[EVDL List]

Not to hinder this discussion, but I'd like to remind y'all that one of the
principles behind the EVDL - expressed in its charter - is that we proceed
from the fundamental premise that EVs are a Good Thing.

The EVDL charter, written by list owner and originator Clyde Visser in 1991,
says :

"The EV Electric Vehicle Discussion Mailing List is intended to provide a
forum to discuss the current state of the art and future direction of
electric vehicles. It is not intended to discuss either EV appropriateness
or comparisons with other transportation primary drive modes such as the
venerable internal combustion engine."

There's been a general consensus for some time that hydrogen is a losing
proposition, and nearly 10 years ago the EVDL membership voted to minimize
discussion of fuel cells even though they are part of our charter.

Again, I'm not saying "don't discuss this" or that the thread is wildly off
topic. I also realize that most of the participants in this discussion are
relatively new here and haven't discussed these matters before. There's a
certain kind of elation in >finally< being among folks who've been doing
some serious thinking about these matters, and haven't just bought into the
latest media blitz.

Just keep in mind that the primary focus here is building EVs and getting
them on the market (separate issues), not debating whether they are an
appropriate answer. Try not to let the discussion wander off track.

Thanks,

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not
reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

 

[EVDL List]

While I can understand that you would not want to tie up to much time on
subjects like hydrogen or fuel cells, I can't see why you would not want to
keep up to speed on these technologies as they mature.
We spend endless amounts of time on lead acid batteries. And that's okay.
But info on an EV that gets its power from a fuel cell is not to be talked
about?
The reason that EV are not main stream yet is that we have not ironed out
what the final "Right Way" of doing it is. Any of these technologies may
turn out to be a revolutionary change in the way we build EV's in the
future. To ignore them is to continue designing for the past.
10 years ago you voted on fuel cells? At what point will you vote to look at
them again? Alot changes in ten years.
Just my two cents.
Jim

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Roden" <[email protected]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 10:52 PM
Subject: [EVDL] Evolutionary path, hydrogen, etc.


> Not to hinder this discussion, but I'd like to remind y'all that one of
the
> principles behind the EVDL - expressed in its charter - is that we proceed
> from the fundamental premise that EVs are a Good Thing.
>
> The EVDL charter, written by list owner and originator Clyde Visser in
1991,
> says :
>
> "The EV Electric Vehicle Discussion Mailing List is intended to provide a
> forum to discuss the current state of the art and future direction of
> electric vehicles. It is not intended to discuss either EV appropriateness
> or comparisons with other transportation primary drive modes such as the
> venerable internal combustion engine."
>
> There's been a general consensus for some time that hydrogen is a losing
> proposition, and nearly 10 years ago the EVDL membership voted to minimize
> discussion of fuel cells even though they are part of our charter.
>
> Again, I'm not saying "don't discuss this" or that the thread is wildly
off
> topic. I also realize that most of the participants in this discussion
are
> relatively new here and haven't discussed these matters before. There's a
> certain kind of elation in >finally< being among folks who've been doing
> some serious thinking about these matters, and haven't just bought into
the
> latest media blitz.
>
> Just keep in mind that the primary focus here is building EVs and getting
> them on the market (separate issues), not debating whether they are an
> appropriate answer. Try not to let the discussion wander off track.
>
> Thanks,
>
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> EVDL Administrator
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Note: mail sent to "evpost" or "etpost" addresses will not
> reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my
> email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> For subscription options, see
> http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
>

_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev