to work everyday, I would love to ride a bus during the winter or when the weather takes a turn for the worse in the other seasons.

The whole "it's embarrassing" thing doesn't really matter once you actually have to have a job and what not.

I have one question I really want you to answer though.

What do you think of this car made in 1913?

 

[White & Nerdy]

I'm going to need to see a link or something, I'll admit I rarely ride the bus, but the few times I have I got off alive and well.

And being anywhere near a terrorist attack is pretty much a death trap.

True, but if there were to be a terrorist attack, I'd rather not be canned up in a bus with who knows how many other targets around me and no way to escape. I'd like to plot my own path away from the action, and I'd like to have plenty of power and distance under my right foot in case they decide to mop up the survivors. And a short refueling time (a couple minutes, max) for the same reason.

You mean I might have to walk a whole block or two, THE HORROR!!!!

I have to walk 1.5 miles to work everyday, I would love to ride a bus during the winter or when the weather takes a turn for the worse in the other seasons.

A block or two, or 1.5 miles, isn't all of it either. Depending on where you live, the nearest convenience store may be several miles away, not everyone wants to or has time to walk a long round trip just to buy one or two small things. I live about 10 miles away from the nearest town, and the nearest convenience store is somewhere between here and there (about 3.5 to 4 miles one way, if I were to guess). When you consider the topograpy of the area, it becomes a two hour round trip by bicycle, probably actually less on foot. By car, I could go after the second quarter of a football game (I don't bother with the halftime shows, even for the Super Bowl) and not miss too much of the third.

The whole "it's embarrassing" thing doesn't really matter once you actually have to have a job and what not.

Oh really?

When you ride public transport, it says either "I'm so broke I can't even afford a disposable hooptie from Craigslist, so I have to listen to a crying baby and a guy who's shouting into his cell phone and a diesel engine while half the other passengers cough and sneeze out clouds of disease." Or, "I'm being conspicuously enviro-concious! I'm better than you because my carbon footprint is smaller! Bask in the glow of my leafy green halo!"

I have one question I really want you to answer though.

What do you think of this car made in 1913?

'Twas indeed a very clever idea, and the performance gap wasn't as large then as it is now.

Now, about the only thing it's good for is to restore it and drive very slowly to some stuffy concours meet. Or put a V8 in it and chop the top, T-bucket style.

 

[1241Penguin]

If riding buses were really that bad, then why do you think it's an industry that still exists today?

 

[Azuremen]

This. End of story.

If done properly, it can be cheap as dirt(literally). Hydrogen can power a vehicle and potentially be as powerful, or even more so than common cars today. Imagine the power of a Tesla at the price of a Civic. It can be as easy to fill up your car as it is today, but at your own home. Yes, the start-up costs will not be pennies, but over time, it will make things so unbelievably cheap and easy.

Hydrogen isn't an answer. It is just another way to store energy, and right now it would be generated by fossil fuels. And even if we did separate hydrogen from water, we'd need to get the electricity from somewhere. Finally, the internal combustion engine is, at MOST, less than 40% efficient. Realistically, more like 20%. Which means you'd be losing 80% or more of the energy invested just to get the hydrogen from the water. Not exactly efficient. Not to mention issues of storing it and transporting it.

In comparison, electric motors are already 90% efficient. Electricity is relatively easy to move around the country, and if we are using pure electric setups, it will reduce the number of steps where power is lost at.

But no, hydrogen isn't a remotely realistic answer.

The Elise is an enthusiast car. The Tesla is an Elise with 5 forward speeds, the exhaust noise, and a lot of grip removed, a few hundred pounds of battery and a few hundred more of environmentalist attitudes added.

Tesla has 2 speeds, and effectively infinitely more torque.

I'm beginning to wonder if you aren't right. Hydrogen's ability to please just about every consumer at once makes it a blindingly obvious solution, but yet everyone is screaming that we must have batteries, batteries, batteries as if the planet will literally explode if we don't have them, even though they're harder to deal with, don't give much range, take ages to recharge, aren't very green to make, and offer absolutely nothing to excite those who see cars as anything more than large, expensive appliances.

See what I wrote above. Hydrogen isn't an answer at all; it is just people trying to be clever with no real plan.

When you ride public transport, it says either "I'm so broke I can't even afford a disposable hooptie from Craigslist, so I have to listen to a crying baby and a guy who's shouting into his cell phone and a diesel engine while half the other passengers cough and sneeze out clouds of disease." Or, "I'm being conspicuously enviro-concious! I'm better than you because my carbon footprint is smaller! Bask in the glow of my leafy green halo!"

