Finally ELECTRIC CARS are HERE: Nissan announces LEAF Electric Car Roll-Out Plans (ZERO MPG, Zero Emissions, $25K)

MS didn't rewrite windows 7 from the ground up. It is still based on the Windows NT kernel.

electrified car wrote:

Actually, the most innovative car I know of a French designed compressed vehicle. The car is being built by Tata motors, India's largest car maker.

There is absolutely no indication that compressed air vehicles will have anything approaching the sort of range/performance to make them credible. Tata was developing their own compressed air vehicle. Originally it was supposed to ship in 2008 (they pushed the release date back a few times and finally admitted that the technology wasn't ready). Compressed air cars are where electric cars were 10 years ago - you get a glorified go-cart.

If electric cars are ever going to take off we're going to need to seriously revamp our power grid and add more generation. I'm not sure of the numbers off-hand, but you're going to have to replace most of the energy we currently get from gasoline with electricity, which is going to be a burden on the grid. Especially if everyone's charging their cars at night, there're going to be brownouts.

So we need a better grid and a way to quickly charge batteries- in a few minutes- before electric cars can really catch on.

It would be nice if we could replace a lot of daily driving with public transport, though.

electrified car wrote:

No, hydrogen is not an energy source, but an energy carrier because it takes a great deal of energy to extract it from water.

by that definition, there is no such thing as an energy source....everything is an energy carrier

The sun is an energy source. Photons are an energy carrier.

uh_no wrote:

electrified car wrote:

No, hydrogen is not an energy source, but an energy carrier because it takes a great deal of energy to extract it from water.

by that definition, there is no such thing as an energy source....everything is an energy carrier

They'll have to find a way to pay for the roads when people start going electric and there is less gas tax revenue.

The most efficent vehicle is the one that gov't has largely kept its nose out of. It can get anywhere from 50-100 mpg, with a range of 2-300 miles unlike your ghey 40 mile range electric car. I have one right now; it's called a motorcycle. Oh, and mine has a top speed of about 130 mph.

hahahaha

gm + stimulus money = scam

mr sarcastic says use ur brain wrote:

Tim Culpepper's Ghost wrote:

Zero emissions, but most of the energy that goes to your house is generated by fossil fuels, so that's a bit deceiving.

Exactly. That's why we all power our houses with our own gas generators.

The energy density of compressed air is very crappy. As a really rough approximation, it's something like 10% that of gasoline, at ~4000 psi. So, you need to carry a whole hell of a lot of it. Additionally, compressing that large a volume of air is not "simple," although it is certainly possible.

Of course, you assume that it's a conspiracy. It could be the fact that it doesn't work very well.

Bull. Where is your source to prove a million-mile lifetime? If the leaf has a million mile lifetime, why don't regular cars? It's rarely the powertrain that fails, it's often the ancillary systems (body, suspension, chassis, electrical, etc) or just general increased rate of maintenance. The leaf still has the vast majority of subsystems that other cars have. I would not expect it to have a lifetime that is 5+ times that what current cars have.

Can you please show evidence of this conspiracy theory (I see a theme here), proving that oil interests forced internal combustion technology over 100 years ago?

Is it possible that gasoline-powered combustion was chosen because gasoline has the best energy density of commonly available liquid fuels (similar to diesel), combined with relative large supplies? Just a "crazy" idea that they would pick the fuel based on the fact that it's actually a really good fuel.

Inefficient gasoline engines? Gasoline engines are pretty good, they convert roughly 30-40% of the stored energy of gasoline into motive power. Stationary power plants are better, but by the time you get the energy to your location, store it, then use it and convert it to motion, you're not doing any better.

You think that the remaining structure of the Leaf (everything but the batteries) only costs $2500 in 2020 dollars? Source?

Japan Leads the Way wrote:

Finally ELECTRIC CARS are HERE:

Many of the earliest cars built were electric. There are examples of electric carriages back into the 1830s. Electric cars were mass produced in this country, with production peaking in 1912.

The affordability of cheap texas crude, and the affordabilty of mass-produced gasoline engines hastened the death of the electric car. In 1912, an electric roadster cost over $1,000, while a gasoline powered car was around $650.

Nuclear energy and electric cars, end of story. 50 years from now one of our smartass grandsons will resurrect this thread, mock that fact that there was even a debate, and ridicule fellow runners that can't break 12 in the 5K.

