[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

On 16 Aug 2007 at 10:53, Bob Rice wrote:

> Obviously there is a market for locally produced batteries, or he
> wouldn't have been making them here, in the first place?

I realize that not everyone on the EVDL is interested in EVs for their
"greenness." I hope that I can discuss it a bit and those who ARE
interested will take part thoughtfully, while those are are not interested
will just delete this message and refrain from criticizing us or calling us
names.

After all, I don't race EVs, in fact don't really like racing, but I don't
complain about others discussing racing on the EVDL, nor do I insult them or
call them names. So, those who aren't interested in the environmental angle
on EVs, please give us a break on this thread - which I think is solidly on
topic. I promise not to denigrate you for your decisions.

Anyway, for us "greenies," I think it's worth considering that imported
batteries carry some extra environmental baggage.

For one thing, environmental laws are not very strongly enforced in China
(and probably Mexico and some other cheap-labor countries). Lead and
chemical pollution is desperately, fatally high in some parts of China. So
those who have a "green" side might want to investigate the environmental
profile of the factories producing their batteries, be they lead or lithium.

The other consideration is the amount of embedded energy (most of it from
petroleum and coal) that goes into imported batteries.

If you buy USBMC batteries, they'll be shipped from CA or GA, whichever is
closer. Presumably Trojan works similarly. But if you buy batteries from
China, they're shipped literally halfway round the world in a freighter
using fuel oil. Then they're trucked or rail-transported closer to you, and
finally trucked again to you or your dealer.

And that's not all. I've read that at least some of the lead batteries that
are recycled in the US are actually shipped to China or South America for
processing. (Someone correct me if this is wrong.) This burns petroleum
and moves the recycling process to areas where environmental laws may be lax
(see above).

Also, Chinese and South American manufacturing is generally less energy
efficient than European and US manufacturing, so more energy may be used to
produce the batteries there than would be used here.

Then, the finished batteries are shipped back to the states, using still
more energy and petroleum.

So, while the dollar price is lower because of the low cost of labor, the
energy cost of imported batteries is probably higher. I can't say how MUCH
higher, as I don't have the time or access to research materials to
calculate it. I do think it would be interesting, and I hope not dismaying,
to factor this into (or, rather, out of) the energy savings of our EVs.

> Has the State of Or. offered Rich and Otmar any buildings, tax breaks,
> employee training?

I don't know the answer, but I can tell you that EV companies have proposed
manufacturing plants in various places, and in some cases, they've been
promised tax breaks. Often, the companies never build the plants. IIRC,
the Korean operation that developed the Parade, ATTRD, proposed building a
plant somewhere in the Midwest, and were promised financial help by the
regional govemment. No facility ever materialized. This leaves the tax-
break climate less receptive for legitimate (or better managed) EV-related
businesses.

>
> I'll pay more for my Grandkid's new toys to see " Made in USA" on
> them. Bring them ON! I

Maybe you would. But most people >say< this, then they turn right around
and buy what's cheapest, just as they always have. That's why so many
things are made in China - because people buy them. That, and the fact that
it means more profit for the US company at a given price level, which
stockholders demand. If you're the CEO, you get rewarded financially for
this. Who can blame them?

If you want more EV parts made in the USA, then don't buy imported EV parts.
Simple as that. If you want EV parts to which less environmental damage can
be ascribed, buy US-made or EU-made components rather than components from
Asia. Equally simple.

There are people manufacturing EV components in the US and some of them are
right on this list. At least one of them bends over backward to patronize
US suppliers.

Again, I'm not saying this is the right decision for everyone, and I don't
mean to offend anyone who puts price at the top of the decision tree.
Everybody makes buying decisions based on his own situation. All I'm trying
to do is provide some extra input for those decisions.

>
> OK I'm getting off topic trying to make a point? Maybe A123 could make them
> here? Or a Thunder Sky branch plant HERE?

Isn't Jukka talking about a possible Thundersky plant in Finland? If they
can build one there, with Finland's famous high taxes and the EU's stringent
environmental laws, surely we could build one here. All we need is someone
with sufficient drive and connections - and lots of investors.

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]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

I'd like to offer an alternative view on some of your points. I'm deleting
some stuff that is good, but I have no alternate viewpoint for.

My first comment has to do with the human aspects. Assuming we should be
using human labor, and the earth's raw materials, to build transportation
devices at all (which is not a given, but outside the scope), who should we
employ? Employment raises standard of living. Who needs it most,
Americans, so they can drive BMW's instead of Chevies, or Chinese (or others
in cheap labor markets), so they stop starving? Granted there are
environmental concerns, but personally, I don't mind seeing some of our
production go over there if it can help feed some very desperate people. I
think the correct approach is to address the environmental problems "over
there", not by attempting to keep them in the stone age.

