|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
 Posted - 05/06/2011 : 08:54:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Fripp
Another problem I've heard is that we could be trading "dependence on foreign oil" to "dependence on foreign minerals" if, for example, we are using lithium-based batteries.
|
That is an interesting point which I had never even thought about. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 05/06/2011 09:02:52 |
 |
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 09:41:45 [Permalink]
|
These are two examples that I've read brief blurbs about: lithium and cobalt, both are used in battery production (which also figure heavily in our cel phones and personal electronics), and both have huge deposits in countries prone to civil unrest.
Obviously, the details are hazy, but the implications certainly give one pause. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 10:01:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Fripp
These are two examples that I've read brief blurbs about: lithium and cobalt, both are used in battery production (which also figure heavily in our cel phones and personal electronics), and both have huge deposits in countries prone to civil unrest.
Obviously, the details are hazy, but the implications certainly give one pause.
|
Indeed! I am a firm believer in the law of unintended consequences and at first glance your point has at least the potential to be a big one.
Like I said I had never even considered that point before so when I get some extra time I'd like to follow up on that and see what is being said about this concern on the WWW. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 05/06/2011 10:03:00 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 10:06:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| Want to see demand for gasoline drop like a rock? |
Not unless an affordable and practical alternative to gasoline is already in place first. Like it or not affordable gas is the backbone of the US economic engine. I would be against breaking that backbone UNTIL an affordable and particle alternative backbone is discovered, tested and proven to be able to replace the current backbone with little or no hiccup in the transition. In other words lets not burn our current bridge until our new bridge is complete, tested, proven and ready for the transition. To burn our current bridge before the new bridge is complete and proven is just insane.
Besides jacking up fuel costs with no alternative in place jacks up food costs in the US and all over the world. The cost to farm and transport is drastically effected by fuel costs. You have now put food cost out of reach for millions who previously were right on the bubble. |
There are two problems with the above two paragraphs. The most-obvious one is that the equipment and trucks used to produce and haul food mostly run on diesel, not gasoline. My "plan" (haha!) to keep gasoline prices high need not apply to all fuels equally.
Second, the people who use cars the most - daily commuters - often already have alternative transportation available to them for their commuting needs. What has to change for them to become bus or light-rail riders isn't an alternative to gasoline but instead a better attitude from employers regarding scheduling and a better attitude from commuters regarding desires and needs (some commuters are sticking with their cars just in case they need to do some shopping after work - they need better planning, instead). Jacking up gasoline prices with no alternatives in hand may very well be the push that's required for those attitudes to change.
The hypermilers' adage that the best way to get better mileage is to "adjust the nut behind the wheel" applies to more than just private autos.| At the end of the day when the electric car is plugged in being charged the electricity charging the car is being produced mostly by burning coal. |
Controlling emissions from a single power plant that charges (say) a million electric cars would be easier and cheaper than controlling the emissions of a million gas-powered cars. That single power plant wouldn't need a million exhaust sensors, for example.| So I guess my question is how do you see this time line of converting to batteries and alternative fuel panning out? |
I'm making no predictions. If the goal is to get away from gasoline, though, we could start that part of the transition today. I never said it would be painless. Some things that need to be done, hurt.| So give us your gut feel and best guess on when this window might start opening up to the point where the batteries and alternative fuels are now at least in the same ballpark as their gasoline brethren in practicality and affordability. |
I don't even know if alternative technologies should be as practical or affordable as gasoline. An intensive re-examination of the structure of our communities and cities might suggest social engineering strategies which would make the two-car garage a curious historical footnote, for example. You're asking what we should do to replace the gas-powered car as it is used today, but I don't think we should assume that such a replacement is desirable.| And how do we charge all of these millions and millions of batteries now out there demanding juice? |
More centralized power stations, obviously, with an upgraded and strengthened grid.
