'Perpetual motion' drives electric cars forward

[Zingari]

He's technically right, but just trying to be clever. It's the conservation of energy law. The energy IS changed along the way into heat, sound, etc via friction, which is then 'lost' to the atmosphere.

So put it this way, there is a lower energy efficiency with Electric cars.

ah yes i see , what i meant was there is a loss of the usable energy

all cleared up now

[Guest]

The point is on energy is lost in closed system, but it is changed into different types of energy, Kinetic, Heat, Friction etc I think it was semantics on FIF's part.

You call it semantics I call it life.

In fact it's the reason that we can possibly to seen to never die - to have an after-life. Whatever energies we have dissipate into other things.

and there is the answer to clean, unlimited energy. Now what is the question?

[I am Rod Hull]

yes that's true

i was considering buying an electric car , (either a reva g wizz or an aixam) because i've got solar panels on my roof and could have charged up the batteries for free during the daytime . but the cost of replacement batteries would have negated any savings

Have you considered a hammerhead eagle thrust?

[Guest]

yes that's true

i was considering buying an electric car , (either a reva g wizz or an aixam) because i've got solar panels on my roof and could have charged up the batteries for free during the daytime . but the cost of replacement batteries would have negated any savings

But the batteries are becoming more and more efficient all the time.

What it needs is for the "world" to put a deadline on carburant powered cars and then things like batteries would get the funding they need to be super efficient.

Look at computers and micro chips as an example of how car batteries could change within a decade.

Have you considered a hammerhead eagle thrust?

I think he covered that when stating that the tradesmen always said no to his invitation.

[Zingari]

But the batteries are becoming more and more efficient all the time.

What it needs is for the "world" to put a deadline on carburant powered cars and then things like batteries would get the funding they need to be super efficient.

Look at computers and micro chips as an example of how car batteries could change within a decade.

I think he covered that when stating that the tradesmen always said no to his invitation.

i'll look into it again then , but i've only got a couple of grand spare for this type of investment and my only option seems to be 5 year old reva g wizz

Have you considered a hammerhead eagle thrust?

i've just had a look at that , is it some sort of armour plated tank ?

[Webbo]

This is the only answer.

[Captain...]

But the batteries are becoming more and more efficient all the time.

What it needs is for the "world" to put a deadline on carburant powered cars and then things like batteries would get the funding they need to be super efficient.

Look at computers and micro chips as an example of how car batteries could change within a decade.

Agree with that, I would probably go hybrid though before committing to a full electric car, there just isn't the infrastructure to support a full leccy yet as your only car.

[I am Rod Hull]

i've just had a look at that , is it some sort of armour plated tank ?

I think its an Albanian rip-off of the Hummer, but they seem to be using state of the art light weight materials.

[Guest]

I believe that there is a manufacturer who only leases you the battery and then instead of charging the battery while you wait swaps an already re-charged battery in. But until governments actually make the change the infrastructure and a common plan won't be in place.

The automobile and Petrol "industries" have a lot to answer for.

[Webbo]

I believe that there is a manufacturer who only leases you the battery and then instead of charging the battery while you wait swaps an already re-charged battery in. But until governments actually make the change the infrastructure and a common plan won't be in place.

The automobile and Petrol "industries" have a lot to answer for.

The govt subsidise electric cars and it's hardly the oil companies' fault if the technology isn't much good yet.

[Guest]

The govt subsidise electric cars and it's hardly the oil companies' fault if the technology isn't much good yet.

How naive.

Of course it's the car and petrol industry that has halted ALL forms of alternative power improvement. They have TOLD the governments not to help investment. There have been some incredible alternative energy breakthrough ideas which haven't been funded at all, or that have been bought out by the aforementioned industries and left to rot. If even a small percentage of the car and oil industry budget had been given over to alt energy we would be living in a much greener cleaner world now.

[Webbo]

How naive.

Of course it's the car and petrol industry that has halted ALL forms of alternative power improvement. They have TOLD the governments not to help investment. There have been some incredible alternative energy breakthrough ideas which haven't been funded at all, or that have been bought out by the aforementioned industries and left to rot. If even a small percentage of the car and oil industry budget had been given over to alt energy we would be living in a much greener cleaner world now.

Oh, right. So building a load of windmills and subsidising solar panels is all part of the con? They're too clever for the likes of me.

[Captain...]

Oh, right. So building a load of windmills and subsidising solar panels is all part of the con? They're too clever for the likes of me.

The technology for wind energy has been around for over a century and has been under funded and under developed, I found this on wiki:

Fossil fuels are subsidized by many governments, and wind power and other forms of renewable energy are also often subsidized. For example a 2009 study by the Environmental Law Institute^[107] assessed the size and structure of U.S. energy subsidies over the 2002–2008 period. The study estimated that subsidies to fossil-fuel based sources amounted to approximately $72 billion over this period and subsidies to renewable fuel sources totalled $29 billion. In the United States, the federal government has paid US$74 billion for energy subsidies to support R&D for nuclear power ($50 billion) and fossil fuels ($24 billion) from 1973 to 2003. During this same timeframe, renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency received a total of US$26 billion. It has been suggested that a subsidy shift would help to level the playing field and support growing energy sectors, namely solar power, wind power, and biofuels.^[108] History shows that no energy sector was developed without subsidies.^[108]

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) (2011) energy subsidies artificially lower the price of energy paid by consumers, raise the price received by producers or lower the cost of production. "Fossil fuels subsidies costs generally outweigh the benefits. Subsidies to renewables and low-carbon energy technologies can bring long-term economic and environmental benefits".^[109] In November 2011, an IEA report entitled Deploying Renewables 2011 said "subsidies in green energy technologies that were not yet competitive are justified in order to give an incentive to investing into technologies with clear environmental and energy security benefits". The IEA's report disagreed with claims that renewable energy technologies are only viable through costly subsidies and not able to produce energy reliably to meet demand.