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Roden" <[email protected]>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

> On 16 Aug 2007 at 10:53, Bob Rice wrote:
>
> Anyway, for us "greenies," I think it's worth considering that imported
> batteries carry some extra environmental baggage.
>
> For one thing, environmental laws are not very strongly enforced in China
> (and probably Mexico and some other cheap-labor countries). Lead and
> chemical pollution is desperately, fatally high in some parts of China.
> So
> those who have a "green" side might want to investigate the environmental
> profile of the factories producing their batteries, be they lead or
> lithium.

That is a fact. The question is, is the correct solution to produce less in
third world countries, or fix the carelessness about toxic waste.

> The other consideration is the amount of embedded energy (most of it from
> petroleum and coal) that goes into imported batteries.
>
> If you buy USBMC batteries, they'll be shipped from CA or GA, whichever is
> closer. Presumably Trojan works similarly. But if you buy batteries from
> China, they're shipped literally halfway round the world in a freighter
> using fuel oil. Then they're trucked or rail-transported closer to you,
> and
> finally trucked again to you or your dealer.
>
> And that's not all. I've read that at least some of the lead batteries
> that
> are recycled in the US are actually shipped to China or South America for
> processing. (Someone correct me if this is wrong.) This burns petroleum
> and moves the recycling process to areas where environmental laws may be
> lax
> (see above).

I'll agree that additional transportation is not optimal, although container
ships no doubt could be run on Biodiesel to minimize the impact. But I am
in no hurry to say that the lack of enforcement of environmental policy
should be fixed by taking desperate people's jobs away. I think a better
solution is to fix the lack of environmental enforcement.

> Also, Chinese and South American manufacturing is generally less energy
> efficient than European and US manufacturing, so more energy may be used
> to
> produce the batteries there than would be used here.

Have you got a source for that? I've been in American factories (air
conditioned, lots of electrical automation machinery used to replace
expensive people) and a Chinese factory (not air conditioned, the employees
are used to the heat), far less machinery, the work is done by people
operating on biofuels, not electric robots.

> Then, the finished batteries are shipped back to the states, using still
> more energy and petroleum.

Shipped, yes, but it doesn't need to be with petroleum.

> So, while the dollar price is lower because of the low cost of labor, the
> energy cost of imported batteries is probably higher. I can't say how
> MUCH
> higher, as I don't have the time or access to research materials to
> calculate it. I do think it would be interesting, and I hope not
> dismaying,
> to factor this into (or, rather, out of) the energy savings of our EVs.

Producing anything has a cost to the environment. I have no data as to what
part of the cost to the environment of producing a battery the shipping is.
Melting the lead and molding the case may take more energy, and be more
difficult to do with bio fuels.

>> I'll pay more for my Grandkid's new toys to see " Made in USA" on
>> them. Bring them ON! I
>
> Maybe you would. But most people >say< this, then they turn right around
> and buy what's cheapest, just as they always have. That's why so many
> things are made in China - because people buy them. That, and the fact
> that
> it means more profit for the US company at a given price level, which
> stockholders demand. If you're the CEO, you get rewarded financially for
> this. Who can blame them?

I somewhat agree, but I'm in a position to have a lot of data on this. Once
a product becomes a commodity product, competition between companies and
retailers gets ruthless, and margin shrinks. Once one company goes overseas
to have it produced, "more profit" doesn't last long, prices drop. Other
companies then have to go overseas, or get out of the business. It doesn't
so much determine who makes a higher profit as it determines who operates
with the usual profit, and who gets out. It's a natural function of
Capitolism. The most efficient compete until it almost isn't worth the
trouble, the less efficient move on or die off. It provides most Americans
with a better standard of living, except the ones that lose their job to
outsourcing. It will cause a lot of grief until Chinese labor gets more
expensive, like Japanese labor did. It's already starting to happen in the
more industrialized cities. The bottom line is, for most companies,
outsourcing isn't about more profit, it's about survival. Only a shift in
global economics, or import duties, could change this.

> If you want more EV parts made in the USA, then don't buy imported EV
> parts.
> Simple as that. If you want EV parts to which less environmental damage
> can
> be ascribed, buy US-made or EU-made components rather than components from
> Asia. Equally simple.

That sounds like a protectionist attack to me. You don't know that imported
parts necessarily cause more harm, and if they do, the best solution may not
be to bring production back here. To me, a generalization like this says we
want our standard of living to be raised by artificially protecting our
market from global competition, we'll use the environment for justification.
Let the third world starve while we can afford to blow resources on bigger
cars, bigger electric bills, more toys...