Look at all the transportation costs associated with getting gasoline from refineries to your local gas station. The same amount of useful power can be delivered (to your home, even!) much more cheaply and cleanly by wire, no driver needed. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 11:26:31 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| There are two problems with the above two paragraphs. The most-obvious one is that the equipment and trucks used to produce and haul food mostly run on diesel, not gasoline. My "plan" (haha!) to keep gasoline prices high need not apply to all fuels equally. |
Even if you only jack up gasoline you are still potentialy pushing millions into poverty who were right on the bubble before their weekly energy costs were tripled.
| Second, the people who use cars the most - daily commuters - often already have alternative transportation available to them for their commuting needs. What has to change for them to become bus or light-rail riders isn't an alternative to gasoline but instead a better attitude from employers regarding scheduling and a better attitude from commuters regarding desires and needs (some commuters are sticking with their cars just in case they need to do some shopping after work - they need better planning, instead). |
For those Americans who live and work in a big metro area all of this is something to be considered. Many Americans, such as myself, live in small towns and work in other small towns. Not only is public transportation not available, but it would not be practical either.
| Jacking up gasoline prices with no alternatives in hand may very well be the push that's required for those attitudes to change. |
My guess is that you are in the minority here for being in favor of this. Like I said I don't burn my bridges until I have a proven new bridge in place and fully operational. And jacking up the toll on the current bridge to pay for the new bridge only hurts those who have to depend on the bridge to get back and forth to work and the grocery each day. And those who were previously on the bubble can now no longer even afford to use the bridge at all. I see this plan hurting a lot of people and slowing the economy down both at the same time. Again, cutting off our own nose to spite the face.
| The hypermilers' adage that the best way to get better mileage is to "adjust the nut behind the wheel" applies to more than just private autos. |
When goes goes over $4/gallon this is just a temporary band-aid solution at best.
| Controlling emissions from a single power plant that charges (say) a million electric cars would be easier and cheaper than controlling the emissions of a million gas-powered cars. That single power plant wouldn't need a million exhaust sensors, for example. |
I'll have to look more into this. I have no idea what exhaust sensors for coal fired power plants vs. exhaust sensors for automobiles cost, for example. I have no idea what amount of C02 comes from burning coal over burning gas. Developing....
My point was that most/many people do not even consider where the electricity to run the car is coming from. It just comes out of the wall for all they know.
| I'm making no predictions. If the goal is to get away from gasoline, though, we could start that part of the transition today. I never said it would be painless. Some things that need to be done, hurt |
.
I just don't want to see us cut off our own nose to spite the face.
| I don't even know if alternative technologies should be as practical or affordable as gasoline. An intensive re-examination of the structure of our communities and cities might suggest social engineering strategies which would make the two-car garage a curious historical footnote, for example. You're asking what we should do to replace the gas-powered car as it is used today, but I don't think we should assume that such a replacement is desirable. |
But now you are talking about a total infrastructure rebuild. Not saying we can't do it or should not look at that option but in all practical reality we are now looking at decades and trillions and trillions of dollars before this dream is even close to a reality. In the mean time we will still need gasoline to keep the US economic engine running.
| More centralized power stations, obviously, with an upgraded and strengthened grid. |
Again, not saying we can't do it but the reality is that we are looking at decades and trillions of dollars worth of work here.
| Look at all the transportation costs associated with getting gasoline from refineries to your local gas station. The same amount of useful power can be delivered (to your home, even!) much more cheaply and cleanly by wire, no driver needed. |
I am not an expert here but lets take the volt, for example. It MSRPs for around $45K (maybe below $40k with government added incentives) and gets about 40 miles to a charge. While a gasoline car of similar size will run around $20k or less and get around 400 miles to a tank of gas.
When I have time I'll look and see if any studies have already been done but it would be neat to see the cost and C02 emissions to burn the coal to produce the electricity that goes to your house to charge your volt so you can travel 40 miles vs what it takes to get usable gasoline to your car to go 400 miles on a tank of gas.
From everything I have read it takes a lot of electricity (i.e. burning coal) to get the volt to travel just 40 miles. So the real interesting comparison would be the cost per mile breakdown. How much cost and escaped emissions (burning coal) go into getting one mile of transportation out of electric car vs cost and escaped emissions to get a gasoline car to travel the same mile?
