NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

Why, for instance, is Toyota selling hybrids that have weak performance, and US car manufacturers not designing, making, or selling shit, and we're not seeing anything like this out of Europe?

It's fast. As fast as a Porsche. Sounds like a great car. They SELL.

If they can design a vehicle like this, then why isn't anyone else doing it?

Why does "going green" have to feel bad? The Prius seems to be designed with the enviroguilty in mind - you can't feel good unless your car is weak.

This is a good step in the right direction.

Fuck Hydrogen. Electric and plug-in hybrids are the way to go. *nod*

Fuck Hydrogen. Electric and plug-in hybrids are the way to go. *nod*

Once they find out how to get a decent range. It'll have to be much longer than with conventional hydrogen/fosssil fueled cars to make up for a much longer 'refueling' time.

In the mean time, I'll stick with my ammonia fueled solid oxide fuell cell agenda.:D

Once they find out how to get a decent range. It'll have to be much longer than with conventional hydrogen/fosssil fueled cars to make up for a much longer 'refueling' time.

In the mean time, I'll stick with my ammonia fueled solid oxide fuell cell agenda.:D

250 miles isn't a decent range?

As for refueling times, the answer is in the battery packs. With lithium, battery packs can now be built smaller and lighter than ever. They could easily be designed to be universal(or maybe only a couple possible designs). Then if you run low on power and stop at a 'recharging station', they just swap your battery and off you go. :)

250 miles isn't a decent range?

As for refueling times, the answer is in the battery packs. With lithium, battery packs can now be built smaller and lighter than ever. They could easily be designed to be universal(or maybe only a couple possible designs). Then if you run low on power and stop at a 'recharging station', they just swap your battery and off you go. :)

ingenious, why did i never think of that?

My car has a range of barely 300 miles. 250 miles isn't bad at all, except wouldn't it have to be round trip? You can't go 250 miles and then just plug it in anywhere.

The main reason is that the Tesla Motors vehicle costs about $100,000; given that hybrids and other vehicles have to be within a competitive range of conventional ones, the automakers' hybrid offerings have to sacrifice some of their power and potential in order to sell. Given that Ford, GM, and DaimlerChrysler are all in worsening fiscal shape, I don't think they could afford to design and sell those vehicles.

Obviously, as the technology improves and costs fall it will approach a competitive range with other vehicles and automakers will begin to offer them as standard models, but currently we're still in the initial stage and the economies of scale have yet to be worked out to mass produce these vehicles.

They will, though...have no doubt about that.

Didn't we talk about this two or three months ago? There was a terrific article in Wired--why it wasn't the cover article is beyond me--that basically answered the OP's question. The answer is that automakers--even the great Toyota--are stuck in the rut of thinking about fuel based technologies. The guy who started Tesla had no auto building experience. He knew batteries, so he went with what he knew, and he came up with this.

And by the way, I'd like to say that the OP is overstating the power issues with the Prius and other hybrids. They're terrific vehicles to drive. They're not sports cars, but they're not meant to be, either. Most cars aren't.

250 miles isn't a decent range?

As for refueling times, the answer is in the battery packs. With lithium, battery packs can now be built smaller and lighter than ever. They could easily be designed to be universal(or maybe only a couple possible designs). Then if you run low on power and stop at a 'recharging station', they just swap your battery and off you go. :)

LG, in a few years I might have a busniness proposition for you...

250 miles isn't a decent range?
With a conventional car, when you can refuel in 30 seconds yes. When you have to 'refuel' overnight, no. I wouldn't want to have to stop at a sleazy motel if I run out on the way to the supermarket.:D

As for refueling times, the answer is in the battery packs. With lithium, battery packs can now be built smaller and lighter than ever. They could easily be designed to be universal(or maybe only a couple possible designs). Then if you run low on power and stop at a 'recharging station', they just swap your battery and off you go. :)
Without meaning to be the prophet of doom, there's one flaw with that, and that's Lithion Ion batteries degrade. Basically oxygen gets into the pack and oxidises the Lithium to useless lithium oxide. So basically, with billions of cars and more battery packs (one in use, one 'recharging' and two in transport to/from the station) that'll use up large amounts of relatively rare lithium.