> There are people manufacturing EV components in the US and some of them
> are
> right on this list. At least one of them bends over backward to patronize
> US suppliers.
>
> Again, I'm not saying this is the right decision for everyone, and I don't
> mean to offend anyone who puts price at the top of the decision tree.
> Everybody makes buying decisions based on his own situation. All I'm
> trying
> to do is provide some extra input for those decisions.

Here's another consideration, and it's not always about price. Manual labor
should be diverted to where the standard of living needs fixing. Generate a
higher standard of living in the US by creating more jobs, and what do
americans do with their extra money? I'd guess they tend to buy bigger
houses and cars, drive more, use air travel for vacations, buy more consumer
goods, use more energy in general. We're already by far the biggest energy
users, and way too high on the carbon footprint list. American's basic
needs, housing, food and health care, are pretty good already. We tend so
squander additional income in some pretty environmentally unfriendly ways.
Our recreational use of energy, boats, jet skis, taking a flight (carbon) to
Vegas (an environmental nightmare in itself), driving to the Super Bowl etc
makes me want to hurl already. Generate a higher standard of living in a
third world country, where does the money go? Generally they have a lot of
catching up to do in terms of basic health care and nutrition. Generally
they aren't squandering it in wasteful ways like we are. Is it morally
right to try to keep the jobs here on the basis of ecology, instead of just
addressing ecological problems over there where they need the jobs a whole
lot worse than we do? I'd guess raising our standard of living causes a lot
more environmental damage due to indiscriminate use of disposable income
than floating products across the ocean does. Just my guess.

>>
>> OK I'm getting off topic trying to make a point? Maybe A123 could make
>> them
>> here? Or a Thunder Sky branch plant HERE?
>
> Isn't Jukka talking about a possible Thundersky plant in Finland? If they
> can build one there, with Finland's famous high taxes and the EU's
> stringent
> environmental laws, surely we could build one here. All we need is
> someone
> with sufficient drive and connections - and lots of investors.

Realistically, who would invest in a factory here when the general concensus
is that manufacturing must be done somewhere else to be competitive? As far
as I know, only items that are not built in large quantity (the Chinese
don't bother with small market stuff), and items that need a lot of
attention from a lot of technical people (like high end semiconductor
manufacturing) can be competitively made here. If BEV's become more common,
what are now specialty parts will become commodity products, production will
go wherever it's the most cost effective, and prices will drop like a rock,
which makes BEV's more affordable, which is good for the environment. I'm
finding in my business that I've either got to continually change my product
line to stay out on the specialty market fringe where there isn't third
world competition, or get hooked up with third world manufacturing to remain
competitive as products become commodity products.

The alternative is protectionism, intentionally maintaining a difference in
standard of living that promotes energy squandering here, and starvation and
poor health care there. Personally, I vote for global competition, let those
people earn themselves a better life.

>
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> EVDL Administrator

I guess my thought is that building parts in China could reduce prices
enough to make BEV's more competitive and more common, which would easily
offset the environmental impact of shipping. Heck, a lot of our ICE cars
are shipped here from Asia, you're just offsetting that if you replace them
with BEV parts from Asia. There are environmental issues in Asia, they are
making improvements. But most environmental damage done in asia is done in
a desperate attempt to feed their people. A lot of ours is done for
recreation and self indulgence. Let's clean ours up before we point
fingers.

Marty


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

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

Here is the reality. The standard of living of the average Chinese will never match that of the US. The planet does not have the carrying capacity for outsourcing to collectively raise up the standard of living of the planet to an idyllic level. There are going to be winners and losers. It probably doesn't even have enough key resources to sustain the current global population even if we had unlimited energy. So the argument that we can just "wait out" the dark ages of Chinese manufacturing after which they will become the next Japan is false. The only way the Chinese can rise is if the rest of the world drops in counterbalance. If history had unrolled differently, when oil was more plentiful, it might have been a different story. Maybe the world could have settled into some egalitarian middlepoint between poverty and luxury. But this is what we've got to work with: overshoot. So the capital that the US sends to China in outsourcing
manufacturing is good for them, but will bottom out with fossil fuel depletion.

>From an environmental perspective, even if China had unlimited
fossil
fuels, they will pollute themselves into oblivion if they truly
continue
to try to be the world's factory. Manufacturing really should be more
distributed on that basis alone. The industrial zones of China are
currently as polluted as Dickensian england. On that level, we're not
doing them ANY favors and they would be better off living a rural
agricultural life.


