Comments for Saturn All-Electric Conversions Available Next Year at http://www.ecogeek.org , comment 1 to 11 out of 11 comments http://www.ecogeek.org Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:01:50 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-16069 I have a Sky and the idea is intruiging. I'd love to see the company come out with a owner based conversion kit and instruction. - Jim S. Sun, 13 Jul 2008 06:48:34 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14830 Solar, wind, geo, wave, and other energy generation systems do not have the ability to provide more than 20% of demand over the next 10 years. Solar has to be replaced often and is expensive to install and replace raising it's cost. Wind is not reliable and has high costs to maintain working units. Geo has serious mineral deposit accumulation so it is limited. Lower transportation costs can on be obtained by a JFK type national nuclear program of building one new plant per week for 10 years. Then after announcing that program open all coastal shelfs and ANWAR for development with approval for twenty new refineries financed by the cash flow saved from buying OPEC oil. The Democrats in Congress do not understand supply and demand concepts. Then they can not do simple math,; they now say drilling in ANWAR would only reduce oil prices by 1 cent per gallon. My math says 1,000,000 barrels per day times $130 is 130 million per day or $ 47.4 billion not going to OPEC. That big a hit will force oil prices down quickly and then when the coastal oil come on oil will be under $ 80 per barrel. This will give us time to build out the nuclear plants allowing us to go all electric plug in cars and trucks. No more oil threat problem gone. Plug in cars with over 200 mile per charge range exist now and with a national project they could be replacing gas auto and trucks by 2009 -2010. The cash not sent to OPEC can finance the whole plan. Tell Congress start today or seek other employment because we will vote you out to save our economy. - Goodbusiness Mon, 16 Jun 2008 23:03:08 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14800 ;D They should do this with Cadillac XLR and other cars. This could be a huge business. In mid 80's when U.S. Dollar went sky high people were buying European Spec Porsches & Jaguars and bringing them here and so called gray market conversion shops sprouted up across the country. - James Varela Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:44:38 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14721 $.54 per mile? At $4 per gallon of gas, that means the car is getting about equal to a school bus (8 mpg). Heck, my own calculations for Honda Civic vs Honda Civic Hybrid (just $6000) would take something like 30 years to pay off at $4 per gallon and 10000 miles per year driven. Granted, that isn't the point. P.S. I'll say it again... where in the heck are my AFFORDABLE electric cars at? I don't want some amped up sports car that costs 50k or a Tesla that costs 100k. Here's hoping the cityZenn and/or Zap-X come to fruition. - jake3988 Sat, 14 Jun 2008 15:13:41 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14673 Dr. Bill has a political agenda which makes him blind to things 'not right wing'. Nuclear has become so expensive to build that it's most likely not in our future. We need power during the very hours that solar PV and thermal work best. These technologies are being brought on line very quickly and are quite likely to have sucked up all the profitable peak hour money before a new nuke can be built. Without the profit from peak hour sales new nuclear can most likely never pay for itself, much less turn a profit. The there are the huge wind farms now up and more now coming. Build some more, build some storage, and we can start shutting down dirty coal.... - Bob Wallace Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:27:05 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14659 Blah, once again- even if the majority of your electricity is via coal fired plants- thats still better for the environment than burning gas. Coal plants are more effecient than ICE. Wether or not its worth the cost/inconvenience is another matter. nuclear vs coal.... thats a whole different conversation - Sick of Trolls Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:56:23 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14653 This car would bankrupt a California driver. The price of electricity makes electric cars reasonable where power is generated by hydro sources. When power is generated by coal (about 50% or more of the US,)not only are the re-charging costs considerably higher but so is the polution spewed into the atmosphere. According to Dr. Bill, a coal fired plant generating the power for a family of four for twenty years releases enough solids into the air to fill an entire 100 car freight train - including U235 and Thorium. Each coal burning plant in the US releases approximately 5.2 tons of Uranium (including 74 pounds of U235) and 12.8 tons of Thorium. Twenty years of electricity for a family of four generated by a nuclear plant would result in waste the size of a golf ball. You want eco-friendly? Go nuclear, and THEN go electric cars! - Big Bustard Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:32:45 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14648 Curiously, like the Tesla, this car is based on the Lotus Elise: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Elise#List_of_cars_sharing_the_Elise_platform In the UK, it's called the Vauxhall VX200, and in Continental Europe, the Opel Speedster. - Harry Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:37:30 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14641 Wow - what a fabulous looking car: beautiful and eco-friendly. Better start saving quickly! Great site you have here. - Joanna Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:09:36 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14639 These guys do a similar thing - they have a Mini Cooper, PT Crusier as well as working on their own electric super car. http://www.hybridtechnologies.com - Craig Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:27:40 +0100 http://www.ecogeek.org/automobiles/1749#comment-14637 The $.04 vs $.54 per mile operating cost comparison is not completely valid. From memory (admittedly faulty) the $.54 amount includes insurance, depreciation, cost of money (maybe), fuel and maintenance. For these electric cars the insurance will likely be higher, the depreciation lower on a percentage basis but maybe still higher on an actual $ basis, cost of money will be higher, fuel will be much lower and maintenance much lower as well. As a completely wildass guess, taking these other costs into account, I'd peg the cost of operating this car at $.27 per mile making the payback period more like 100K miles. - nicster Thu, 12 Jun 2008 10:37:35 +0100