Are cars like the Tesla Model S the future?

Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
It is already being tried - and the meter rolls backwards when it does.
Click to expand...
citation needed.

if you have a home power generation system your meter reverses when you add juice to the system, but if they take back power from a battery they are FUCKING you, even if they pay for what they take back at the same rate they charged you.

the regulator and rectifier that turns ac into dc consumes electricity to do it's job (which is why it gets hot) thus they are selling you retail electricity, some of which is consumed to step it down from 240v to the needed voltage, more to transfer if from ac to dc, some is consumed to turn dc into chemical energy, and when they take it back, some is consumed to turn that chemical energy into electricity, and more to switch it back to AC, and more to step the voltage back up to 240V, and THEN they "refund" what you send back, meaning you lose all the juice used for the conversion for your needs, AND the conversion back for THEIR needs.

and you think this is a good idea.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
citation needed.

if you have a home power generation system your meter reverses when you add juice to the system, but if they take back power from a battery they are FUCKING you, even if they pay for what they take back at the same rate they charged you.

the regulator and rectifier that turns ac into dc consumes electricity to do it's job (which is why it gets hot) thus they are selling you retail electricity, some of which is consumed to step it down from 240v to the needed voltage, more to transfer if from ac to dc, some is consumed to turn dc into chemical energy, and when they take it back, some is consumed to turn that chemical energy into electricity, and more to switch it back to AC, and more to step the voltage back up to 240V, and THEN they "refund" what you send back, meaning you lose all the juice used for the conversion for your needs, AND the conversion back for THEIR needs.

and you think this is a good idea.
Click to expand...
Minor issues and you know it. I am going to bed, perhaps I will look up the experiments in the morning. I read it in the LA times a few weeks ago.
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
Wrong again Doc. electric engines can be more than 90% efficient and even up to 98% efficient while combustion engines are 30 to 45% efficient. Heat loss and friction. Internal combustion engines have many points of friction, including the rings of each piston, the cam, the crank and the bearings. Electric only has bearings and produces far less waste heat. An internal combustion engine needs to lug gallons of water, heat exchangers, oil sumps and pumps and the engine itself.
Click to expand...
WRONG AGAIN.

electric motors are more efficient only at delivering torque to get up to speed. once they are AT SPEED they consume just as much energy to maintain that speed as they do accelerating against inertia to acheive speed, while a combustion engine is most efficient at steady throttle cruise.

dont even try to argue otherwise, because youre just plain wrong.

you are arguing total efficiency, measured in joules, energy in, vs energy out, which is great in a laboratory, but SUCKS when you need to do actual work.
 
L

LIBERTYCHICKEN

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
It is already being tried - and the meter rolls backwards when it does.
Click to expand...

Most analog meters will not 'roll backwards'

The power company will switch you to a modern electric meter device , which instead of 'rolling backwards' records the amount of energy passing bolth ways . The power being fed back into the grid is then 'sold' to the power company . But it's sold at a fraction of the price you buy power for even for off peak hours
 
L

LIBERTYCHICKEN

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
Good idea, then we might still have cars that blow up and burn the occupants when they are hit from the rear. Good idea,m then we still wouldn't have air bags and seat belts, tires could be sketchy and roll overs more predominant. No, the government should stay out of the auto industry, and we could still have vehicles that get 12 miles to the gallon - because "that is what consumers want" - right?

Conservatives tend so easily to accept what government has done to improve things, presuming that the "free market" took care of that. Short attention spans, short memories.
Click to expand...


Let me know when the goberment fixes the electricution problems for first response units on these electric/hybrid cars
 
kpmarine

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
LIBERTYCHICKEN said:
Most analog meters will not 'roll backwards'

The power company will switch you to a modern electric meter device , which instead of 'rolling backwards' records the amount of energy passing bolth ways . The power being fed back into the grid is then 'sold' to the power company . But it's sold at a fraction of the price you buy power for even for off peak hours
Click to expand...
The bitch of not having enough capital to possess any real bargaining power.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
Actually, it is likely that the electric car will be what comes next. As our grid goes green we will need methods of storing power, wind is intermitent, so is solar, the best way to store that energy is in the batteries of cars plugged into the grid. Most cars spend the majority of their time in a a garage anyway so it's a great way to have a mass of batteries at the ready. It also helps with transmission distances.
Click to expand...
Idk if you read my post but actually the electric has been here all along, since the beginning like during horse and buggy days.
Even if wind and solar combined were not intermittent we would have no reason to store it as we use way more than those could possibly produce.
 
kpmarine

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
Ain't that the truth....