I wonder if it's possible to reduce Lithium Oxide back to Lithium without Na or K. Interesting. If you can perhaps that's an answer.

Part of the reason is an irrational aversion due to the reputation of the vehicles.

Early on, electric vehicles had a bad rep of having notoriously short legs, excessively long recharge times, being much more expensive than other cars, and totally lacking in power.

This has nothing to do with some gigantic conspiracy of the oil companies or automakers, but the limitations of technology and the consequences of overreaching before the time for that tech has come.

With a conventional car, when you can refuel in 30 seconds yes. When you have to 'refuel' overnight, no. I wouldn't want to have to stop at a sleazy motel if I run out on the way to the supermarket.:D


Without meaning to be the prophet of doom, there's one flaw with that, and that's Lithion Ion batteries degrade. Basically oxygen gets into the pack and oxidises the Lithium to useless lithium oxide. So basically, with billions of cars and more battery packs (one in use, one 'recharging' and two in transport to/from the station) that'll use up large amounts of relatively rare lithium.

I wonder if it's possible to reduce Lithium Oxide back to Lithium without Na or K. Interesting. If you can perhaps that's an answer.


From Wikipedia:

On Earth, lithium is widely distributed, but because of its reactivity does not occur in its free form. In keeping with the origin of its name, lithium forms a minor part of almost all igneous rocks and is also found in many natural brines. Lithium is the thirty-first most abundant element, contained particularly in the minerals spodumene, lepidolite, petalite, and amblygonite. On average, Earth's crust contains 65 parts per million (ppm) lithium.

Since the end of World War II, lithium metal production has greatly increased. The metal is separated from other elements in igneous mineral such as those above, and is also extracted from the water of mineral springs.

The metal is produced electrolytically from a mixture of fused lithium and potassium chloride. In 1998 it was about US$ 43 per pound ($95 per kg).[1] Chile is currently the leading lithium metal producer in the world, with Argentina next. Both countries recover the lithium from brine pools. In the United States lithium is similarly recovered from brine pools in Nevada.[2]


Lithium is very abundant and does not occur in it's metal form. So all of it is processed anyway. *nod*

LG, in a few years I might have a busniness proposition for you...

I will require an executive parking space and my own personal taco bar. :)

I will require an executive parking space and my own personal taco bar. :)

Oh trust me, if this works out you can have a taco bar that's a quarter of a mile long, and tended to by a thousand cheerful taco bar refreshers. :D

And three exective parking spaces will be dedicated to you.

Although you'll only need half of one, because you'll just drive a clown car to work.

Oh trust me, if this works out you can have a taco bar that's a quarter of a mile long, and tended to by a thousand cheerful taco bar refreshers. :D

And three exective parking spaces will be dedicated to you.

Although you'll only need half of one, because you'll just drive a clown car to work.

An electric clown car. :)

An electric clown car. :)

Indeed.

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

Why, for instance, is Toyota selling hybrids that have weak performance, and US car manufacturers not designing, making, or selling shit, and we're not seeing anything like this out of Europe?

It's fast. As fast as a Porsche. Sounds like a great car. They SELL.

If they can design a vehicle like this, then why isn't anyone else doing it?

Why does "going green" have to feel bad? The Prius seems to be designed with the enviroguilty in mind - you can't feel good unless your car is weak.

This is a good step in the right direction.

Yes. The time has come to leap boldly into the 1990's (http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/) (not sarcastic against the OP. Really.).

Why I wouldn't buy one.
1. Price. In no way can I afford $100,000.00 for a car.
2. Size. I'm a big guy and an old guy. I would have great difficulty getting in and out of that car.
3. Space. Looks like I would have a choice of carrying the wife or groceries but not both.
4. Range. If I wanted to take a long trip, I would have to have a second car or rent a car, which takes us back to #1.
Nice looking car, but not practical for me.

It's fast. As fast as a Porsche. Sounds like a great car. They SELL.

