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 ...
Why do you think that everything has to be powered by this one, single technology? I don't know if "plug-ins" are part of the answer but if they are, then it would simply mean somewhat less oil used for passenger cars which could then be used to power the semi-trucks, airplanes, etc..
No one's claiming it's the silver bullet, just perhaps a part of the puzzle.
Mmm. I'd agree it would not be desirable, but why do you think it will be an option? Not being a smartass here, I'd just would like to be more optimistic than my current knowledge permits. We have ~ 75million net global population increase every year, every one of whom wants to have the std of living of a upper median income US life style ( at least ). Sorry, but I don't see any reason to think that our current life style together with the current and future population is sustainable. Something has to give.
There is a lower bound. Yes, there are lots of other external considerations that will increase the wasted energy, but you can't go below some minimum limit required to move the mass from point A to point B.
You are driving a vehicle that has been refined for 100 years.
Early adopters always pay higher prices and get less refined products, but they pay for the research and development that in the end will provide good mass market products.
Current hybrids are small and expensive because they are using 5 year-old technology borrowed from other applications. The technology will become less expensive and more invisible and better for the task with time.
"I wonder how these electric cars do towing a four horse trailer."
Actually that's the perfect "hybrid" for these electric cars. When the batteries give out, you hitch the team up and pull the car the rest of the way.
Of course physics haven't changed in 50 years. My point was on the technology curve in general.
Nationally, though, the Democrats are going to have to get over their squeamishness about nuclear power, to make this work. I hope the next batch of Republican presidential candidates make that a priority, using the National Security argument. If we don't need foreign oil to run power plants, that reduces our dependence on regimes that support terrorism, and reduces the dollars going to them.
I'm not a conservative because I'm interested in emerging alternative energy technology? I suggested replacing free market oil with regulated electricity when?
Never mind.
I definitely do not consider current implementation of hybrid technology as ideal but it is a first step. I am aware of the details you mention, see my post above about early adapters.
We are seeing the equivelent of pre model T. hybrid vehicles.
Car companies are talking about gas/electric hybrids. Since most trips around town by folks are less than 35 miles a day, the gas would never be used. This would go a long way toward making the air in crowded cities much cleaner. However, if you go beyond the range of the batteries, the gas would kick in, and take you the rest of the way until you could plug in again. There would be no need for a third car, especially if companies can produce a hybrid mini-van.
True, but remember a heat pump is simply squeezing heat energy from the ambient air or ground -- it's not a fair comparison.
Sure, I'd have one if it were cost competitive. My town center is 3 miles down the street and it would fit fine in my lifestyle.
The big problem in the not too distant future is not too many people but too few. Europe, Russia and Japan are imploding demgraphically. China is about to reach zpg and start dropping. India will probably follow. The trick is as you get rich, your birth rate falls. the trick is not try and limit growth, the trick is to get people rich FAST enough. Tossing the US GDP down the toilet is not the way to do that.
Electric bicycle next?
Then walking?
Computers are very fast and storage media is very cheap. Do computers stay current longer? No because software is not concisly written to save a 3-1/2" disk per sales package by putting the program on three instead of four, but a bunch of memory eating crap is dumped onto a cd or dvd. Ergo it eats up hard drive space and hogs memory.
If we did buy into this electric boondogle the government will see it as another way to control us and we will save nothing. The government will see that we never have "extra" money.
Literally the lower bound is zero.
With friction approaching zero and speed approaching zero, you can get from point A to point B with energy expendeture approaching zero. All the rest is just details.
Sounds reasonable. That means about $1,700 a year, which is equal to about 34 fill ups of a 20 gallon tank at $2.50 a gallon.
That's the worst misapplication of basic thermo I've seen in a long time.
The key is "like vehicles". Plug-ins and regular gasoline powered cars are not "like vehicles". Electric plug-in vehicles don't get their energy from generators powered by internal combustion engines burning gasoline. For your argument to work, that's what would have to be happening. But that isn't what is happening. Instead, most energy for electric plug-ins comes from generators being powered via turbines. These are much more efficient than internal combustion engines. So until we have cars running coal-fired gas turbines, you can't say "like vehicles".
And even if we restrict the discussion to non-plug-in hybrids, your argument is still weak since non-electric hybrids have a hard time running their internal combustion engines at optimal RPM all the time. In fact, a simple IC engine car must be "detuned" just to provide enough power at low RPM. A hybrid doesn't have that restriction. The IC engine in the hybrid can be optimized for max efficiency since the electric motor will take care of providing power at low speeds.
"Early adopters always pay higher prices and get less refined products, but they pay for the research and development that in the end will provide good mass market products. "
You can't overcome the laws of physics by selling in volume.
Battery-powered electrics will never, ever be viable in comparison to internal combustion counterparts.
Look at each of the electric car makers. See where the money comes from. Then you'll understand that you will NEVER have an electric car in your driveway.
The current Saturn Vue would make a poor "plug-in" hybrid. The electric motor is only to boost the gas motor so the vehicle really cannot be driven on electric alone.
It makes for a more efficient gasoline motor, but can't be made to go full electric (unless you are happy with 20 mph max speeds or a 10 mile range).
Next year's (2008) model uses a different driveline which will make a Plug-in hybrid possible.
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.