You've clearly not spent any time in a large city. Large like San Francisco large, where parking is expensive and hard to find, it takes 10 minutes to go a mile in traffic, and registration fees with emissions make even cheap cars a hassle.

In large cities, public transit is what many people with quite a bit of money use. I'm talking millionaires using the rail system in New York, DC, or SF. People with more money than you certainly have. It is often faster and easier to just the BART and Muni in SF than to spend 30 minutes finding parking and paying $5 or more an hour for parking.

 

[Murcie_LP640]

You've clearly not spent any time in a large city. Large like San Francisco large, where parking is expensive and hard to find, it takes 10 minutes to go a mile in traffic, and registration fees with emissions make even cheap cars a hassle.

In large cities, public transit is what many people with quite a bit of money use. I'm talking millionaires using the rail system in New York, DC, or SF. People with more money than you certainly have. It is often faster and easier to just the BART and Muni in SF than to spend 30 minutes finding parking and paying $5 or more an hour for parking.

This is similar to the experiences I've had in Sydney when I was up there for Top Gear Live. The first time we went up there was about a week after we got the brand new Accord Euro off the lot, and the amount of times we drove to a destination could be counted on the first half of one hand. The CityRail network and bus system in Sydney was a much easier way of getting round the city and for the most part, a fair bit quicker.

 

[White & Nerdy]

If riding buses were really that bad, then why do you think it's an industry that still exists today?

People have their reasons, I'm sure. Some really are that broke, some actually don't mind the annoying soundtrack (somehow), and some people will do just about anything to look green - ride public transport, drive an underwhelming computermobile known as a "Prius", walk or bike miles in hostile weather, etc. etc. etc.

Hydrogen isn't an answer. It is just another way to store energy, and right now it would be generated by fossil fuels. And even if we did separate hydrogen from water, we'd need to get the electricity from somewhere. Finally, the internal combustion engine is, at MOST, less than 40% efficient. Realistically, more like 20%. Which means you'd be losing 80% or more of the energy invested just to get the hydrogen from the water. Not exactly efficient. Not to mention issues of storing it and transporting it.

In comparison, electric motors are already 90% efficient. Electricity is relatively easy to move around the country, and if we are using pure electric setups, it will reduce the number of steps where power is lost at.

But no, hydrogen isn't a remotely realistic answer.

Neither is electricity. 100 miles of range just isn't going to fly, and neither is running on 2/3 power after 40. And considering that hydrogen power could apparently give rise to personal filling stations, suddenly that hours-long recharge time doesn't look so attractive. And range is also heavily affected by temperature, so places like Alaska and Canada will soon find themselves without a viable solution for personal transport half the year unless those places are completely abandoned in favor of warmer climes - which would then defeat the purpose, since air-conditioning a building is apparently less "green" than heating one.

Tesla has 2 speeds, and effectively infinitely more torque.

Oh? As far as I know it was always a single-speed because their prototype 2-speed kept breaking. And if I'm buying a sports car I don't want a modern day Powerglide in it. AND it still sounds like a Hoover sucking on air.

Then again, I guess you would be used to high-pitched whines.

See what I wrote above. Hydrogen isn't an answer at all; it is just people trying to be clever with no real plan.

And electric power is just a desperate attempt to be green with a half baked plan. Oh, let's make mockeries of "performance cars" while tethering everyone to major metropolitan areas, derpderp!

You've clearly not spent any time in a large city. Large like San Francisco large, where parking is expensive and hard to find, it takes 10 minutes to go a mile in traffic, and registration fees with emissions make even cheap cars a hassle.

Wait... did you just say San Francisco?

HAHAHA!

In large cities, public transit is what many people with quite a bit of money use. I'm talking millionaires using the rail system in New York, DC, or SF. People with more money than you certainly have. It is often faster and easier to just the BART and Muni in SF than to spend 30 minutes finding parking and paying $5 or more an hour for parking.

Well good on them, then. Like I said, not everyone lives in the middle of a city - and not everyone wants to be trapped in their city, either. If you want to go somewhere that's not on public transportation routes or close to your residence, or if you don't want to be in a confined space with an annoying mixture of sick, loud, and potentially dangerous people, you're just plain outta luck!

 

[Azuremen]

Neither is electricity. 100 miles of range just isn't going to fly, and neither is running on 2/3 power after 40. And considering that hydrogen power could apparently give rise to personal filling stations, suddenly that hours-long recharge time doesn't look so attractive.

Electric cars already have ranges beyond 100 miles. The average commuter drives less than 30 miles a day. Converting water to hydrogen to blow it up is grossly inefficient. And then you have to find a safe and stable way to store hydrogen gas, which has a lower return rate on energy for a given mass than gasoline, so you aren't going to see huge ranges from hydrogen combustion vehicles anyhow.