A porsche is great, provided you can afford it. Porche price + hybrid price = God can't afford.
Not to mention, your car could outrace a fucking indy car, but you are still driving under speed limits of 25 to 75 mph.

This is a step in the wrong direction. Hybrid sports cars should be considered secondary to developing affordable, average hybrid cars.

Lithium is very abundant
Well, I did read about so-called rarity on a website about its potential use in nuclear fusion, so it was probably refering to a specific isotope.

and does not occur in it's metal form. So all of it is processed anyway. *nod*
Yeah, I didn't think that one through. Otherwise the round would get a little hot when it rains.:D

This is what happens after you complete a chemistry AS level. Your brain turns to slush and you forget all you know. :headbang:

Why I wouldn't buy one.
1. Price. In no way can I afford $100,000.00 for a car.
2. Size. I'm a big guy and an old guy. I would have great difficulty getting in and out of that car.
3. Space. Looks like I would have a choice of carrying the wife or groceries but not both.
4. Range. If I wanted to take a long trip, I would have to have a second car or rent a car, which takes us back to #1.
Nice looking car, but not practical for me.

Well, it's not designed to be practical for typical user, but rather a sport car - to break the impression of electric cars as utilitarian industrial equipment. 250 miles is OK for a sport car, specifications look good (as the engine power is real power), and price is in target range.
It's simply not designed to carry some cargo, or to make long trips... just for a rich person for good rides and/or showing that he is not unconcerned about environment. I guess they well understand that most people will not pay even 50% more for a car with same qualities, but electric, and aim at ones who can buy it without much worrying about the price.

They'll probably make some cheaper cars, but I wouldn't expect something really cheap. The batteries set the limit; the battery is probably half of the price.


Electric technology is also promising for off-road vehicles, since it makes 4WD simple, allows to distribute power as needed and provides good torque at low rpm. Trucks also can carry heavier, but much cheaper Ni-MH or Ni-Cd batteries. This would be the practical way.

Yes. The time has come to leap boldly into the 1990's (http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/) (not sarcastic against the OP. Really.).

Hey, I liked the nineties, I want to go back to them.

Well, it's not designed to be practical for typical user, but rather a sport car - to break the impression of electric cars as utilitarian industrial equipment. 250 miles is OK for a sport car, specifications look good (as the engine power is real power), and price is in target range.
It's simply not designed to carry some cargo, or to make long trips... just for a rich person for good rides and/or showing that he is not unconcerned about environment. I guess they well understand that most people will not pay even 50% more for a car with same qualities, but electric, and aim at ones who can buy it without much worrying about the price.

They'll probably make some cheaper cars, but I wouldn't expect something really cheap. The batteries set the limit; the battery is probably half of the price.


Electric technology is also promising for off-road vehicles, since it makes 4WD simple, allows to distribute power as needed and provides good torque at low rpm. Trucks also can carry heavier, but much cheaper Ni-MH or Ni-Cd batteries. This would be the practical way.

The Wired article noted that Tesla hopes to make a sedan beginning next year, and that economies of scale will make them price competitive inside 5 years. It's a completely different way of going about making an electric car.

*snip*

And by the way, I'd like to say that the OP is overstating the power issues with the Prius and other hybrids. They're terrific vehicles to drive. They're not sports cars, but they're not meant to be, either. Most cars aren't.

Yep. It's a myth that they are low power. The hybrid Nissan that my parents have has more power than the standard model.

Those cars are the sux0r. Who wants an electric sports car? Its not a good vehicle unless you can smell the ozone burning.

Those cars are the sux0r. Who wants an electric sports car? Its not a good vehicle unless you can smell the ozone burning.

Funny you mention ozone because that's the chief pollutant of electric engines.

Funny you mention ozone because that's the chief pollutant of electric engines.

:eek: Ok, well I guess those cars are ok then :p

seems the only down side would be the 250 mile range and 3 hour charge time...but with LG's idea of battery swap stations, or carrying more than one battery, that seems easily fixed. Industry standardization would be vital tho

seems the only down side would be the 250 mile range and 3 hour charge time...but with LG's idea of battery swap stations, or carrying more than one battery, that seems easily fixed. Industry standardization would be vital tho

I couldn't find out how much the battery system weighs, but I would think (as an electrican) that in an all-electric car the extra battery would add significant weight to the car and reduce your overall travel distance on one charge.