Keeping them hard at work making batteries is a good way to try to mitigate the above is as long as it's accompanied by a push towards cleaner electricity generation. But we're talking about rolling up an absurdly large hill. The scale of the task is almost beyond comprehension. It's so daunting that the elemental composition of batteries (or solar cells) will be a key factor in how much any of this is going to help. Those who are doing EV conversions and plan to power their car and household electricity off the grid are the privileged few. I am hoping new technology helps enable more and more people to join that club, but the majority of us will face a "power down" future, not simply a shift to renewables, because they won't afford the up-front costs to switch to renewables. The only truly cheap thing to do is conserve.




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

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

I have nothing against greenies but do try when you talk off list to stress the economey of evs over the green aspect because money will speak louder than enviorment to average joe and green is a good byproduct of ev's that turn people off because of the fringe group that promote green and are way too radicale and some of us do not want to be assocated with that mill stone on our neck . but you are welcome to talk freely here as long as you keep close to topic and stay away from the radical weirdo which I don't thonk you are from your approach to the topic.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Roden<mailto:[email protected]>
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

On 16 Aug 2007 at 10:53, Bob Rice wrote:

> Obviously there is a market for locally produced batteries, or he
> wouldn't have been making them here, in the first place?

I realize that not everyone on the EVDL is interested in EVs for their
"greenness." I hope that I can discuss it a bit and those who ARE
interested will take part thoughtfully, while those are are not interested
will just delete this message and refrain from criticizing us or calling us
names.

After all, I don't race EVs, in fact don't really like racing, but I don't
complain about others discussing racing on the EVDL, nor do I insult them or
call them names. So, those who aren't interested in the environmental angle
on EVs, please give us a break on this thread - which I think is solidly on
topic. I promise not to denigrate you for your decisions.

Anyway, for us "greenies," I think it's worth considering that imported
batteries carry some extra environmental baggage.

For one thing, environmental laws are not very strongly enforced in China
(and probably Mexico and some other cheap-labor countries). Lead and
chemical pollution is desperately, fatally high in some parts of China. So
those who have a "green" side might want to investigate the environmental
profile of the factories producing their batteries, be they lead or lithium.

The other consideration is the amount of embedded energy (most of it from
petroleum and coal) that goes into imported batteries.

If you buy USBMC batteries, they'll be shipped from CA or GA, whichever is
closer. Presumably Trojan works similarly. But if you buy batteries from
China, they're shipped literally halfway round the world in a freighter
using fuel oil. Then they're trucked or rail-transported closer to you, and
finally trucked again to you or your dealer.

And that's not all. I've read that at least some of the lead batteries that
are recycled in the US are actually shipped to China or South America for
processing. (Someone correct me if this is wrong.) This burns petroleum
and moves the recycling process to areas where environmental laws may be lax
(see above).

Also, Chinese and South American manufacturing is generally less energy
efficient than European and US manufacturing, so more energy may be used to
produce the batteries there than would be used here.

Then, the finished batteries are shipped back to the states, using still
more energy and petroleum.

So, while the dollar price is lower because of the low cost of labor, the
energy cost of imported batteries is probably higher. I can't say how MUCH
higher, as I don't have the time or access to research materials to
calculate it. I do think it would be interesting, and I hope not dismaying,
to factor this into (or, rather, out of) the energy savings of our EVs.

> Has the State of Or. offered Rich and Otmar any buildings, tax breaks,
> employee training?

I don't know the answer, but I can tell you that EV companies have proposed
manufacturing plants in various places, and in some cases, they've been
promised tax breaks. Often, the companies never build the plants. IIRC,
the Korean operation that developed the Parade, ATTRD, proposed building a
plant somewhere in the Midwest, and were promised financial help by the
regional govemment. No facility ever materialized. This leaves the tax-
break climate less receptive for legitimate (or better managed) EV-related
businesses.

>
> I'll pay more for my Grandkid's new toys to see " Made in USA" on
> them. Bring them ON! I

Maybe you would. But most people >say< this, then they turn right around
and buy what's cheapest, just as they always have. That's why so many
things are made in China - because people buy them. That, and the fact that
it means more profit for the US company at a given price level, which
stockholders demand. If you're the CEO, you get rewarded financially for
this. Who can blame them?

If you want more EV parts made in the USA, then don't buy imported EV parts.
Simple as that. If you want EV parts to which less environmental damage can
be ascribed, buy US-made or EU-made components rather than components from
Asia. Equally simple.

There are people manufacturing EV components in the US and some of them are
right on this list. At least one of them bends over backward to patronize
US suppliers.

Again, I'm not saying this is the right decision for everyone, and I don't
mean to offend anyone who puts price at the top of the decision tree.
Everybody makes buying decisions based on his own situation. All I'm trying
to do is provide some extra input for those decisions.