I own a Mark V GTI... had to get a new mechatronics unit for my DSG.... good thing it was covered under my extended DSG warranty.... fucking unit was $1500 plus labour... and it's a 5.5 hour job to change it.

Oil change is $116. lol
Click to expand...
That's why you get a TDI. Diesel is just generally superior. :p

If it has compression ignition, then it will always be more reliable.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Dr Kynes said:
and electric cars never took off because they are a BAD solution.

electric motors get up and go from a stop very well, but once you hit your chosen cruising speed they still draw just as much juice from your battery as they do coming up from a dead stop.

conversely, combustion engines do not deliver as much torque from a dead stop, but once they hit a cruising speed they are FAR more efficient than electric motors, and you dont have to drag around 400 pounds of battery in the trunk.
Click to expand...
Dude my heli stays up for 15 mins and the battery is a lot of the weight.....lifting weight is way more work than rolling it......of course my rc does not have a heater ac or touch screen radio either lol

And yes pg&e can suck it fuckin .4/Kwh is ludacris can't wait to get back to nuclear and some common sense.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
It is already being tried - and the meter rolls backwards when it does.
Click to expand...
Yeah but that's only in certain places.....cali in the summer for example....and often times the taxpayer foots the bill for the huge startup costs that take a great while to recover. Sometimes never recovered like a regular citizen dude puts 40k worth of solar panels up and after subsidies only paid 2 grand out of pocket and his meter runs backwards...tax payer never gets it back.
 
kpmarine

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Yeah but that's only in certain places.....cali in the summer for example....and often times the taxpayer foots the bill for the huge startup costs that take a great while to recover.
Click to expand...
Nuclear seems great. Assuming people actually build the things like they will spew radiation if not properly built; people are not known for doing that.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
kpmarine said:
Nuclear seems great. Assuming people actually build the things like they will spew radiation if not properly built; people are not known for doing that.
Click to expand...
Yeah they are....here in the us anyhow.... I hear its even better with non weapons grade....safer I mean.
 
kpmarine

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Yeah they are....here in the us anyhow.... I hear its even better with non weapons grade....safer I mean.
Click to expand...
Your generous use of ellipses make it hard to know what you mean sometimes. Not meant as an offense; I just can't decipher your meaning here.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Pardon, I'm on a phone so the ellipses are easier.

I mean they're safer in the US like we are not known for that. Ihonestly don't remember hearing of any US nuclear radiation pollution.
Nuclear IS great.
I remember reading my power bills though and it was as low as 5c per Kwh and now its .08 for >1000 Kwh and .09 for <1000 Kwh resedential.

Now I'm in cali its high as .40/Kwh....why?
 
kpmarine

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Pardon, I'm on a phone so the ellipses are easier.

I mean they're safer in the US like we are not known for that. Ihonestly don't remember hearing of any US nuclear radiation pollution.
Nuclear IS great.
I remember reading my power bills though and it was as low as 5c per Kwh and now its .08 for >1000 Kwh and .09 for <1000 Kwh resedential.
Click to expand...
Three mile island and the santa susana reactor come to mind. Nuclear power is great and affordable, but it does have risks. Unless you assume Americans are morally superior; you must assume that certain risks need to be addressed before nuclear energy is a viable option.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Shit I'm high lol 3 mile island durrrr.....so how many have died in the coal industry in pursuit of electricity?

I am not suggesting nuclear could be viable I a suggesting it already is and has been for quite a while.

Dude I can already see the hook through the bait think I will pass up on that one.....nothing I said suggested I assume the US is MORALLY superior just better at constructing safer nuclear stations.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
You know kp if I were a shrink Iwould have to ask why you felt the need to bring americas morality into discussion.
What's your favorite electric car?
 
kpmarine

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Shit I'm high lol 3 mile island durrrr.....so how many have died in the coal industry in pursuit of electricity?

I am not suggesting nuclear could be viable I a suggesting it already is and has been for quite a while.

Dude I can already see the hook through the bait think I will pass up on that one.....nothing I said suggested I assume the US is MORALLY superior just better at constructing safer nuclear stations.
Click to expand...
How many people have died from coal is irrelevant until you can compare how dangerous nuclear power could be on an equivalent scale.


Yes, nuclear power has been around for a while, and fukushima illustrated my concerns of underbuilt reactors perfectly. It has been and will be around for a while; that lends no validity to it's safety on it's own merits. Due to this fact; you cannot assume all reactors are safer than coal. The final point you addressed was not a trap. I was pointing out that people are not inherently perfect. You cannot assume lack of US radiation issues is due to lack of reported issues.

You said you could not recall any us nuclear radiation pollution. I listed two incidents on record. That renders you premise solidly invalid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top