User Tag List

First 123

Results 21 to 30 of 30

  1. #21
    Lallygag Moderator Geoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INXP
    Posts
    5,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    Why do the big three and the UWA not want to get into this technology and dominate the market? It has a very good chance of being the direction things are going to have to go.

    They are killing themselves by not jumping on board making the cheapest, most fuel-efficient vehicles they can make. I don't understand why they are fighting it instead of doing their darndest to be on the cutting edge of this thing.

    Are they stupid or does this somehow work to their advantage in some way I'm not seeing?
    I'm guessing.. it's to do with available funds and infrastructure. Right now, they can't stop selling what they have, because they need it to stay solvent. They don't have enough spare to develop a large scale alternative.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    Why do the big three and the UWA not want to get into this technology and dominate the market? It has a very good chance of being the direction things are going to have to go.

    They are killing themselves by not jumping on board making the cheapest, most fuel-efficient vehicles they can make. I don't understand why they are fighting it instead of doing their darndest to be on the cutting edge of this thing.

    Are they stupid or does this somehow work to their advantage in some way I'm not seeing?
    For the Big Three, it's likely based on cost/benefit analysis. It's not yet cost effective. But with gas prices skyrocketing, that will probably change. I don't think they're worried about dominating the market. They probably assume that they'll make the change whenever it's necessary. And they're right, they probably will dominate the market whenever they feel like making the change, because it's just too expensive for another company to be created that will challenge them on a large scale. It's a text book case of bureaucracy slowing down progress.

    As for the UAW, they just don't want change. They don't care about company profits, consumer pocket books, or the environment, they care about jobs (or at least that's how it appears on the surface). Change is likely to cause a reduction in jobs. New assembly lines for electric cars will probably require fewer workers, which means the union loses some power. That sort of thing.

  3. #23
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Hydrogen cells are lame. I really think hydrogen cells are a pipe dream put forth by oil companies, so that alternative fuels never become successful. Here are some of the problems hydrogen faces:

    1. Developing a cost effective fuel cell with adequate fuel storage. (This is the smallest problem and the easiest to overcome.)

    2. The current source of hydrogen comes primarily from fossil fuels. From what I understand the process is cleaner than refining oil, but we are still getting our energy from the same basic shrinking fuel source.

    3. Any other source of hydrogen is not energy efficient.

    4. Hydrogen would require a huge infrastructure to be put into place, so that people could fuel up when they needed to. A person will not buy a hydrogen car unless fuel stations are readily available.

    5. "A viable hydrogen vehicle is still 10 years away." They've been saying this same phrase for over 10 years now, and we aren't any closer.

    On other hand if you look at electric vehicles:
    1. The infrastructure is in place, because electric outlets are everywhere.

    2. Electric vehicles are cleaner than gas/diesel even in considering coal fired power plants. Because of scale power plants are more energy efficient than a small combustion engine, and while they are overall less clean than the latest combustion engines, they are cleaner and more energy efficient than your average oil refinery which is really the biggest polluter in the gas/petrol process.

    3. It's easier to make electricity cleaner, because it is already becoming cleaner as we speak. Power plants can be affected one at a time, and the gradual change over to cleaner energy is much easier to accomplish than one gigantic nationwide/worldwide change. Also state and local governments have more self interest in cleaning up their environment than the federal government.

    4. Electricity is cheaper than hydrogen, because the technology is already fully developed, and it's cheaper than gas/petrol which is steadily increasing in price.

    5. The technology for electric vehicles already exists. Not only can a Prius be modified to be a plug-in, but the Volt is scheduled to be released in 2010. Even ignoring all other factors, electric cars are way ahead of the game compared to hydrogen simply on a chronological basis. Hydrogen fuel is still theory, while electric fuel is reality.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  4. #24
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    ...
    I agree on pretty much every point. In the future, I think it's possible that electricity generation could become more decentralized, assuming we have more technological advances with wind/solar/etc. Decentralization means it would be much more difficult for the government and/or big business to control it, and neither want that. Hydrogen would be centralized, just like oil is now, perfect for maintaining the status quo, as far as power structure goes.

  5. #25
    Senior Membrane spirilis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    InTP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp
    Socionics
    INTj Ni
    Posts
    2,652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    1. The infrastructure is in place, because electric outlets are everywhere.
    The current infrastructure will probably topple on its side in short order if everyone started using their home outlets to charge their cars. Plus, it's slower than hell for the scale of power needed by a car.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spirilis View Post
    The current infrastructure will probably topple on its side in short order if everyone started using their home outlets to charge their cars. Plus, it's slower than hell for the scale of power needed by a car.
    These are easily rectified (no pun intended).