And range is also heavily affected by temperature, so places like Alaska and Canada will soon find themselves without a viable solution for personal transport half the year unless those places are completely abandoned in favor of warmer climes - which would then defeat the purpose, since air-conditioning a building is apparently less "green" than heating one.

Indeed, heat exchange systems are less efficient than simply heating something. Of course, you don't really need air conditioning in a lot of the world. Not that it matters, since batteries do work in colder climates, just not as efficiently at the moment.

Oh? As far as I know it was always a single-speed because their prototype 2-speed kept breaking. And if I'm buying a sports car I don't want a modern day Powerglide in it. AND it still sounds like a Hoover sucking on air.

You don't exactly need several gears when you have 300 ft-lbs of torque from 0RPM to 6000RPM. And it isn't like the 2ZZ-GE is a great sounding motor anyhow.

Then again, I guess you would be used to high-pitched whines.

Is this your best effort at wit?

And electric power is just a desperate attempt to be green with a half baked plan. Oh, let's make mockeries of "performance cars" while tethering everyone to major metropolitan areas, derpderp!

You realize most people do live in metro areas? Even in the US this is the case, and certainly more so in Asia and Europe. The Tokyo metro area is 34 million people, with 15,000 people per square mile. Large ranges are hardly needed.

And you seem to think performance cars can't exist without the archaic internal combustion engine. Try to be a bit forward thinking, just a bit, I dare you.

Wait... did you just say San Francisco?

HAHAHA!

I fail to see why this is funny. Unless you are laughing because of the stereotypes associated with the city. Which I'd almost expect from you

Well good on them, then. Like I said, not everyone lives in the middle of a city - and not everyone wants to be trapped in their city, either. If you want to go somewhere that's not on public transportation routes or close to your residence, or if you don't want to be in a confined space with an annoying mixture of sick, loud, and potentially dangerous people, you're just plain outta luck!

Look at how South Korea works. You can take a bullet train out of the metro area and be 100 miles away from the city in under an hour. In the country side. That is sparsely populated. Because the half the countries population lives in the Seoul Metro area. In San Francisco, you can take the CalTrain system from the major urban area down to the South Bay and be away from the proper city in little time at all. And its hardly the affair you make it out to be, relatively clean and drama free transit.

And yes, being trapped in car in the middle of traffic is certainly great versus listening to Mp3 player while reading. Terrible

Have you ever driven in a massive metro area? Like LA? Have you ever been outside of Alaska? The rest of the world is kind of different.

 

[homeforsummer]

Surprise surprise, White & Nerdy enters the thread and displays his inability to understand anything beyond his own stereotypical views.

I'm normally quite balanced on the EV/petrol stuff. The evidence of this is that on the green/electric car site I write for, I'm often criticised for not being "green" enough and having something "against" certain alternative fuels or cars. Yet on GTP, where I pose exactly the same questions, people like W&N assume me to be some anti-car, tree-hugging hippy type.

They say that if people on the extremes dislike what you write, then you're doing a good job.

So thanks, W&N, I'll take your misguided, un-educated views as a compliment

Though I do hope, some time in the future, you and only you has no access to gasoline any more, and you're forced into driving the electric cars you've never driven, but hate anyway. And I'll take great, great pleasure in your misfortune.

I think the ActiveE is a good proof of concept, but really needs a blank-sheet engineering approach (though not design, the more they look the same as ICE the better IMO). So I'll wait on the i3.

I know what you mean. It's definitely a concept that requires a re-think of how you build a car, and where everything needs to go - one of the things I find quite interesting is the potential for completely re-thinking what is required from a car - how something like the traditional car layout is no longer really required, since electric motors are relatively small and batteries can be shaped pretty much however you like.

I like the ActiveE for its quality mainly, but at around 4,000 lbs it's quite heavy, where the i3 will be significantly lighter thanks to being bespoke and using clever materials.

Also, a point my dad raised the other day, how easy is it to steal a charging cable from an on-street charging station? Or even just unplug it?

Just imagine, driving near the edge of your range for a commute, parking it up to charge, coming back, some idiot has stopped the charging. How are you going to get home? Wait 8 hours for it to charge?

It's something they're dealing with at the moment, in different ways.

Most charging points already have some sort of locking mechanism. Some release only when the car is charged.

Since virtually all electric cars sold today are advanced enough that you can control their charging from your smartphone, you can pre-set charging periods. They'll also actually alert you if someone does pull the chord, or if there's a malfunction with the charging post for whatever reason (I've actually written about some "smart" charging points where should a malfunction occur, it'll stop the charging, the post can be fixed essentially via the internet, and it'll re-start charging - clever stuff).