We also seem to throw away most of the batteries manufactured in this country, even the recharable ones eventually end up in the landfill. I wonder what will become of these millions of car batteries once they go bad and need replaced? |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Ebone4rock
SFN Regular
USA
894 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 11:46:48 [Permalink]
|
originally posted by Bill scott
For those Americans who live and work in a big metro area all of this is something to be considered. Many Americans, such as myself, live in small towns and work in other small towns. Not only is public transportation not available, but it would not be practical either.
|
Bill brings up a great point. There seems to be a cultural divide between the urban folks and the rural folks. I think it would be great if both understood that they each have different needs.
Sure, driving a little matchbox car is just fine for sitting in traffic jams. People like me on the other hand need a gas guzzling SUV for fun things like hauling wood and dead animal carcasses around. You can't fit 4x8 sheets of plywood in a Prius.
Public transportation? Whats that. (I'm being facetious, the city that I work in has a good bus system) I have never been on a city bus nor would I want to. |
Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 11:58:19 [Permalink]
|
Today's cars runs just as well on E85 as they do on gasoline, with minor adjustments. No need to scrap your car/motorcycle/other gasoline-consuming hobby-machines.
Granted, corn-ethanol is not ideal with the fermenting process as it is done today, but cellulose-processing yeasts are being developed as we speak, and other crops which works better on less rich soil than corn demands. There doesn't have to be a food vs gas competition.
If I'm not mistaken, sugarcane for ethanol is being tested in both Florida and California.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 11:59:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Ebone4rock
originally posted by Bill scott
For those Americans who live and work in a big metro area all of this is something to be considered. Many Americans, such as myself, live in small towns and work in other small towns. Not only is public transportation not available, but it would not be practical either.
|
Bill brings up a great point. There seems to be a cultural divide between the urban folks and the rural folks. I think it would be great if both understood that they each have different needs.
Sure, driving a little matchbox car is just fine for sitting in traffic jams. People like me on the other hand need a gas guzzling SUV for fun things like hauling wood and dead animal carcasses around. You can't fit 4x8 sheets of plywood in a Prius.
Public transportation? Whats that. (I'm being facetious, the city that I work in has a good bus system) I have never been on a city bus nor would I want to.
|
And I have been on some public transportaion in Chicago where you are putting your life and wallet on the line by just getting on that thing. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 12:17:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Today's cars runs just as well on E85 as they do on gasoline, with minor adjustments. No need to scrap your car/motorcycle/other gasoline-consuming hobby-machines.
Granted, corn-ethanol is not ideal with the fermenting process as it is done today, but cellulose-processing yeasts are being developed as we speak, and other crops which works better on less rich soil than corn demands. There doesn't have to be a food vs gas competition.
If I'm not mistaken, sugarcane for ethanol is being tested in both Florida and California.
|
Assuming that all you are saying is true, the cars run as good on E85, easy to convert current cars over and it does not have to compete with crops that would otherwise be used for food, then it sure seems like this has more potential to hit the point where the practicality and affordability is there way before the electric cars get there. I'll have to look into this stuff more, too, as admittedly I am no expert here either. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 13:51:17 [Permalink]
|
Cellulosic ethanol (ethanol made from plant cellulose, lignin, and other long chain polysacharides) can be made from any plant material at all. You don't have to sacrifice farmland, and you don't have to grow any specific crop. You find some stuff that grows wildly, doesn't deplete the local soil, then you use some land that can't be used for anything like farming and you plant a bunch of whatever.
You let it grow, you cut it down, you throw it in the fermentation vat.
It can be done with plants that require no fertilizer or other argiculture chemicals. It can even be done with seaweed, no fertilizer or anything else required. Massive offshore seaweed farms could crank out material year round. Just need a floating (probably permanently anchored) rig to hold it.
Ethanol from something like that could be very close to carbon neutral too.
I propose that we strip the oil companies of their $60-100billion a year tax subsidy and give it to companies with viable prototypes for cellulosic ethanol production and other functional prototypes for alternate energy, and require them to implement their technology ASAP.
That doesn't break oil companies, it barely cuts into their massive profits.
The only reason that hasn't happened is because it does cut into the massive profits of oil companies, screws with the biggest redistribution of wealth in human history in fact, and we all know how hard it is to get corporations to stop milking the public tit once we start giving them welfare!