  7. #27
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spirilis View Post
    The current infrastructure will probably topple on its side in short order if everyone started using their home outlets to charge their cars. Plus, it's slower than hell for the scale of power needed by a car.
    No, the current infrastructure will be just fine, because everyone is not going to go out and buy a new electric car in the same year. As people convert to electric more power power plants will be built/expanded. This is already what happens when demand for electricity increases.

    On the other hand with hydrogen some type of "refinery" will still have to be built to make the hydrogen but since this is a new process it will more difficult and expensive than simply expanding the use of electric power plants. More importantly though is that electrical outlets are everywhere. It will take a lot of time and money to put up enough hydrogen fueling stations, so that people can fuel conveniently.

    Charging a car is slow, but the main way to get around that is to make electrical cars to be plug-in hybrids. Basically you plug it in at night and get 30-40 miles purely from electricity during the day. If you need more than that then the engine switches to gas/petrol and you still get about 40-50 mpg. Most people don't drive more than 40 miles on an average day anyway, so very little fuel would be used.

    Electric really is the direction we are heading. In about 20 years we will look back at our ideas concerning hydrogen cells, and then we'll laugh and laugh.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  8. #28
    Lallygag Moderator Geoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INXP
    Posts
    5,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    No, the current infrastructure will be just fine, because everyone is not going to go out and buy a new electric car in the same year. As people convert to electric more power power plants will be built/expanded. This is already what happens when demand for electricity increases.

    On the other hand with hydrogen some type of "refinery" will still have to be built to make the hydrogen but since this is a new process it will more difficult and expensive than simply expanding the use of electric power plants. More importantly though is that electrical outlets are everywhere. It will take a lot of time and money to put up enough hydrogen fueling stations, so that people can fuel conveniently.

    Charging a car is slow, but the main way to get around that is to make electrical cars to be plug-in hybrids. Basically you plug it in at night and get 30-40 miles purely from electricity during the day. If you need more than that then the engine switches to gas/petrol and you still get about 40-50 mpg. Most people don't drive more than 40 miles on an average day anyway, so very little fuel would be used.

    Electric really is the direction we are heading. In about 20 years we will look back at our ideas concerning hydrogen cells, and then we'll laugh and laugh.
    Perhaps... I don't think it's so easy to build power stations though. Here in the UK we view them negatively and it's difficult to get them built. Even if we are talking about renewables like wind turbines there is a lot of local opposition. So, no it won't be easy to simply expand power. In any case, try doing a sum of the megawatts of electricity needed to replace oil. It's pretty enormous. Suddenly the underlying infrastructure just won't be enough.

    You might be right that it'll end up being the way forward, quiet efficient and non polluting. But it won't be easy.

  9. #29
    Glowy Goopy Goodness The_Liquid_Laser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    3,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    Perhaps... I don't think it's so easy to build power stations though. Here in the UK we view them negatively and it's difficult to get them built. Even if we are talking about renewables like wind turbines there is a lot of local opposition. So, no it won't be easy to simply expand power. In any case, try doing a sum of the megawatts of electricity needed to replace oil. It's pretty enormous. Suddenly the underlying infrastructure just won't be enough.

    You might be right that it'll end up being the way forward, quiet efficient and non polluting. But it won't be easy.
    I didn't realize there was such a big resistance to power stations in the UK. I still don't think hydrogen will spring up there, but transportation might take a somewhat different turn there in the US. Overall the US relies a lot more on cars than other countries, so transportation is somewhat of a different issue in Europe than it is in the US.
    My wife and I made a game to teach kids about nutrition. Please try our game and vote for us to win. (Voting period: July 14 - August 14)
    http://www.revoltingvegetables.com

  10. #30
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ExTJ
    Posts
    1,377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser View Post
    Electric really is the direction we are heading. In about 20 years we will look back at our ideas concerning hydrogen cells, and then we'll laugh and laugh.
    I wouldn't say people would laugh, just look at it as an idea that seemed good at the time but didn't work out. (Assuming hydrogen does in fact not work out, it may end up being more useful than battery storage if the right combination of stuff happens, though that seems unlikely.)

Similar Threads

  1. In A Deadly Crash, Who Should A Driverless Car Kill — Or Save?
    By chubber in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-12-2016, 06:42 AM
  2. Vent Killed The Electric Car:
    By ThatGirl in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 07-14-2009, 09:43 PM
  3. Who Killed the Constitution?
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-10-2008, 05:22 PM
  4. Who is the most protective type?
    By kathara in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 11:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO