THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 3 (merged)

[Plantagenet]

Back in the mid 1800's an electric car could go 50-60 miles and then would require 10 hours or so to recharge.

Really?

And what exactly did electric cars plug into in the mid-1800s?

lightning bolts?

[Timo]

Political will has nothing to do with technology. Political posturing and lending of money to push technology is a recipe for disaster as we see time and again. Just because someone wants something to work does not mean it will. People that are willing to give up having a mode of transportation that is properly suited to our needs as a country will drive EV's so they can feel good about something. The rest of us, the thinking ones, will wait until the battery technology and popularity of said cars reaches a point that they can be used as daily transport for more than a 5 mile trip to the 7-11. Point in fact. Nissan Leaf, 60-80 miles on one charge and 10 or more hours to recharge. Back in the mid 1800's an electric car could go 50-60 miles and then would require 10 hours or so to recharge. Yes you can?? Can what? Brag about old technology rather than smart technology? Smart technology is a diesel generator powering a battery pack that drives electric motors and goes 268 miles on one gallon of diesel. THAT is a Yes we can moment. Sheesh.

Point in fact, humans have been burning something to generate energy, either wood, or coal, or oil, or natural gas, or some other combustible material since the dawn of humanity. I'm really glad the "smart" technology is to continue burning something, like diesel fuel, instead of finding a better, more sustainable, and less destructive way to service our needs as a species. No need to worry. Someone else will find that better way. Let's all just sit back and wait for someone else to more us forward.

Don't get me wrong here. I totally acknowledge the necessary requisite for interim technologies to serve as the transition from technology A to technology B. The engine you described is such a technological adaptation that will serve its purpose very well. But, discounting the technological innovations of others, such as the Nissan Leaf, is counterproductive, and actually serves to lessen new technological innovation. We didn't get to the cell-phone without first stringing up the telegraph from coast to coast, and then the telephone with operator assistance, and then rotary-dial, and then touch-tone, and then satelite, and then cellular, and currently Smart Phones that talk back to us. One step at a time, and every step taken is as valuable as every other step, if for no other reason than some paths are eventually recognized as the wrong path, to begin with. Does the 8-track ring a bell? And speaking just for myself, i actually think the Nissan Leaf would be a great car to own as i transition my own life away from combustion. Or maybe a Ford Focus. Or a Tesla!

[Rhyunbear]

I typically find that becoming educated keeps one from coming across as an aloof idiot. You, however, have a different viewpoint. Have a nice day.


Who invented the very first EV is uncertain and several inventors have been given credit. In 1828, Hungarian, Ányos Jedlik invented a small-scale model car powered by an electric motor that he designed. Between 1832 and 1839 (the exact year is uncertain), Robert Anderson of Scotland invented a crude electric-powered carriage. In 1835, another small-scale electric car was designed by Professor Stratingh of Groningen, Holland, and built by his assistant Christopher Becker. In 1835, Thomas Davenport, a blacksmith from Brandon, Vermont, built a small-scale electric car. Davenport was also the inventor of the first of the first American-built DC electric motor.

[Rhyunbear]

Timo,
You make my point for me while still trying to come off as the one that made it. I was pointing out (rightfully so) that the Nissan Leaf does nothing that was not done in the 1800's prior to the widespread use of cheap and more powerful gas and diesel. For that reason the pure EV as it is being made now is not a step forward, it is a re-hash of the old. The Tesla gets a bit closer to be sure, yet even Elon Musk found that he was spending $160k to sell a $109k auto at first. And even with the huge battery pack you have a limited range. I am all for technological advancement when it is beneficial. EV cars are far from being beneficial in their current state for most of our society. Every fuel is sustainable, the choice is how much are we willing to invest to keep it going. Electricity does not make itself, coal does and oil does. Natural processes of organic matter becoming somewhat dead and then compressed create these things. To say that they are not sustainable is to think that once the dinosaurs died that was the last organic matter ever to do so from then till now. IF that were true, then I would agree that we shall run out of natural fuel. The discussion of whether we are using more than is being regenerated is one that can be had with more intellectual honesty as long as advanced oil drilling techniques are also taken into account. I find most people that glam onto EV's do so because they have a misguided notion that they are saving something that they do not have the ability to save. They tell themselves what it takes to justify it, but the truth is still the truth. Once battery technology advances and rare earth minerals become less expensive (not on the horizon BTW) then there might actually be a fighting chance for a pure EV.