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 05/06/2011 : 17:22:49 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dude |
| propose that we strip the oil companies of their $60-100billion a year tax subsidy and give it to companies with viable prototypes for cellulosic ethanol production |
I will second that.
| The only reason that hasn't happened is because it does cut into the massive profits of oil companies, screws with the biggest redistribution of wealth in human history in fact, and we all know how hard it is to get corporations to stop milking the public tit once we start giving them welfare! |
Yep.
|
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 05/07/2011 : 03:04:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Ebone4rock
originally posted by Bill scott
For those Americans who live and work in a big metro area all of this is something to be considered. Many Americans, such as myself, live in small towns and work in other small towns. Not only is public transportation not available, but it would not be practical either.
|
Bill brings up a great point. There seems to be a cultural divide between the urban folks and the rural folks. I think it would be great if both understood that they each have different needs.
|
What's the point of living some other small town than the one where you're working? |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Ebone4rock
SFN Regular
USA
894 Posts |
Posted - 05/07/2011 : 06:08:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by Ebone4rock
originally posted by Bill scott
For those Americans who live and work in a big metro area all of this is something to be considered. Many Americans, such as myself, live in small towns and work in other small towns. Not only is public transportation not available, but it would not be practical either.
|
Bill brings up a great point. There seems to be a cultural divide between the urban folks and the rural folks. I think it would be great if both understood that they each have different needs.
|
What's the point of living some other small town than the one where you're working?
|
For peace and tranquility. |
Haole with heart, thats all I'll ever be. I'm not a part of the North Shore society. Stuck on the shoulder, that's where you'll find me. Digging for scraps with the kooks in line. -Offspring |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/07/2011 : 18:07:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
| Originally posted by Dude |
| propose that we strip the oil companies of their $60-100billion a year tax subsidy and give it to companies with viable prototypes for cellulosic ethanol production |
I will second that.
| The only reason that hasn't happened is because it does cut into the massive profits of oil companies, screws with the biggest redistribution of wealth in human history in fact, and we all know how hard it is to get corporations to stop milking the public tit once we start giving them welfare! |
Yep.
|
Wait, I wasn't being sarcastic and Bill agrees with me.... I need to check my vitals.....
There are 15 cellulosic ethanol plants in operation or being constructed (according to a reference on wikipedia) in the US right now. We need many more. This kind of operation doesn't have to follow the giant oil refinery model, these can be localized and regional. Each one specializing in the type of plant easiest to grow in their area. Once there are a few hundred of these things up and running the cost to produce ethanol will drop, and if we grant them reasonable tax subsidies they will provide a viable replacement for fossil fuels.
If there were large scale government support for this industry and the basic research needed to perfect the genetically engineered microorganisms, the future cost to produce ethanol could end up being less than the cost to drill and refine oil.
We are retarded, almost beyond comprehension, for not having scaled these things up already!
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 05/07/2011 : 22:06:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Assuming that all you are saying is true, the cars run as good on E85... I'll have to look into this stuff more, too, as admittedly I am no expert here either. |
An example of a real non-expert: a guy where I work bought a new car a few months back, and just recently at work was asking what the "Flex Fuel" logo on his car meant. He bought a car capable of running on E85 without even knowing it.
Also:| Even if you only jack up gasoline you are still potentialy pushing millions into poverty who were right on the bubble before their weekly energy costs were tripled. |
Where are these people living and what are they doing for work that both requires a car and pays so little that an increase in fuel costs is going to drive them into the poor house?| For those Americans who live and work in a big metro area all of this is something to be considered. Many Americans, such as myself, live in small towns and work in other small towns. Not only is public transportation not available, but it would not be practical either. |
Nobody is saying that there is a one-size-fits-all solution, and the gasoline-powered car probably isn't even an optimal solution for people in your situation, either. People just commuting between small towns should probably be in E85 hybrids. People who need to haul stuff between small towns probably should have gone diesel a long time ago.
