If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
On 1/3/2013 6:57 AM, Dylan Smith wrote:
where gasoline cars idle but electric cars don't need to put any energy into the motor. But to be fair, that electric car sitting in traffic still might need to put considerable energy into climate control. In my area, the typical commute is more like 10 miles. 20 years ago, I know of no electric available that would make that round trip, especially if you include climate control. Today, there are several choices on on the market that would be excellent for that mission. Do they make economic sense? That's the real question! For most of us, the answer is "no" as long as gasoline is easily available and under (say) $8.00/gallon. Vaughn |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
Dylan Smith wrote:
On 2013-01-02, wrote: A couple of orders of magnitude of improvement are needed to make things like general purpose, e.g. C-172 equivelant, electric airplanes practical. Oh, I completely agree with you on that point. But I think that battery technology will in the not too distant future be eminently practical for most of the world's use case for a car. If by "not too distant future" you mean 50 years, than I think a big maybe. Absent some astounding breakthrough in portable electric generation, i.e. all devices such as fuel cells and not just batteries, I doubt the all electric vehicle will ever become a significant fraction of vehicles on the road. Hybrid vehicles stand a much better chance, the biggest current obstacle being the huge premium in cost. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 1:34:32 PM UTC-5, wrote:
If by "not too distant future" you mean 50 years, than I think a big maybe. Absent some astounding breakthrough in portable electric generation, i.e. all devices such as fuel cells and not just batteries, I doubt the all electric vehicle will ever become a significant fraction of vehicles on the road. Hybrid vehicles stand a much better chance, the biggest current obstacle being the huge premium in cost. When airplanes were invented, many argued that it will never become an economical transportation. When computers were invented, even the president of IBM said he does not think there was much of a market for personal computers. When automobiles were invented, it was criticized for being so unreliable compared to the horse. On the other hand, there as just as many examples where things did not work out. Like the space program. We never went back to the moon or set up a permanent colony. America enjoyed the prosperity from the automobile, airplane and computers. Electric vehicles could just be the next big thing. While there is no guarantee of success, failure is pretty much guaranteed if we don't try. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 1:34:32 PM UTC-5, wrote: If by "not too distant future" you mean 50 years, than I think a big maybe. Absent some astounding breakthrough in portable electric generation, i.e. all devices such as fuel cells and not just batteries, I doubt the all electric vehicle will ever become a significant fraction of vehicles on the road. Hybrid vehicles stand a much better chance, the biggest current obstacle being the huge premium in cost. When airplanes were invented, many argued that it will never become an economical transportation. When airplanes were invented, the limitations were material technology, not the basic physics of the power plant. When computers were invented, even the president of IBM said he does not think there was much of a market for personal computers. When computers were invented they were the size of a small house, cost millions of dollars, and a fortune in power and air conditioning to work. It took improvements in the technology to eliminate all those problems, not a basic break through in the physics and chemistry of any part. When automobiles were invented, it was criticized for being so unreliable compared to the horse. When automobiles were invented they were praised by many for not filling city streets with horse **** and as material technology improved, so did the reliability. None of this required any break through in either physics or chemistry. On the other hand, there as just as many examples where things did not work out. Like the space program. We never went back to the moon or set up a permanent colony. We never went back because no one wantee to pay for it, much like no one wants to pay a bunch of money for a niche vehicle. America enjoyed the prosperity from the automobile, airplane and computers. Electric vehicles could just be the next big thing. While there is no guarantee of success, failure is pretty much guaranteed if we don't try. Oh, we are "trying" allright and failure is guaranteed by basic physics and chemistry until, if ever, there is an astounding breakthrough. Millions in tax dollars are being poured into the electric car rat hole in subsidies with no positive results. What we have instead of results are sales that are almost nonexistant and lawsuits like those in Arizona because electric car batteries react to the heat just like anyone with any knowledge of battery chemistry would expect them to; range nowhere near advertised and a very short life. If the government were not forcing the manufacture of electric cars through emission standards and subsidies there would be none manufactured |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
Dave Doe wrote:
In article , , says... Andrew Sarangan wrote: On Thursday, January 3, 2013 1:34:32 PM UTC-5, wrote: If by "not too distant future" you mean 50 years, than I think a big maybe. Absent some astounding breakthrough in portable electric generation, i.e. all devices such as fuel cells and not just batteries, I doubt the all electric vehicle will ever become a significant fraction of vehicles on the road. Hybrid vehicles stand a much better chance, the biggest current obstacle being the huge premium in cost. When airplanes were invented, many argued that it will never become an economical transportation. When airplanes were invented, the limitations were material technology, not the basic physics of the power plant. When computers were invented, even the president of IBM said he does not think there was much of a market for personal computers. When computers were invented they were the size of a small house, cost millions of dollars, and a fortune in power and air conditioning to work. It took improvements in the technology to eliminate all those problems, not a basic break through in the physics and chemistry of any part. When automobiles were invented, it was criticized for being so unreliable compared to the horse. When automobiles were invented they were praised by many for not filling city streets with horse **** and as material technology improved, so did the reliability. None of this required any break through in either physics or chemistry. On the other hand, there as just as many examples where things did not work out. Like the space program. We never went back to the moon or set up a permanent colony. We never went back because no one wantee to pay for it, much like no one wants to pay a bunch of money