I'm shallow, I'm weak on research, but ...
They named it after Nikolai Tesla, inventa of the the Tesla Coil.
Now, a real Tesla Car would work by moving over the whatsit-leyline-things, and charge itself up by moving. It would be a Perpetual Motion Car. Oh yeah! Um...

Electric cars are crap. They depend on electricity, which is generally got by burning fossil fuels. Greehouse-wise, they're no better than oilburners.

I'd be more interested in a car which burned COAL. Coal is bloody cheap, and if you were caught short of a Coal Station, you could haul your axe out of the boot and chop down a bloody tree. Do-it-yourself biofuel! You beauty!

No, seriously: Gas Cars from howstuffworks (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/ngv.htm)

seems the only down side would be the 250 mile range and 3 hour charge time...but with LG's idea of battery swap stations, or carrying more than one battery, that seems easily fixed. Industry standardization would be vital tho

Well, the 250 mile thing isn't that bad; if you use it to commute daily you can probably get 4-5 days on a charge, and then just plug it in at night. You could just have another conventional vehicle or hybrid for when you're planning to take a long road trip or some other kind of extensive driving.

Really, the bulk of driving most people do is to and from work so the 250-mile charge isn't that much of a limitation, especially if you do your charging at night.

<snip>

Really, the bulk of driving most people do is to and from work so the 250-mile charge isn't that much of a limitation, especially if you do your charging at night.

Or for those long hauls, you could buy a thickshake in the roadhouse, and nurse it for two hours while your rig charges up from the socket in the men's room.

Or for those long hauls, you could buy a thickshake in the roadhouse, and nurse it for two hours while your rig charges up from the socket in the men's room.

You could, actually. Three hours isn't that long for 250 miles of driving (longer than filling up, but still not too bad) especially when you consider you might be able to get it for free or for cheap if you can find a discreet outlet; plus, it'll give you a chance to take a break from driving or even take a nap...I know what it's like to have to drive long distances, and a justified three-hour break would be well worth it.

Well, the 250 mile thing isn't that bad; if you use it to commute daily you can probably get 4-5 days on a charge, and then just plug it in at night. You could just have another conventional vehicle or hybrid for when you're planning to take a long road trip or some other kind of extensive driving.

Really, the bulk of driving most people do is to and from work so the 250-mile charge isn't that much of a limitation, especially if you do your charging at night.

250 for a standard day is fine. But my family is in Connecticut, and I'm in Boston. 250 miles, minus traffic and the like, just wouldn't be enough. And no, I can't afford to own, maintain, and insure two cars. It would be far more logical to put a battery swap in gas stations, or travel with multiple batteries

I couldn't find out how much the battery system weighs, but I would think (as an electrican) that in an all-electric car the extra battery would add significant weight to the car and reduce your overall travel distance on one charge.

Lithium ion batteries would be suprisingly light, but probably quite bulky. In an electric car, there's plenty of extra space where the engine would have been, but a 'spare' would eat up the trunk space. :p

Standardized batteries are a good idea. Think of them like giant 9 volt batteries. Smallr cars might use three or four, while larger vehicles use five or six. As the technology improves, the batteries can retain their standard shape, and vehicles can be designed to operate on the standardized current.

Like a giant toy car. :)

250 miles isn't a decent range?

As for refueling times, the answer is in the battery packs. With lithium, battery packs can now be built smaller and lighter than ever. They could easily be designed to be universal(or maybe only a couple possible designs). Then if you run low on power and stop at a 'recharging station', they just swap your battery and off you go. :)
What if the cock who was there before you tried to take one of his batteries appart?

What if the cock who was there before you tried to take one of his batteries appart?