(My job is in a place with no public transportation, and lots of people who work there live in even more rural areas. Many of them spend their hour-long commutes in pick-up trucks or SUVs, empty, while their higher-mileage second car sits at home just in case their spouse wants to run an errand. It's completely backwards from how they ought to behave to maximize their budgets. As I noted, the thing that needs to change the most is attitudes.)| Jacking up gasoline prices with no alternatives in hand may very well be the push that's required for those attitudes to change. |
My guess is that you are in the minority here for being in favor of this. |
I said "may," not "will." It's an idea that should be considered.| Like I said I don't burn my bridges until I have a proven new bridge in place and fully operational. And jacking up the toll on the current bridge to pay for the new bridge only hurts those who have to depend on the bridge to get back and forth to work and the grocery each day. And those who were previously on the bubble can now no longer even afford to use the bridge at all. I see this plan hurting a lot of people and slowing the economy down both at the same time. |
Again, some things that need to be done can be painful. But we need not just throw people under the natural-gas-powered bus. During the transitional period, they could be helped (using some of the extra tax money) in ways other than just keeping gasoline cheap.| Again, cutting off our own nose to spite the face. |
I'm not sure you understand that saying.| The hypermilers' adage that the best way to get better mileage is to "adjust the nut behind the wheel" applies to more than just private autos. |
When goes goes over $4/gallon this is just a temporary band-aid solution at best. |
When we keep gas at over $4/gal, we need a permanent solution, and it's going to start with people's attitudes towards cars.| I'll have to look more into this. I have no idea what exhaust sensors for coal fired power plants vs. exhaust sensors for automobiles cost, for example. I have no idea what amount of C02 comes from burning coal over burning gas. Developing.... |
It doesn't have to be burning coal. That may be the cheapest thing we've got today, but it won't be tomorrow. Despite a lack of a strong Federal push, people are building wind farms all over the place. Attitudes about power production already are changing.| My point was that most/many people do not even consider where the electricity to run the car is coming from. It just comes out of the wall for all they know. |
No, the power producers are worrying about that. They are in it for the long haul, and so need to assume - before it happens - that fossil fuels are going to be priced out of the market, either through supply depletion or legislation.| I just don't want to see us cut off our own nose to spite the face. |
Yeah, see, it's more like getting a nose-job. Some temporary pain and discomfort for long-term improvement in how one looks (at least, that's the intent for those who get nose-jobs).| But now you are talking about a total infrastructure rebuild. |
It's going to happen sometime, anyway. May as well do it now before the coastal gas stations are flooded by rising sea levels.| Not saying we can't do it or should not look at that option but in all practical reality we are now looking at decades and trillions and trillions of dollars before this dream is even close to a reality. In the mean time we will still need gasoline to keep the US economic engine running. |
Yeah, we shouldn't consider it because it'll be difficult.  | I am not an expert here but lets take the volt, for example. |
Let's not. I'm not impressed with that thing, and neither are consumers, it seems.| When I have time I'll look and see if any studies have already been done but it would be neat to see the cost and C02 emissions to burn the coal to produce the electricity that goes to your house to charge your volt so you can travel 40 miles vs what it takes to get usable gasoline to your car to go 400 miles on a tank of gas. |
Don't focus on coal, either.| From everything I have read it takes a lot of electricity (i.e. burning coal) to get the volt to travel just 40 miles. |
The amount of power required to move a one-ton vehicle at 60 MPH for an hour is the same whether it's powered by gasoline or electricity, and measured in kilowatt-hours. So what you'll need to examine is the cost-per-kWh of various electric power plants vs. gasoline (which is 33 kWh/gallon, minus the tank-to-wheels inefficiencies).
Hey, I've got a power bill here: I'm looking at about 12 cents per kWh, or about $3.96 for 33 kWh. That's the same cost as gasoline, today. But if, as I've read, gasoline is 5-to-6 times less efficient from the tank to the wheels as electricity is from batteries to wheels, then gasoline is 5-to-6 times more expensive per kilowatt-hour. You can handle the rest of the comparisons.| We also seem to throw away most of the batteries manufactured in this country, even the recharable ones eventually end up in the landfill. I wonder what will become of these millions of car batteries once they go bad and need replaced? |
What do you do with your used engine oil? If you throw it away, it may be illegal (like it is in my county). Jiffy Lube doesn't throw engine oil away, they recycle it. Shops that replace car batteries will also ensure the old ones are recycled.
(Throwing away alkaline or rechargeable AA batteries is also a bad idea.) |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Presidential facebook statement