for a niche vehicle. America enjoyed the prosperity from the automobile, airplane and computers. Electric vehicles could just be the next big thing. While there is no guarantee of success, failure is pretty much guaranteed if we don't try. Oh, we are "trying" allright and failure is guaranteed by basic physics and chemistry until, if ever, there is an astounding breakthrough. Millions in tax dollars are being poured into the electric car rat hole in subsidies with no positive results. What we have instead of results are sales that are almost nonexistant and lawsuits like those in Arizona because electric car batteries react to the heat just like anyone with any knowledge of battery chemistry would expect them to; range nowhere near advertised and a very short life. If the government were not forcing the manufacture of electric cars through emission standards and subsidies there would be none manufactured Well I'm not sure if you have noticed the quantum mechanics revolution that we're, I'd dare say, *in*, right now. Perhaps it's true to say that our quantum mechanics knowledge hasn't changed *that* much in 50 years - but certainly, the theory is becoming reality. QM is totally irrelevant to the discussion of battery chemistry and physics. Theory never becomes reality; theory is always theory. Reality in this context is when a theory can be applied to produce something, as in elecromagnetic theory being used to produce antennas for radios. These things all currently exist, albiet on small and experimental levels, for now! ... * Quantum cloaking and invisibility * Carbon nanotubes - bridges into space * unlimited cheap energy * superconductivity at normal temperatures * quantum entanglement - teleportation All are pie in the sky speculation and other than carbon nanotubes do not exist. I'll let you do your own research. I already have but not by watching sifi movies. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
|
#59
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
In article , ,
says... Dave Doe wrote: In article , , says... Andrew Sarangan wrote: On Thursday, January 3, 2013 1:34:32 PM UTC-5, wrote: If by "not too distant future" you mean 50 years, than I think a big maybe. Absent some astounding breakthrough in portable electric generation, i.e. all devices such as fuel cells and not just batteries, I doubt the all electric vehicle will ever become a significant fraction of vehicles on the road. Hybrid vehicles stand a much better chance, the biggest current obstacle being the huge premium in cost. When airplanes were invented, many argued that it will never become an economical transportation. When airplanes were invented, the limitations were material technology, not the basic physics of the power plant. When computers were invented, even the president of IBM said he does not think there was much of a market for personal computers. When computers were invented they were the size of a small house, cost millions of dollars, and a fortune in power and air conditioning to work. It took improvements in the technology to eliminate all those problems, not a basic break through in the physics and chemistry of any part. When automobiles were invented, it was criticized for being so unreliable compared to the horse. When automobiles were invented they were praised by many for not filling city streets with horse **** and as material technology improved, so did the reliability. None of this required any break through in either physics or chemistry. On the other hand, there as just as many examples where things did not work out. Like the space program. We never went back to the moon or set up a permanent colony. We never went back because no one wantee to pay for it, much like no one wants to pay a bunch of money for a niche vehicle. America enjoyed the prosperity from the automobile, airplane and computers. Electric vehicles could just be the next big thing. While there is no guarantee of success, failure is pretty much guaranteed if we don't try. Oh, we are "trying" allright and failure is guaranteed by basic physics and chemistry until, if ever, there is an astounding breakthrough. Millions in tax dollars are being poured into the electric car rat hole in subsidies with no positive results. What we have instead of results are sales that are almost nonexistant and lawsuits like those in Arizona because electric car batteries react to the heat just like anyone with any knowledge of battery chemistry would expect them to; range nowhere near advertised and a very short life. If the government were not forcing the manufacture of electric cars through emission standards and subsidies there would be none manufactured Well I'm not sure if you have noticed the quantum mechanics revolution that we're, I'd dare say, *in*, right now. Perhaps it's true to say that our quantum mechanics knowledge hasn't changed *that* much in 50 years - but certainly, the theory is becoming reality. QM is totally irrelevant to the discussion of battery chemistry and physics. It most certainly is not. Indeed it's possible to explain anything in the universe, ulimately, by quantum mechanics. Theory never becomes reality; theory is always theory. Reality in this context is when a theory can be applied to produce something, as in elecromagnetic theory being used to produce antennas for radios. These things all currently exist, albiet on small and experimental levels, for now! ... * Quantum cloaking and invisibility * Carbon nanotubes - bridges into space * unlimited cheap energy * superconductivity at normal temperatures * quantum entanglement - teleportation All are pie in the sky speculation and other than carbon nanotubes do not exist. I'll let you do your own research. I already have but not by watching sifi movies. You clearly are not looking in the right places. Do you require some proof? - I would prefer it if you found it yourself - it's the best way to gain knowledge. -- Duncan. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
The new Electric Cessna 172
Dave Doe wrote:
In article , , snip old crap QM is totally irrelevant to the discussion of battery chemistry and physics. It most certainly is not. Indeed it's possible to explain anything in the universe, ulimately, by quantum mechanics. Just because you might, maybe, someday, be able to explain everything related to current battery chemistry and physics does not mean you will magically be able to come up with new battery chemistry and physics nor does it mean you will actually be able to build said battery, or that if you can build it, it will be of such cost to be practical. We have known for a long time how to turn lead into gold, but the cost of doing it far exceeds the value of the gold. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Electric jets where are You? | nrepeb | General Aviation | 5 | March 13th 11 08:56 PM |
FS: Electric tow | Bug Dout | General Aviation | 0 | October 16th 10 06:27 PM |
6CH Electric RC Helicopter for $169 | GTY | Rotorcraft | 0 | October 27th 05 08:59 PM |
Electric RC Helicopter for $83 | NYPT Man | Home Built | 0 | October 24th 05 06:47 PM |
Electric DG | Robbie S. | Owning | 0 | March 19th 05 03:20 AM |