There are also some cars (the Volt, I think) where the car alarm goes off if someone tries to remove the charging plug without permission (i.e. when the car's doors are locked). Though this has been causing problems of its own, say for some of the more high-tech businesses in Silicon Valley where several people own EVs, and some are required to share charging posts during the day. You have to then get the owner to come unlock their car before you can take the charger.

Sometimes it's easy, sometimes it's complicated. There are always teething problems with new tech, but by the time it becomes mainstream the little issues should be ironed out.

 

[Joey D]

With an electric car, that formula is likely to be "put a new suspension under it, then add some tape stripes and scary animal stickers to it so it looks (but not goes) fast." Just like in the 70s.

Besides, even if they were as easy to upgrade, my guess is they'd still be dangerous for DIY mechanics. So unless you like relying on other people to do everything for you, that's totally not gonna fly.

Are you sure that's all you can do to an electric car to hop it up? I know there are all sorts of different motors an gearing you could put into the car. I assume hopping up an EV is similar to hopping up an R/C car, which is actually quite easy to do.

And really it will be no more dangerous then working on anything else. I mean you can work on other electronic device can't you? Upgrading a computer is very easy and it has all sorts of electronic components, you don't die trying to do it do you?

 

[ExigeEvan]

Every time I see a thread like this, I'm amazed and appalled by the number of so called "enthusiasts" who are ready to accept the end of the internal combustion engine, or of the traditional car in general.

You know what killed the thrill of driving? Windscreens. What's the point in doing 100 mph if you can feels every air molecule and bugs squish into your body? It's an outdoor activity, but I bet you feel happier sat inside with the heater on and the rain off you.

It's the modern day drivers that disgust me, turning the car into a living room with an internal combustion engine. Sickening.

Or just progress. Depends how stupid you are.

It's something they're dealing with at the moment, in different ways.

Most charging points already have some sort of locking mechanism. Some release only when the car is charged.

Since virtually all electric cars sold today are advanced enough that you can control their charging from your smartphone, you can pre-set charging periods. They'll also actually alert you if someone does pull the chord, or if there's a malfunction with the charging post for whatever reason (I've actually written about some "smart" charging points where should a malfunction occur, it'll stop the charging, the post can be fixed essentially via the internet, and it'll re-start charging - clever stuff).

There are also some cars (the Volt, I think) where the car alarm goes off if someone tries to remove the charging plug without permission (i.e. when the car's doors are locked). Though this has been causing problems of its own, say for some of the more high-tech businesses in Silicon Valley where several people own EVs, and some are required to share charging posts during the day. You have to then get the owner to come unlock their car before you can take the charger.

Sometimes it's easy, sometimes it's complicated. There are always teething problems with new tech, but by the time it becomes mainstream the little issues should be ironed out.

Interesting! I'll probably spend a day sat beside an electric charging point when they eventually come to my city, and I'm still unemployed. There'll probably be a parade to celebrate it, expect it sometime in 2020.

 

[homeforsummer]

Or just progress. Depends how stupid you are.

👍

Interesting! I'll probably spend a day sat beside an electric charging point when they eventually come to my city, and I'm still unemployed. There'll probably be a parade to celebrate it, expect it sometime in 2020.

When I lived up in Newcastle there were loads of them (a few hundred in fact, if I remember correctly), all about the city on streets and in car parks, and there were even electric cars actually parked at them charging on occasion. Few Leafs up there and a few Mitsubishi i-MiEVs.

Of course, from 2013 they'll be building the Leaf in Sunderland which should not only bring down the cost of it a bit, but also make them easier to get hold of. And the North East is pretty loyal to Nissan as they provide so many jobs, so I can see the Leaf becoming very popular up there in the next few years.

Save for London, or perhaps even more so than London, the NE is the most suitable place in the whole country for electric cars.

 

[ExigeEvan]

When I lived up in Newcastle there were loads of them (a few hundred in fact, if I remember correctly), all about the city on streets and in car parks, and there were even electric cars actually parked at them charging on occasion. Few Leafs up there and a few Mitsubishi i-MiEVs.

Of course, from 2013 they'll be building the Leaf in Sunderland which should not only bring down the cost of it a bit, but also make them easier to get hold of. And the North East is pretty loyal to Nissan as they provide so many jobs, so I can see the Leaf becoming very popular up there in the next few years.

Save for London, or perhaps even more so than London, the NE is the most suitable place in the whole country for electric cars.

Loyalty is often helped by lucrative employee discounts. Certainly why I see plenty of Fords around here (Used to be Visteon in Swansea, but now only Bridgend engine plant).

Nothing west of Cardiff it would appear. Grim.