>
> OK I'm getting off topic trying to make a point? Maybe A123 could make them
> here? Or a Thunder Sky branch plant HERE?

Isn't Jukka talking about a possible Thundersky plant in Finland? If they
can build one there, with Finland's famous high taxes and the EU's stringent
environmental laws, surely we could build one here. All we need is someone
with sufficient drive and connections - and lots of investors.

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/<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/<http://www.evdl.org/help/> .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


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

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

It's actually kind of tough to argue for EVs on economy. ICEs are a
commodity item and get a huge advantage from fully-amortized designs and the
economies of scale.

EVs don't look much better, if at all, until you bundle real external costs
into the costs of operation. Externalities are given some consideration in
Europe, in the form of taxes. In the states, even this slight boost for EVs
is largely missing. Here, many of the "real" costs of petroleum are
distributed into other "invoices."

There's no sense in arguing about why this is or pointing fingers at
politicians or corporations or what-have-you. This is the situation; we
have no choice but to work with it.

It's also hard to argue that "greenness" gets much traction. It does have
some favor with the public, in certain demographic or psychographic groups
However, it's more evidenced as an "attaboy" for >us< when we drive EVs,
than in something that >they< personally embrace. Other factors influencing
transportation choices are more important to them. Most of us have probably
seen this in action, with friends who think it's very cool that we do EVs,
but when pressed will find all kinds of reasons that EVs just won't QUITE
work for them.

I do think we can get some mileage (sorry) out of the independence argument -
that EVs don't require petroleum imported from regions that can cause us
grief as a nation. There is also a significant annoyance with the oil
companies. This is a good place to start. The idea that you can make your
own "fuel" for EVs from sunlight or wind may enhance this argument, but also
may be a bit too far out for some folks.

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]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

There is no doubt that we are early adopters. But when me in my garage
can come close in costs per mile to manufactures who have had 100 years
already, i am doing pretty good.
I think a main point is the "car cost $800". That is just because of the
mass production. Have you priced rebuilding a motor and transmission on
an ICE recently?
My pontiac at 120,000 miles blew a cylinder and I had to replace the
motor, $1000 at a wrecking yard because it would be $4000 to rebuild.
I only bothered because the tranny had been rebuilt at 85K miles.
another $1000.
But that is doing the labor myself. My sister had the motor changed in
her montero (200,000miles, she lives in the country) and it cost her a
lot more.
I would much much rather work on an EV!
I have solar and want to get more. So that pays the fuel cost. The lead
is the only issue I see with ev's. I consider it just a placeholder for
real batteries to come.

I also think the maintanence costs have a huge amount of variability in
them. TYpe of car, type of driving, I know that when i lived in the
country my cars lasted 200K-300K miles, I often got rid of them cause
everything else was falling apart. When I moved to the city my cars
started going out at 100K miles.(my mistake, i bought american?)

Since you do solar, I have a question. I want more PV so i can totally
offset my power bill but I have primarily a west and an east facing roof.
Although people usually discourage putting solar on the east roof, i
think they are missing out.

1) solar panels are more efficient when cool
2) Inverters just don't produce below a threshold.

here is my idea.


west roof <> east roof
< >
< >
< >
< >
| |
_|_ _|_
/_\ /_\
|_____________________|
|
inverter

So early in the morning, the east panels run the inverter and as the sun
moves overhead the west panels begin to produce and the east panels
start to drop off. But the inverter is running during the time period
where either the east or west bank by itself wouldn't be enough to keep
the inverter going. the Mppt in the inverter would still seek a balance.
Instead of 3full hours from an east array and 5full hours from a west
array I get 10 full hours?
This would allow me to increase the size of my system on the DC side and
not have to worry about getting another inverter.

Question how many hours a day are the typical sunnyboy inverters rated for?

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

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

> Behalf Of David Roden
>>Snip>>

> Isn't Jukka talking about a possible Thundersky plant in Finland? If
> they can build one there, with Finland's famous high taxes and the EU's
> stringent environmental laws, surely we could build one here. All we need is
> someone with sufficient drive and connections - and lots of investors.
>
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> EVDL Administrator

Anyone SERIOUSLY interested in the above idea please contact me off-list.

--
Stay Charged!
Hump
I-5, Blossvale NY

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

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

 

[EVDL List]

Re: [EVDL] Getting a bit OT - TS warnings ...

>Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 7:29:16 -0600
>From: Tim Humphrey <[email protected]>

>Anyone SERIOUSLY interested in the above idea please contact me off-list.

Tim what is your offlist email.

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