Posted on 01/01/2007 10:44:24 AM PST by Uncledave
An oil and security task force of the Council on Foreign Relations recently opined that "the voices that espouse 'energy independence' are doing the nation a disservice by focusing on a goal that is unachievable over the foreseeable future." Others have also said, essentially, that other nations will control our transportation fuel--get used to it. Yet House Democrats have announced a push for "energy independence in 10 years," and in November General Motors joined Toyota and perhaps other auto makers in a race to produce plug-in hybrid vehicles, hugely reducing the demand for oil. Who's right--those who drive toward independence or those who shrug?
Bet on major progress toward independence, spurred by market forces and a portfolio of rapidly developing oil-replacing technologies.
snip
All this is likely to change decisively, because electricity is about to become a major partner with alternative liquid fuels in replacing oil.
snip
Utilities are rapidly becoming quite interested in plug-ins because of the substantial benefit to them of being able to sell off-peak power at night. Because off-peak nighttime charging uses unutilized capacity, DOE's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory estimates that adopting plug-ins will not create a need for new base load electricity generation plants until plug-ins constitute over 84% of the country's 220 million passenger vehicles.
snip
Once plug-ins start appearing in showrooms it is not only consumers and utility shareholders who will be smiling. If cheap off-peak electricity supplies a portion of our transportation needs, this will help insulate alternative liquid fuels from OPEC market manipulation designed to cripple oil's competitors.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
"One must at least try to be accurate or one loses credibility."
Ok,fine. Are we talking about a delta or a wye-connected 3-phase 480 volt feed? Shall we agree on a 0.85 uncorrected power factor? Do we have a switched power supply?
ah, nevermind, the punchline just got horribly mutilated.
I have to echo your comment from #73, there is no way the winds are stronger at night. The daytime mixing brings down stronger winds from aloft, usually that stops at night.
Electricity at 12 cents per KWH costs about twice as much per BTU as gasoline. Electricity also has no road taxes. If it got to be a significant source of energy for travel, I'm sure road taxes would soon follow.
"Homeowners in my area with electric water heaters can get off peak rates. No conditions on amount of electric usage."
Fair enough, at least for you. It still makes little difference to the viability of electric cars.
Electric cars viable? That's a long ways down the road, if at all.
Yeah, I think I might have got that wrong about night vs day.
"Electric cars viable? That's a long ways down the road, if at all."
LOL....hey, that's my line. I'm working this side of the street, find your own thread.
There are private companies doing research. There are companies in both MA and CA selling photovoltaic solar collectors. They have been expensive up to this point, but the sale of their more expsnsive products is providing the money to continue the research to make it more affordable with each successive generation of collectors. As with many new technologies, the government is on the leading edge, but as it becomes feasible, private companies will come in and carry it through. I think this is a good use of government money; look at all the everyday technology that has come from the space program.
Again with the negativity! How in the world will anyone know if something has a chance in hell of wider use if it's not tried? Obviously, there are electric cars right now, so we know that technology is viable. Why can't they be re-imagined for wider use?
"If you think that we are at the pinnacle of transportation technology, I'm not the one to tell you that you are wrong but history tends to argue against you."
Transportation? no. Fuels? petroleum provides about the optimal mix of volatility and energy density, so I'd say we've gotten pretty much as close to the pinnacle as chemistry can provide......but you never know.
"Why can't they be re-imagined for wider use?"
Oh, alright. I may as well just say it: We just suffer a lack of creativity, desire, and, yes....imagination. If it weren't for that (and physics) we'd have viable electric cars for everyone.
The technology is there to have flying cars, too.
The reason we don't all have flying cars is the cost of flying cars isn't worth the benefit of flying cars.
If I could have an Electric car tomorrow for $15K that would have the same performance and cost as much to operate as $15K gasoline powered car, I would go out an buy it. Right now.
1.) It doesn't exist.
2.) There is no indication it will exist in the next 10-15 years.
Electric cars aren't viable for most folks. They are mostly viable for bringing in research dollars and tax breaks at this point.
Just cause it doesn't exist now, and may not for another 10 years doesn't mean that it won't ever exist. Nor should folks just throw their hands up in the air and say "never mind, we can't get it done next year, so we shouldn't even try".
If someone is going to pay me try, I'll try until I'm blue in the face.
If you want me to pay someone to try, I'm going to have to ask you to go pound sand.
Agree 100%.
I don't have the numbers in front of me but this is not a difficult issue to work out. The oil market is a liquid market. Inputs go into the market, buyers buy and the price is set based on supply and demand. The petroleum will be shipped to the market in the most cost effective mannor, meaning that we get more of our oil from Mexico, Venezuela and Canada (not that any of them have been acting like our friends). Even if the molecules do not physically come from the Muslims, our demand puts dollars in their pocket as surely as if you put it in an envelope and mailed it to them.
You seems to have a concern about socialistic electrons. If you don't mind dumping your money into the despotically driven oil market, you shouldn't mind spending it to get out of the regulated electrical market. About a $30,000 investment can get you off the grid for good, my brother-in-law has been off the grid for the last 5 years. Add a few more panels and a windmill and you can either charge up your electric car or make Pelosi and Kennedy buy your excess.
BTW do you have any idea how much money you send to governement when you fill your gas tank. Your transportation is in their hands now. They can jack up their taxes, regulate the octane mandate that chemicals be put in or taken out without your say-so. They can tell you what you can drive on the road and what you can't. They can take your car off the road for being too old. They can also take you liscense to drive it they don't like your behavior. Buddy, your transportation is in their hands now. Don't let the electric car discussion distract you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.