From what I've read about lithium, then he's probably still there, fused into the asphalt. :p

From what I've read about lithium, then he's probably still there, fused into the asphalt. :p

one could only hope


*continues to try to fuse self to asphalt using Gorilla glue*

I'm shallow, I'm weak on research, but ...
They named it after Nikolai Tesla, inventa of the the Tesla Coil.
Now, a real Tesla Car would work by moving over the whatsit-leyline-things, and charge itself up by moving. It would be a Perpetual Motion Car. Oh yeah! Um...

Electric cars are crap. They depend on electricity, which is generally got by burning fossil fuels. Greehouse-wise, they're no better than oilburners.

I'd be more interested in a car which burned COAL. Coal is bloody cheap, and if you were caught short of a Coal Station, you could haul your axe out of the boot and chop down a bloody tree. Do-it-yourself biofuel! You beauty!

No, seriously: Gas Cars from howstuffworks (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/ngv.htm)
Yes, hydro-electric dams, wind turbines, nuclear power plants all don't exist.

And how the hell would you make coal usefull? You'd have to make it boil some water, then drive some steam engines. Steam powered carswent under for a reason. They take forever to start.

250 for a standard day is fine. But my family is in Connecticut, and I'm in Boston. 250 miles, minus traffic and the like, just wouldn't be enough. And no, I can't afford to own, maintain, and insure two cars. It would be far more logical to put a battery swap in gas stations, or travel with multiple batteries

Could you even afford to own, maintain, and insure this car?

Could you even afford to own, maintain, and insure this car?

could I even afford to own, maintain, and insure any car?

my parents, who would be the ones driving back and forth, however, can. But not a seperate car to use once a month or less

however, it doesn't appear that the power source is what makes the Tesla car expensive.

Because they're not gasoline fueled. Doesn't bring in the $$. I mean really.. we have been like most other countries a gas guzzeling fool. Not only would a lot of big rigs (businesses) be shot out, but it would take a certainty of other corps to feel safe putting out alternative fuels, knowing they can make a profit.

It's all about profit!

They aren't certain they WILL profit. Plain and simple.

When one of these things wreck wouldn’t that get battery acid all over the road or elsewhere?

Pfff. I've been pimping the Tesla for months now. Dammit. No one pays attention to me...

The Tesla is a speciality ride, and a good step, but it's not going to work for everyone. And like just about anything else you build the flashy one for the
'gotta have its' to make the money for the one that people can afford. The Tesla sold out before the first one was finished, so it's a good step. If it lives up to its range claim then you can bet we'll see more of its kind.

I don't know if any of you have owned a small sports car (the Tesla is basically an electric Lotus Elise) but it's not exactly the kind of thing you take on a cross country road trip. 250 is more than enough. It would take me to and from and back again to San Francisco, which is more driving in a small sports car than you'd normally do anyway.

Sometimes a small timer has to come along and show the slow ships what direction things are going. The first Tesla hasn't rolled out yet, when it does you can bet more like it will follow.

250 miles isn't a decent range?

As for refueling times, the answer is in the battery packs. With lithium, battery packs can now be built smaller and lighter than ever. They could easily be designed to be universal(or maybe only a couple possible designs). Then if you run low on power and stop at a 'recharging station', they just swap your battery and off you go. :)

250 miles? My car only gets that on the highway.

When one of these things wreck wouldn’t that get battery acid all over the road or elsewhere?

Doesn't that happen anyway? Cars already have batteries. Plus, they also have highly flammable gasoline and other chemicals.

Pfff. I've been pimping the Tesla for months now. Dammit. No one pays attention to me...
It is hard to remember posts if the poster has no name.

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

Why, for instance, is Toyota selling hybrids that have weak performance, and US car manufacturers not designing, making, or selling shit, and we're not seeing anything like this out of Europe?
Ford sells almost 200K Mustang s a year, at like 25-30 grand each. Consistenty. For decades. They sell hundreds of thousands of pickups, too. So does GM.

Also, I doubt the Tesla will sell, mostly due to it's cost. Still, I would probably buy one, just to swap in a V8.

Ford sells almost 200K Mustang s a year, at like 25-30 grand each. Consistenty. For decades. They sell hundreds of thousands of pickups, too. So does GM.

