DIY Electric Car Forums banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Well, this is better - at least specific arguments are made.

Unfortunately, they don't address the point of the article. US News - a
business-oriented magazine - is saying that consumers, who are in
general not motivated by a desire to save the world or to deprive the
House of Saud of some of its revenue, will compare the costs and
benefits of the old way with the costs and benefits of the new, and (the
author believes) will mostly opt for the old. Having the option of
buying the old technology, or even just keeping their checkbooks in
their pockets, they will - or so US News believes. You are free to
differ, but just because they disagree with you doesn't make them enemy
agents. Treating them as such damages your credibility, not theirs.

The simple fact is that the price of petroleum fuel is not as high, in
real terms, as it was in the days of the Model A. Reading the automotive
literature of the turn of the 20th century is instructive, because they
were saying the same things then as you are now: petroleum will run out
soon; petroleum prices are already too high; electric is the only viable
option. Such statements require proof, not passion, to sustain them.

Another fact: if the House of Saud and all our other foreign petroleum
suppliers were to disappear, US oil companies could still find enough
crude at home to supply demand. At present, with foreign supplies
abundant and cheap, they are making bigger profits refining foreign oil,
so that is what they do. Fuel prices would rise, of course, if we had to
rely only on domestic production - heck, we might even have to pay as
much as Europeans have been paying for generations.

EV advocates are making the same mistake they made in the 1970's. With
stricter emissions restrictions looming, they assumed that the
internal-combustion engine was dead and told everybody who would listen
that, in a few years, everybody would be driving an electric or taking
the (electric) bus. (The steam freaks were saying more or less the same
thing about their hobby horse, but that is another story.) The IC engine
makers didn't get the memo. Instead, they cranked up their research labs
and easily met the new standards, whereupon all the real merits of the
alternatives were forgotten, because their advocates had pinned all
their expectations on what they thought was a sure thing.

Five years from now I'm afraid we'll hear echos of the early 1980's.
"The gas pumps are still open - I guess we don't really need electrics."

We need to face facts - not scream at the people who point them out to us.

Best,
Marc
--
Archivale catalog: http://www.archivale.com/catalog
Ducted fans: http://massflow.archivale.com/
Polymath weblog: http://www.archivale.com/weblog
Translation services (BeWords): http://www.bewords.com/Marc-dePiolenc
Translation services (ProZ): http://www.proz.com/profile/639380
Translation services (translatorscafe):
http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/profile/default.asp?LID=130919&ForOthers=true#Profile_Start

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Have fun driving in your gas car Marc. You are delusional to think we can
find enough oil in this country to supply our current demand.

Cheap oil is becoming increasingly hard to find. Deep water, Oil shale,
etc. You have really demonstrated that you don't know the facts about our
current world oil demand.

This story is 3 days old.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS50409640120101118

According to the article, World Wide Peak oil was hit back in 2006!!!
Funny, no mention of that fact in the US news article.


Sincerely;

Douglas A. Stansfield
President
www.TransAtlanticElectricConversions.com
973-875-6276 (office)
973-670-9208 (cell)
973-440-1619 (fax)

ELECTRIC CAR PRODUCERS






-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Marc de Piolenc
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 11:32 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: [EVDL] Reaction to the US News article

Well, this is better - at least specific arguments are made.

Unfortunately, they don't address the point of the article. US News - a
business-oriented magazine - is saying that consumers, who are in
general not motivated by a desire to save the world or to deprive the
House of Saud of some of its revenue, will compare the costs and
benefits of the old way with the costs and benefits of the new, and (the
author believes) will mostly opt for the old. Having the option of
buying the old technology, or even just keeping their checkbooks in
their pockets, they will - or so US News believes. You are free to
differ, but just because they disagree with you doesn't make them enemy
agents. Treating them as such damages your credibility, not theirs.

The simple fact is that the price of petroleum fuel is not as high, in
real terms, as it was in the days of the Model A. Reading the automotive
literature of the turn of the 20th century is instructive, because they
were saying the same things then as you are now: petroleum will run out
soon; petroleum prices are already too high; electric is the only viable
option. Such statements require proof, not passion, to sustain them.

Another fact: if the House of Saud and all our other foreign petroleum
suppliers were to disappear, US oil companies could still find enough
crude at home to supply demand. At present, with foreign supplies
abundant and cheap, they are making bigger profits refining foreign oil,
so that is what they do. Fuel prices would rise, of course, if we had to
rely only on domestic production - heck, we might even have to pay as
much as Europeans have been paying for generations.

EV advocates are making the same mistake they made in the 1970's. With
stricter emissions restrictions looming, they assumed that the
internal-combustion engine was dead and told everybody who would listen
that, in a few years, everybody would be driving an electric or taking
the (electric) bus. (The steam freaks were saying more or less the same
thing about their hobby horse, but that is another story.) The IC engine
makers didn't get the memo. Instead, they cranked up their research labs
and easily met the new standards, whereupon all the real merits of the
alternatives were forgotten, because their advocates had pinned all
their expectations on what they thought was a sure thing.

Five years from now I'm afraid we'll hear echos of the early 1980's.
"The gas pumps are still open - I guess we don't really need electrics."

We need to face facts - not scream at the people who point them out to us.

