Another case for the LNG/CNG vehicle!

[John Connor]

Coal's portion of the generation mix has fallen from about 50% to the high 30s in just the last decade due to the availability of cheaper natural gas and more aggressive deployment of renewables. Given the high likelihood that most electric cars will be sold in areas that fall under a high renewable portfolio standard (like California) I think the basis of the article's argument isn't really that sound.

You're talking about California, one state and you're saying the article isn't sound?

Okay....

 

[John Connor]

If having your electric car's power come from coal really bothers you, you can always put solar panels on your house. I hear it's even possible to hack the charging to only charge the car when the solar panels are powering the house.

How do you travel?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Coal comes from the environment, so does plastic. Just burning NG would be common sense.

plastic is manufactured using fossil fuels the last time I checked,and didn't 'grow' in the environment.

 

[John Connor]

He was referring to toxic materials that were already in the environment. Why do I have to spell it out to the morons in this forum all the time? You know damn well what I meant. That plastic is a bitch to the environment coming from chiefly oil.

 

[JoeBleed]

I'm not sure why people are still hung up on hybrid gas/electric cars. I think it would be better to take a pure electric car and add a small diesel generator to provide constant energy to charge batteries and/or drive the motors when you want to extend your driving range.

I did a quick search, but i failed to find actual power consumption while in use. all i was finding is charging data. I'd think it would be somewhat small. Something a 4-6kw genset could handle, or at least do a great job at extending the range while using little fuel.

 

[JoeBleed]

Then there are the hot button issues that actually aren't a benefit or harm. So many people complain about the toxic metals used in batteries and how it supposedly harms the environment. But in reality, they were already in the environment. We dug them up, put them in cars, then they eventually get burried back in the ground. This is a wash.

The problem with this statement is it's missing the obvious problem information. the elements that were in the ground already, were mind over a larger cubic area of earth to remove relatively small amounts of the desired material to make batteries. So when they are not recycled and disposed of, you're putting dangerous levels back into the environment in a concerned and refined form. You're also missing all of the chemicals used in the mining process and manufacturing process.

 

[K1052]

You're talking about California, one state and you're saying the article isn't sound?

Okay....

2/3rds of US states have a renewable generation portfolio standard between 10% and 25% by 2020.

Also:

Washington and Oregon's largest source of power (over 50%) by far is hydroelectric. California it's NG with hydro, nuclear, and other renewables all in about the 10% range.

It is relatively easy to conclude that the vast majority of probable electric car sales will be to states with high penetration of clean energy.

 

[K1052]

I'm not sure why people are still hung up on hybrid gas/electric cars. I think it would be better to take a pure electric car and add a small diesel generator to provide constant energy to charge batteries and/or drive the motors when you want to extend your driving range.

I did a quick search, but i failed to find actual power consumption while in use. all i was finding is charging data. I'd think it would be somewhat small. Something a 4-6kw genset could handle, or at least do a great job at extending the range while using little fuel.

You're describing a hybrid, just a different kind.

A company called Wrightspeed has done this very thing by coupling a micro turbine with a battery system. The turbine burns fuel extremely efficiently in it's optimal power range and it charges the battery system (with plug charging capability as well) instead of powering the truck directly. Seems like a promising solution for medium and heavy trucks that greatly reduces emissions and increases fuel efficiency while preserving range and power. Fedex is testing them and there is a lot of interest from waste haulers.

http://www.hybridcars.com/wrightspeed-combines-gas-turbine-and-batteries-for-big-fuel-savings/

 

[DCal430]

This. I've also assumed it was essentially a wash.

Studies show just the opposite, electric vehicles are more efficient, because ICE are extremely inefficient at converting the combustion of fossil fuels to propulsion, almost all the energy release is in the form of heat and NOT motion.

 

[DCal430]

The fact that ICE are far less efficient is the exact reason why it is far cheaper for an electric vehicle to go 100 miles than a gas vehicle.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Um, OP you know you already made a thread on this exact same topic, right?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2439137&highlight=coal

Coal's portion of the generation mix has fallen from about 50% to the high 30s in just the last decade due to the availability of cheaper natural gas and more aggressive deployment of renewables. Given the high likelihood that most electric cars will be sold in areas that fall under a high renewable portfolio standard (like California) I think the basis of the article's argument isn't really that sound.

I think it is sound (well can't speak for the conservative blogs' take, but the actual study I think is). But then, obviously trying to have a discussion about this with the OP is impossible because he just focuses on dumb political shit while accusing anyone discussing the actual topic of doing that.

He was referring to toxic materials that were already in the environment. Why do I have to spell it out to the morons in this forum all the time? You know damn well what I meant. That plastic is a bitch to the environment coming from chiefly oil.

Sorry but you're consistently the moron and um, a lot of times we don't know what the hell you mean because you say nonsense and often your posts contain shitloads of errors. Plus, when people try to spell it out for you you either ignore it, resort to name calling (while ignoring the actual discussion) and then try interjecting other nonsense (often politically focused).

Your analogy was total dogshit and completely missed the point. When we burn fossil fuels we're releasing their chemical makeup into the environment which we can also show with simple basic chemistry has other detrimental effects. We currently are doing very little to try and sequester that back into the ground. And before you respond with some shitty diatribe, yes there is more complexity than that (like the energy costs of producing batteries, etc).

 

[JoeBleed]

You're describing a hybrid, just a different kind.

A company called Wrightspeed has done this very thing by coupling a micro turbine with a battery system. The turbine burns fuel extremely efficiently in it's optimal power range and it charges the battery system (with plug charging capability as well) instead of powering the truck directly. Seems like a promising solution for medium and heavy trucks that greatly reduces emissions and increases fuel efficiency while preserving range and power. Fedex is testing them and there is a lot of interest from waste haulers.

http://www.hybridcars.com/wrightspeed-combines-gas-turbine-and-batteries-for-big-fuel-savings/

This is good to know. i wouldn't call it a hybrid though as the engine doesn't have any kind of mechanical link to the drive train. Which is my understanding of why hybrids got their name.

 

[K1052]

This is good to know. i wouldn't call it a hybrid though as the engine doesn't have any kind of mechanical link to the drive train. Which is my understanding of why hybrids got their name.

I think it technically qualifies as a series hybrid but could also be considered a range extended electric platform. Meh…whichever.