Also, I doubt the Tesla will sell, mostly due to it's cost. Still, I would probably buy one, just to swap in a V8.
Why? You'd basically be building your own car then. I mean, the Tesla is missing so many things nessesary for a gas engine.

Why? You'd basically be building your own car then. I mean, the Tesla is missing so many things nessesary for a gas engine.
That's the fun part. I like modifying and fabricating and etc.

Hey, I liked the nineties, I want to go back to them.

Well, I want to go back to the 80's, so I won't complain on that score.

I was just trying to point out the fact that it was not a lack of market demand that caused electric cars to go off the market. There was a market for them. But it was rather like getting record companies to get behind the idea of Napster.

Well, I want to go back to the 80's, so I won't complain on that score.

I was just trying to point out the fact that it was not a lack of market demand that caused electric cars to go off the market. There was a market for them. But it was rather like getting record companies to get behind the idea of Napster.
I want to go back to the '60s.

http://www.musclecarcalendar.com/ThunderAlley2004/SamsBuick/SamsBuick.htm

Ford sells almost 200K Mustang s a year, at like 25-30 grand each. Consistenty. For decades. They sell hundreds of thousands of pickups, too. So does GM.

Also, I doubt the Tesla will sell, mostly due to it's cost. Still, I would probably buy one, just to swap in a V8.

Ford and GM are hardly the best examples of car companies to use, seeing as they are both in pretty dire situations


additionally, there is nothing that demonstrates that the battery technology is what makes the Tesla so expensive. The most likely cause of that extreme price is the fact that there are currently only 100 of them, and those rapidly sold out. I would expect costs to drop rapidly as this technology becomes more prevelent, be it by only the Tesla company, or if it gets picked up by other manufacturers (actually, it would be very very wise for GM and Ford to consider picking this up before the Japanese do...they faild to do so with hybrids, placing them in their current situation)

If I win the lottery I am buying one of these cars!

one could only hope


*continues to try to fuse self to asphalt using Gorilla glue*

It can be done. :)

It's too sexy to be made by human hands. And since we haven't developed advanced enough robots to have sexy robot hands, that's why.

I wonder why the car needs one of these?

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/387/teslabt6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

I know it is for the charging cord.:p

Pfff. I've been pimping the Tesla for months now. Dammit. No one pays attention to me...

The Tesla is a speciality ride, and a good step, but it's not going to work for everyone. And like just about anything else you build the flashy one for the
'gotta have its' to make the money for the one that people can afford. The Tesla sold out before the first one was finished, so it's a good step. If it lives up to its range claim then you can bet we'll see more of its kind.

I don't know if any of you have owned a small sports car (the Tesla is basically an electric Lotus Elise) but it's not exactly the kind of thing you take on a cross country road trip. 250 is more than enough. It would take me to and from and back again to San Francisco, which is more driving in a small sports car than you'd normally do anyway.

Sometimes a small timer has to come along and show the slow ships what direction things are going. The first Tesla hasn't rolled out yet, when it does you can bet more like it will follow.


If it'll make you feel better, I remember your old threads about this. :)

If it'll make you feel better, I remember your old threads about this. :)As do I, and like I said, the sports car was mainly built to 1) show an electric car can be fast adn sexy and still have range and 2) show it can be done eventually for cost--to prove the technology. The makers have said from the beginning that the sports car was done first to gin up interest in the technology, and then they'd move to more practical styles.

i hope they move to more practical models.....a hundred grand is way too expensive for a second vehicle. there is only so much of a demand for cars that are useful only for wealthy people that don't drive very far.

As do I, and like I said, the sports car was mainly built to 1) show an electric car can be fast adn sexy and still have range and 2) show it can be done eventually for cost--to prove the technology. The makers have said from the beginning that the sports car was done first to gin up interest in the technology, and then they'd move to more practical styles.

Well that makes sense. If you are using expensive new technology, you need to give the customer something worth paying top dollar for.

The rich are the only ones how can afford this technology, so why would you target the product at a poor person, as many posters suggest they do.

250 miles isn't a decent range?