Best,
Marc
--
Archivale catalog: http://www.archivale.com/catalog
Ducted fans: http://massflow.archivale.com/
Polymath weblog: http://www.archivale.com/weblog
Translation services (BeWords): http://www.bewords.com/Marc-dePiolenc
Translation services (ProZ): http://www.proz.com/profile/639380
Translation services (translatorscafe):
http://www.translatorscafe.com/cafe/profile/default.asp?LID=130919&ForOthers
=true#Profile_Start

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev

_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Don't forget coal can be gasified (that has been done in other countries).
Doesn't the U.S. have hundreds of years of coal reserves? In light of this peak
oil is not the end-all argument for EVs. Less pollution, less noise, less cost
(well, hopefully eventually), less maintenance, multifuel for charging are all
great arguments.




________________________________
From: Douglas A. Stansfield <[email protected]>
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[email protected]>
Sent: Sun, November 21, 2010 9:51:32 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Reaction to the US News article

Have fun driving in your gas car Marc. You are delusional to think we can find
enough oil in this country to supply our current demand.


Cheap oil is becoming increasingly hard to find. Deep water, Oil shale, etc.
You have really demonstrated that you don't know the facts about our current
world oil demand.


This story is 3 days old.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS50409640120101118

According to the article, World Wide Peak oil was hit back in 2006!!! Funny, no
mention of that fact in the US news article.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20101121/2ca3c86f/attachment.html
_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Hello,

> Don't forget coal can be gasified (that has been done in other countries).
> Doesn't the U.S. have hundreds of years of coal reserves? In light of this peak
> oil is not the end-all argument for EVs. Less pollution, less noise, less cost
> (well, hopefully eventually), less maintenance, multifuel for charging are all
> great arguments.


We are probably at peak coal, right now.

http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-11-20/peak-coal-nov-20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_coal

We need to move to renewable energy sources as soon as possible.

Wind
Solar Heat
Solar PV
Methane (from landfills, sewage, animal and plant waste digesters)
Wave Power
Tidal Power
Hydro w/o dams
Geothermal

++++++++++

EV's save about $12,000 per 100,000 miles for fuel and maintenance costs. I wonder if the US News article author knew this?

That is based on $2.75/gallon gasoline (which is so last summer!) and $0.19/kWh electricity -- which is much higher than the average US rates. I used the RAV4 EV vs the RAV4 for this comparison.

Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Uh... that article itself says that's an extreme opinion by the "Post C,arbon" group and that there is likely 100's of years of coal:

The authors of the comment unquestionably have an agenda; they come from the Post-Carbon Institute, which clearly has an interest in promoting consideration of a world that doesn't run on fossi fuels. And that agenda is obvious in the article summary, which concludes, "Energy policies relying on cheap coal have no future." That appears to be in sharp contrast to various estimates that suggest the world's coal supply is enough to keep us going for up to several hundred years.

On Mon Nov 22nd, 2010 6:11 AM MST Neil Blanchard wrote:

>Hello,
>
>> Don't forget coal can be gasified (that has been done in other countries).
>> Doesn't the U.S. have hundreds of years of coal reserves? In light of this peak
>> oil is not the end-all argument for EVs. Less pollution, less noise, less cost
>> (well, hopefully eventually), less maintenance, multifuel for charging are all
>> great arguments.
>
>
>We are probably at peak coal, right now.
>
>http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-11-20/peak-coal-nov-20
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_coal
>
>We need to move to renewable energy sources as soon as possible.
>
>Wind
>Solar Heat
>Solar PV
>Methane (from landfills, sewage, animal and plant waste digesters)
>Wave Power
>Tidal Power
>Hydro w/o dams
>Geothermal
>
>++++++++++
>
>EV's save about $12,000 per 100,000 miles for fuel and maintenance costs. I wonder if the US News article author knew this?
>
>That is based on $2.75/gallon gasoline (which is so last summer!) and $0.19/kWh electricity -- which is much higher than the average US rates. I used the RAV4 EV vs the RAV4 for this comparison.
>
>Sincerely, Neil
>http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
>| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
>| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
>| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev





_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
The "Agenda" of the Post Carbon Institute is to promote awareness of the
issues. If people can "teach the controversy" of global warming, I applaud
those who will attempt to "teach the controversy" to contrary the idea that
we have hundreds of years of coal in the ground.

http://www.postcarbon.org/blog-post/183218-fridley-heinberg-discuss-peak-coal-in

They are a think tank, their mission is:

"Post Carbon Institute provides individuals, communities, businesses, and
governments with the resources needed to understand and respond to the
interrelated economic, energy, and environmental crises that define the 21st
century. We envision a world of resilient communities and re-localized
economies that thrive within ecological bounds."

Scary stuff ! .. lol
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/private/ev/attachments/20101122/f67ef228/attachment.html
_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Folks, sorry to break in here. . I don't want to seem overly worried or
anything - things aren't too flamey in this thread and they may not get that
way at all. Still, I want to make sure we don't get into an overheated
discussion here (and one that's really off topic).

On the EVDL we're united by an interest in promoting and/or building and/or
driving EVs, regardless of the reasons. If you're EVing to be "green,"
that's great - there are lots of others here who feel that way too. But not
everyone does, and there are many other reasons that EVs make sense. Some
folks just like the EV grin. ;-)

Some references to "peak oil" and the like are inevitable, I guess, but
let's not get distracted by a big debate of that or other basic non-EV-
specific environmental issues. Such debates don't change anyone's mind
anyway, so they're a complete waste of our bandwidth and your writing time.

Please respect the varying views on this issue and resist the urge to argue
or defend your side.

Thanks!

David Roden
EVDL Administrator
http://www.evdl.org/


_______________________________________________
| REPLYING: address your message to [email protected] only.
| Multiple-address or CCed messages may be rejected.
| UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
| OTHER HELP: http://evdl.org/help/
| OPTIONS: http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top