[Plantagenet]

Who invented the very first EV is uncertain and several inventors have been given credit. In 1828, Hungarian, Ányos Jedlik invented a small-scale model car powered by an electric motor that he designed. Between 1832 and 1839 (the exact year is uncertain), Robert Anderson of Scotland invented a crude electric-powered carriage. In 1835, another small-scale electric car was designed by Professor Stratingh of Groningen, Holland, and built by his assistant Christopher Becker. In 1835, Thomas Davenport, a blacksmith from Brandon, Vermont, built a small-scale electric car. Davenport was also the inventor of the first of the first American-built DC electric motor.

Your post was plagiarized word for word from this web site:
link to web page from which Rhyunbear plagiarized his post

The internet is a marvelous tool for researching almost anything. However, even on the internet it is dishonest to copy text word for word from one site and try to pass it off as your writing at a different site.

Cheers!

PS: Please drop the insults and plagiarized pseudo knowledge and lets start over again, shall we? I politely asked you a question. If you don't know the answer thats OK.

----you said above that electric cars in the mid-1800s took about 10 hours to recharge. I asked you how did they get recharged? There were no electric power plants and no regional electric system in the mid-1800s....did the inventors hook them up to water-wheels or lightning bolts or mix a new batch of chemicals each night or what?

[Timo]

Slightly off topic discussion we've entered into here, but none-the-less, i'm here, too. The gist of what i was attempting to say is that research and product development takes time, and technolgical advances build off of each other. In that sense, even though battery EV technology hasn't really progressed much over the past 100 years, further research into improving that technology is hardly a waste of time. The same approach can be exemplified by improvements in ICE. MUCH more efficient engines are available now, but those advances in technology only occured because of research into making it happen. Battery technology will be just the same, hopefully, but even acknowledging its potential failure is not a reason to give up on the effort. Elon Musk, IMO, is shaping up to be the next cultural Steve Jobs, taking a simple idea, removing its boundaries, and making a successful business out of it. I totally admit that i may have made an overstatement, there, but i admire his ingenuity and determination. Aynway, on to the Leaf, Nissan makes cars as a business, and the Leaf may very well be considered the Model T or the Model A in another 30 or 40 years. Advancements take time, and the Leaf, rightly or wrongly, is just one small step toward making EVs a larger reality for everyone. No current technology is the answer for what lies ahead for all of us, but i fully endorse the (sensible) efforts in recognizing that current technologies are already outdated when looking at what technologies we'll need to employ in the future.

[Rhyunbear]

So, wait, let me draw out those two letters one more time sssoooo, You, when proven wrong resort to attacking the information and not accepting that you were wrong. I hope that you continue your education. Admitting your mistakes is one of them. I did not then or now say that those words were mine. That would have been theft. What you pointed out was your attempt at defense. Try Try again.

[Revi]

I guess I am delusional while driving around all day in my electric car. it must not work. It must not have worked to get my wife around all day, and then after plugging it in for a couple of hours it must not have worked to take me to a baseball game and then to the ice cream shop. It was just a dream, but a nice one. The sun was shining and the car was running perfectly. I think I'll just stay in my dream world where I get around for a penny a mile.

[Logic]

Apparently I am delusional as well driving my EV. I must have been dreaming when I thought I drove further than 5 miles to the corner store.
My wife and I have put about 12,000 miles/year on our EV. It works great for our needs. EVs work great for many people. And there are a number of people who's driving habits or charging abilities make EVs not an option. Luckily many people can enjoy EVs.
For anyone concerned about peak oil, that would seem to be a good thing;)

[Plantagenet]

More bad Karma:

Fisker Karma EV starts house fire in Texas

Fire investigator blames Fisker Karma EV for house fire

GM Volts and Tesla Karmas were already recalled in 2011 because of concerns about battery fires. Looks like the Tesla Corporation might have to recall the Karma again to fix whatever this new problem is.

[Logic]

Plantagenet, I know you have been corrected on this before. Why do you continue to label Tesla as the builder of the Karma? Tesla has nothing to do with building or selling the Karma.

Reading your article, it appears the battery pack was not being charged, is still intact, and was not the source of the fire.

I have no problem with people skeptical of EVs. But you seem to have an irrational axe to grind. Your arguments and implications are I'll formed.