As for refueling times, the answer is in the battery packs. With lithium, battery packs can now be built smaller and lighter than ever. They could easily be designed to be universal(or maybe only a couple possible designs). Then if you run low on power and stop at a 'recharging station', they just swap your battery and off you go. :)

Or....

bring a generator along.
One that recharges while you drive.

Like a rolling Wimherst generator.

Just make it like a little trailer on the back.

i would have thought that would only work if the generator could pump out enough energy to offset it's own weight, and still provide power to the car as fast as it is using it.

i would have thought that would only work if the generator could pump out enough energy to offset it's own weight, and still provide power to the car as fast as it is using it.
That would only work if perpetual motion devices where possible.

In other words; the trailered generator wouldn't work?

Yes, it wouldn't work.

I think that Tesla thing is a brand new company, but I know exactly why it hasn't caught on with others: It's too much of a shake-up. Imagine it, it could destroy large portions of the auto industry. It's like sound in films; for ages they resisted! And when they finally converted, most of the industry fell through the cracks! Did you really think an auto company is going to let that even potentially happen to itself? You know, several years ago, the state of California passed a law requiring auto companies to research and create an electric car. They did. They created one. It was a hit. -But they only leased them- not sold. Then they lobbied the state (which is, within the U.S, known for being- well, quite flatly, either strange or corrupt) to repeal the law (which it did), then they refused to renew the leases and took back all the cars (sometimes without warning). They then shipped them to a desert where they were literaly- ever bit of them- destroyed.

Let's not forget that it was the auto industry (more specifically, G.M. combined with Firestone Tires and Standard Oil) that brought down American mass transit. Did you know that Los Angeles once had the largest and most efficient mass transportation system in the world? The air was clean too. And there weren't many traffic jams. I have heard it said that Los Angeles was once a beautiful place.

Question:

What if you had two batteries placed within the engine of the electric car, using the shake it up technology that you find in flashlights, to generate power would it be feasible to have one battery charging while the other goes, switching with the flip of a switch when it runs out, assuming you could make it last for 5-6+ hours, enough time to recharge the other fully, wouldn't it be possible to have the never ending car charge? I mean the expense and how fast it would wear out are questions of course, but conceptually, I mean, there are plenty of things vibrating in the energy to provide electricity and stuff to shake it up to charge it. Is that stuff potent enough to run a car is the real question.

Question:

What if you had two batteries placed within the engine of the electric car, using the shake it up technology that you find in flashlights, to generate power would it be feasible to have one battery charging while the other goes, switching with the flip of a switch when it runs out, assuming you could make it last for 5-6+ hours, enough time to recharge the other fully, wouldn't it be possible to have the never ending car charge? I mean the expense and how fast it would wear out are questions of course, but conceptually, I mean, there are plenty of things vibrating in the energy to provide electricity and stuff to shake it up to charge it. Is that stuff potent enough to run a car is the real question.

No. It won't work. The mathematics is a bit overwhelming unless you are into that sort of thing, but the bottom line is that it still takes energy to shake those things up. The energy it generates is not equal to the energy expended to generate it. *nod*

However... It might be possible to develop regenerative shocks based on the technology that could actually recover some of the energy lost on bumpy roads. *rubs chin thoughtfully*

Well yeah, that is what I was saying. But also, the shaking from the energy produced doesn't have to have a 100% efficiency, if the energy lasts longer than the time it takes to recharge. Such as if a fully charged battery lasts 6 hours, and takes 4 hours to recharge from general shaking. Also if combined with gasoline, it could create incredible efficiency.

EDIT: Also using the shaking stuff, I mean you could simply take the battery out and shake it alot if it dies, I mean how awesome would that be? Jumper cables would be things of the past. KC and the Sunshine bands old hit song Shake Your Booty would suddenly come back in the top 40. Shake and Bake ressurrected. The Shake Revolution of the 21st century.

No. It won't work. The mathematics is a bit overwhelming unless you are into that sort of thing, but the bottom line is that it still takes energy to shake those things up. The energy it generates is not equal to the energy expended to generate it. *nod*

However... It might be possible to develop regenerative shocks based on the technology that could actually recover some of the energy lost on bumpy roads. *rubs chin thoughtfully*

*runs to patent office*

*runs to patent office*

Pretty sure it was patented soon after they patented the same idea with brakes.