Game Changer ! 1,000,000 miles for $35/k (25k after taxes) ain't bad. The body and suspension are composites. I'm one of those kids who grew up one block from auto row and would sit in the newly introduced cars every September on the showroom floor. Can't wait for September !

L.Armstrong is promoting the Leaf so i'm sure it's 100% clean.

uh_no wrote:

electrified car wrote:

No, hydrogen is not an energy source, but an energy carrier because it takes a great deal of energy to extract it from water.

by that definition, there is no such thing as an energy source....everything is an energy carrier

It never ceases to amaze me how so many people just don't get it about hydrogen as a so-called energy source.

1: To get hydrogen in usable form one splits H2O using a quantity of energy A

2: One then uses hydrogen (in a fuel cell or through other means) to release a quantity of energy B

3: A > B

Why is that so hard to understand?

Fuel cells using hydrogen may be nice for many applications but this is not a new energy source, or an energy source of any kind. It is essentially a battery which has some useful properties, but producing energy is not one of them.

An Engineer wrote:

The energy density of compressed air is very crappy.

Shame on you. Engineers should ALWAYS analysis the big picture, not analyze something with blinders on. You forgot something important. Air is everywhere, it takes no effort to find it. If you can breath it, it's there. Gasoline takes effort to find, and a lot of energy to turn into a useful fuel. The gasoline engine is not as wonderful as you believe. Do your own overall efficiency analysis, I won't do your homework four you.

Of course, you assume that it's a conspiracy. It could be the fact that it doesn't work very well.

Provide proof of your claim "the fact it doesn't work very well." The burden is on you, not me.

Can you please show evidence of this conspiracy theory (I see a theme here), proving that oil interests forced internal combustion technology over 100 years ago?

Provide evidence proving the oil industries have NO interest in gasoline engines. Every heard of service stations? Who do you think owns them, and supplies the gasoline?

Is it possible that gasoline-powered combustion was chosen because gasoline has the best energy density of commonly available liquid fuels (similar to diesel), combined with relative large supplies? Just a "crazy" idea that they would pick the fuel based on the fact that it's actually a really good fuel.

Study automotive history. Go see an automobile museum. You'll be amazed at the supposedly revolutionary technologies that were available before the gasoline engine; external combustion, rotary, electric, steam, etc. Amazing stuff.

Gasoline is not a good fuel. Take into account the environmental issues that must be dealt with. Oil leaks, air pollution, the list is a long one.

Inefficient gasoline engines? Gasoline engines are pretty good, they convert roughly 30-40% of the stored energy of gasoline into motive power. Stationary power plants are better, but by the time you get the energy to your location, store it, then use it and convert it to motion, you're not doing any better.

Yes, inefficient. Consider the entire fuel energy chain.

For your obvious trolling, I'll give you a 5/10.

Remember to always provide your own proofs when demanding a proof from someone else. It's hard for engineers to learn to see the big picture. Engineering schools fail at that, shame on them.

Auto Row wrote:

Game Changer ! 1,000,000 miles for $35/k (25k after taxes) ain't bad. The body and suspension are composites. I'm one of those kids who grew up one block from auto row and would sit in the newly introduced cars every September on the showroom floor. Can't wait for September !

What are you talking about? Nissan only guarantees the battery for 100,000 miles. So say you get lucky and get twice that use, you're shelling out about $18,000 (Nissan's cost) for a new battery once the original bites the dust. To get your mythical 1,000,000 miles (using my 200,000 number), you'd have to spend well over $90,000 on batteries alone.

And you're right, there are composites used in the manufacture of the Leaf, but the body, frame, and suspension aren't completely composite. To do so would raise the cost of the car astronomically. You may be able to get 1,000,000 miles out of the Leaf, but you're still going to have to replace a large number of components.

Face it, in the U.S. almost no one keeps a car for more than 200,000 miles. 150,000 is a likely better number before the scrap pile calls.

The above will hold true regardless of the car you decide to buy.

Cuba is an example of what would happen if getting a new car was incredibly difficult. The average miles on a car in Cuba is about 225,000.

There are stories of several cars reaching 1,000,000 miles in Cuba. Cars are hard to come by. Repair parts have to be hand made. Cars become family members. Throwing them out is not an acceptable option to some Cubans.

And anyway you can get million plus from gas cars. Some guy has 2.5m miles from a Volvo P1800 - not the same engine I think(!) but probably comparable cost to keep a Leaf going would. I don't knock electric cars, but there's just been too many false-dawns before.