In the US, the wind power industry has recently increased its lobbying efforts considerably, spending about $5 million in 2009 after years of relative obscurity in Washington.^[110] By comparison, the US nuclear industry alone spent over $650 million on its lobbying efforts and campaign contributions during a single ten year period ending in 2008

[Webbo]

What's your point?

[ADK]

If electric cars were any good the market would supply them.

All i see at the moment is a niche market of electric cars for people who want to seen to be environmentally concious but really have more money than sense.

[Captain...]

What's your point?

You mentioned subsidies for solar panels, my point was that fossil fuels and nuclear are subsidised a lot more than renewable energies, we have had the technology for over a century but due to underfunding on research we are still a long way off being able to sustain ourselves with renewable energies.

[Guest]

Webbo - the funding for alternative energy is miniscule. Don't believe me go and do some research.

ADK - I seem to disagree with 80% of what you say. The Car manufacturers and Oil industry have actively put a halt on electric cars. they are not so good because that is what the industry wants them to be. Big business controls governments.

[Webbo]

You mentioned subsidies for solar panels, my point was that fossil fuels and nuclear are subsidised a lot more than renewable energies, we have had the technology for over a century but due to underfunding on research we are still a long way off being able to sustain ourselves with renewable energies.

Is it possible that there was no investment in this technology because it wasn't viable because fossil fuels were so much cheaper? What about nuclear energy? Why didn't the oil companies order the govt not to invest in that?

The reason why we don't live in a perfect world isn't always down to some secret conspiracy.

[Zingari]

If electric cars were any good the market would supply them.

All i see at the moment is a niche market of electric cars for people who want to seen to be environmentally concious but really have more money than sense.

Right that's it , I'm not buying the Reva G WIZ now and that's final !!

I haven't got much money and if this says that I've got more money than sense , how much sense do I have ?

[ADK]

Right that's it , I'm not buying the Reva G WIZ now and that's final !!

I haven't got much money and if this says that I've got more money than sense , how much sense do I have ?

Well if you want to buy a glorified mobility scooter with a silly name it would be a great choice.

[Captain...]

Is it possible that there was no investment in this technology because it wasn't viable because fossil fuels were so much cheaper? What about nuclear energy? Why didn't the oil companies order the govt not to invest in that?

The reason why we don't live in a perfect world isn't always down to some secret conspiracy.

I'm not saying there is a massive conspiracy just stating a few facts. This is not new technology it has been around for a century with the right funding we could already be close to being self sustainable, if it wasn't viable why would they invest any money on it.

It is viable as wind turbines have proved they can produce enough energy to be viable and they will become more efficient, all we need is more of them.

I do know in america the oil companies have a huge amount of power and sway, they have tried to discredit nuclear energy and oppose it, but ultimately it is becoming apparent that the oil reserves are finite and we need to find an alternative and nuclear fission is not a viable long term alternative, we need to be investing now in new energies and renewable technologies, and getting back on topic electric cars are part of it.

[Zingari]

I'm not saying there is a massive conspiracy just stating a few facts. This is not new technology it has been around for a century with the right funding we could already be close to being self sustainable, if it wasn't viable why would they invest any money on it.

It is viable as wind turbines have proved they can produce enough energy to be viable and they will become more efficient, all we need is more of them.

I do know in america the oil companies have a huge amount of power and sway, they have tried to discredit nuclear energy and oppose it, but ultimately it is becoming apparent that the oil reserves are finite and we need to find an alternative and nuclear fission is not a viable long term alternative, we need to be investing now in new energies and renewable technologies, and getting back on topic electric cars are part of it.

This may be true , but have you heard all the objections when there is talk of them anywhere near ?

Too many NIMBY'S for wind turbines at the moment

[Webbo]

Windfarms are notoriously inefficient. They only work when the wind is blowing and they have to be turned off when the wind is too high. As for the technology the wind turns the blades which turns the turbine. I'm not sure how that can be dramatically improved.

[Captain...]

Windfarms are notoriously inefficient. They only work when the wind is blowing and they have to be turned off when the wind is too high. As for the technology the wind turns the blades which turns the turbine. I'm not sure how that can be dramatically improved.

To make them lighter, make them stronger to cope with higher winds, make them more aerodynamic, so it needs less wind to get them to turn, not to mention improving the efficiency of the dynamos within the turbine and reducing energy loss (sorry FIF, I meant change) throughout the process. Improve the manufacturing process so they are cheaper and use less resources to build, make more durable so they last longer, and more reliable so they require less maintenance.

There is still a long way to go in what is a relatively young industry, but it is growing because people realise once the initial cost of a wind turbine has been met, it is just pure profit with 0 input.

[Zingari]

you're making a good case for them and maybe eventually they will be the answer , but where would we put them all though ?

edit;

is there any chance that wind turbines in abundance could affect the whole eco system or affect weather conditions by altering the free transit of air across the country ?

it's probably a daft question