Pretty sure it was patented soon after they patented the same idea with brakes.

Maybe, maybe not.

Pretty sure it was patented soon after they patented the same idea with brakes.

*sighs* Quite being such a downer.

The shakey stuff is patented. So we couldn't even get rights to it without giving the guy who invented it alot of royalties. I also wouldn't be surprised if it is patent pending in all forms of use within engine batteries.

The shakey stuff is patented. So we couldn't even get rights to it without giving the guy who invented it alot of royalties. I also wouldn't be surprised if it is patent pending in all forms of use within engine batteries.

I would. You're failing to consider how little energy those things actually make. You would need a hell of a lot of them to even make a dent in running a car. In fact, I'd have to say that I'd question whether or not the amount of electricity it generates would even cover the amount spent on the extra weight. Perhaps if you had them below the shock absorbers? Nonetheless, it's a very interesting notion, and I think I'd like to ask someone who would know for a fact.

Meh. Why not just build methane fueled cars. That way you could stop at Taco Bell for lunch and an eventual fuel up.

Meh. Why not just build methane fueled cars. That way you could stop at Taco Bell for lunch and an eventual fuel up.

Do you know how distracting it will be to drive with a hose up your butt?

...

Or am I the only one?

Do you know how distracting it will be to drive with a hose up your butt?

...

Or am I the only one?

I never said it would be comfortable. Anyway, it would give new meaning to the old "Ass, gass or grass" bumperstickers. What else are passengers for anyway?

On a serious note, maybe you could power a car with the small nuclear generators similar to the ones used on satalites and space probes?

I never said it would be comfortable. Anyway, it would give new meaning to the old "Ass, gass or grass" bumperstickers. What else are passengers for anyway?

On a serious note, maybe you could power a car with the small nuclear generators similar to the ones used on satalites and space probes?

"Bob, what happened to all your hair?"

"I tried to change the oil in my car."

"Bob, you dumbass! Your car is nuclear!"

"Oh. Shit. No wonder the oil came out green and glowing. What am I going to do? I'm sterile now!"

"Bob, I think that's for the best."

:)

"Bob, what happened to all your hair?"

"I tried to change the oil in my car."

"Bob, you dumbass! Your car is nuclear!"

"Oh. Shit. No wonder the oil came out green and glowing. What am I going to do? I'm sterile now!"

"Bob, I think that's for the best."

:)

It would mprove the gene pool as well? This gets better and better all the time.

The only ones who would buy them right now are those who don't travel, and my geuss is they're too expensive for them. The 250 mile per charge thing in a nutshell kills it. That and the fact that those who live in apartments may not neccesarily have the means to recharge them. Although I do agree that it's a good idea to sell it. You always start with the primitive models, I'd be surprized if they didn't make ones that got more miles per charge if only the initial models sold.

The main reason is that the Tesla Motors vehicle costs about $100,000; given that hybrids and other vehicles have to be within a competitive range of conventional ones, the automakers' hybrid offerings have to sacrifice some of their power and potential in order to sell. Given that Ford, GM, and DaimlerChrysler are all in worsening fiscal shape, I don't think they could afford to design and sell those vehicles.

Obviously, as the technology improves and costs fall it will approach a competitive range with other vehicles and automakers will begin to offer them as standard models, but currently we're still in the initial stage and the economies of scale have yet to be worked out to mass produce these vehicles.

They will, though...have no doubt about that.

That's because they're only making 100 at a time. If they were making 100,000 or 1,000,000 per year, the unit costs would drop.

Wonder if the Nazz would listen to Sean Hannity for 10 minutes to get a car like this one?

That's because they're only making 100 at a time. If they were making 100,000 or 1,000,000 per year, the unit costs would drop.

Wonder if the Nazz would listen to Sean Hannity for 10 minutes to get a car like this one?

If they were giving it to me? Sure. If it were affordable to someone in my income range. Sure. I can do ten minutes standing on my head. Hell, if they were giving it to me, I'd listen to Hannity for ten minutes a day for a year.