JUL 25

I see articles such as this shilling a totally
impractical technology and laugh at how they will appeal to that small group of people who are convinced that one must suffer in order to be
a good Earth-citizen. The sheer ignorance out there about electric propulsion is incredible to behioold, although it certainly shouldn't be surprising - 80% still believe that we have been visited by aliens, or that the JFK assassination was a conspiracy. You can't explain stupid.
Instead of mindlessly cheerleading every electrically propelled vehicle, the environmental community should demonstrate some seldom seen logic, else we'll end up with another 30 year nuclear power moratorium, ushering in global warming way too soon. Or another wind power fiasco, where California energy officials became outraged that someone would point out that during the recent blackouts California's massive fleet of windmills were producing zero power.
The simple facts are that battery-only electrics are oxymorons so long as batteries are expensive and are not quickly rechargeable. Nor do they demonstrate ANY significant advantage over plug-ins with 40 mile or more electric driving ranges,
either in terms of gasoline avoidance or emission avoidance. There is the real possibility that plug-ins will actually do better at avoiding both,
although the differences are trivial in either case. The battery-only electric without a practical battery is an impractical car. No one can own just one car if one of them is a battery-only EV. That side effect expense, which battery-only advocates carefully avoid mentioning,makes battery-onlies far more expensive. And when was the last time you read an article shilling these vehicles that mentioned the crucial issues of battery costs and battery lifespans? I note that this article mentions neither.

Yes, battery powered EV's don't have great range; but then again, I don't need it and don't care about it. Neither do thousands and thousands of other drivers. I am sick of being robbed at the gas station.

Battery powered EV's alone are not the answer. No one technology will be "the answer". The cars Chevy, Ford and GM have produced for the last umpteen years certainly aren't the answer either. The BEV will be an option that will sell when it is reasonably priced.

The simplicity of BEV design and long-term (relatively) maintenance free life will be welcome by many. The battery technology will get better, but people that have run EV's for years seem to have gotten by some how. See just one example below.

http://www.gazette.net/stories/072408/laurnew121127_32361.shtml

Energy independence is vital to our national wellbeing. We can't afford another war for oil. This one hasn't worked out so well.

Daimler is not planning to get out of producing petroleum power cars. They are getting out of producing gasoline powered cars. Some of their cars will still be able to use diesel.

mopar 318 big block needs new car for trade for smart car i'd trade my vintage mopar engine for a cruisen start car then they would find a way to run my old motor off hydrogen gas created off a solar panel just be my luck.

http://thefoodmonsterblog.blogspot.com
I would think, Los Angeles and New York would be the perfect market for something like this. Most people who would buy one, would also have another car for longer trips.

Do you think there is a potential market for a detachable swivel wheel (generator trailer) to extend the range of these small B.E.V's. Perhaps just a carrier for additional batteries.

It still amazes me how people ask for immediate results from batteries when many of the alternatives have tons of problems when it gets to distribution of the fuel. The beauty with batteries is that we have electric energy sources all around us... pretty much everywhere! Batteries will be ruled by Moore's law before long and will be like LCD panels and CPUs, doubling in performance/price every 18 months or so. The sooner we get on board the quicker we'll see improvements. That's how market economies work. Demand then supply will follow.