[Plantagenet]

Reading your article, it appears the battery pack was not being charged, is still intact, and was not the source of the fire.

I have no problem with people skeptical of EVs. But you seem to have an irrational axe to grind. Your arguments and implications are I'll formed.

Hi Logic: The Fire Marshall who investigated the fire said the Karma was the source of the fire. It is irrational and illogical of you to claim the Karma wasn't the source of the fire when the very experienced official fire investigator says the Karma was the source of the fire.

Your argument is ill-formed, and your conclusion is simplistic. The fire could've started from an electrical short anywhere in the Karma---the fact that the battery pack was not being charged and is intact does not preclude the conclusion that the Karma was the source of the fire, since the battery pack is not the only potential source of a fire in an EV.

Cheers:

PS: You are right about the bad Karma not being a Tesla EV----its a Fisker EV. Sorry----I watched "Revenge of the Electric Car" on PBS about a week ago, and Elon Musk and Tesla were featured in that report.

[Plantagenet]

Fisker just issued a statement saying the Battery wasn't the source of the Karma fire.

Yes.............but a short anywhere in the car might be responsible.

I'd be happier if Fisker could determine just what went wrong in the Karma to cause it to catch on fire, rather then playing games by selectively saying this or that component isn't to blame......

[Plantagenet]

I have no problem with people skeptical of EVs.

I do have a problem with people who don't care about safety.

The idea that cars should not spontaneously burst into flames in people's garages is not a matter a "skepticism".

Its common sense.

Its completely irrational of you to dismiss concern about fire dangers as mere "skepticism about EVs."

[Plantagenet]

Here's a pic of the burned up Fisker Karma EV. It was almost completely consumed by the fire. Based on the complete destruction of the Karma, it seems like the Fire Marshall came to a reasonable conclusion when he said he thought that the Karma was the source of the fire and the focus of the fire once it got started.



Things around the Karma were seriously damaged by the fire and heat radiating from the Karma, but they were not consumed by the fire like the Karma EV was. You can see an ICE SUV that was parked beside the Karma---it is seriously damaged, but it was not consumed by fire like the Karma was. Similarly the garage itself was damaged by the EV fire, but survived. The owner had just driven the Karma home a few minutes before it caught on fire---thank god the house itself wasn't destroyed when the EV burst into flames.

[Timo]

Plant, just to add a little perspective to your argument regarding the Karma, and EVs in general (without questioning your particular viewpoint), one step at a time. I'm not endorsing the Karma or discounting the problems, potential or valid, with its batery systems. However, from my point of view, again -right or wrong, i look at the hundreds, if not thousands of actual lives lost in the battles over oil, and the inevitable disasters that stem from its delivery. The Deepwater Horizon was far more catastrophic than any fire caused by any EV, anywhere. The wars in Nigeria, the spills and leaks in Michigan, refinery fires, and on and on, are much more detrimental to life and property than the fires of the Karma, or the Volt, for that matter. I'm not discounting your opinions regarding battery technologies, or any specific EV product. I'm just saying that in the larger scheme of things, yes, there are still problems to be worked out, and yes, those problems can and probably will continue to cause futher damage, but comparatively, the stand-by technologies of the status quo are far more troubling and cause for concern. One step at a time. Learn from our mistakes. Make things better than they are today. Patience, up to a point, is a virtue. Especially when it comes to developing and implementing new technologies.

[Plantagenet]

Plant, just to add a little perspective to your argument regarding the Karma, and EVs in general (without questioning your particular viewpoint), one step at a time. I'm not endorsing the Karma or discounting the problems, potential or valid, with its batery systems. However, from my point of view, again -right or wrong, i look at the hundreds, if not thousands of actual lives lost in the battles over oil, and the inevitable disasters that stem from its delivery. The Deepwater Horizon was far more catastrophic than any fire caused by any EV, anywhere. The wars in Nigeria, the spills and leaks in Michigan, refinery fires, and on and on, are much more detrimental to life and property than the fires of the Karma, or the Volt, for that matter.

Don't forget to count the environmental destruction and disease and deaths caused by coal-mining on the EVs tally sheet, since coal provides most of the energy to generate the electricity used by EVs.



--------------------------------

The issue this new fire in a bad Karma EV raises is whether or not there is a fire risk with the Fisker Karma and perhaps other EVs?

If there is it should be fixed-----How hard is that to understand?

[Plantagenet]

OK the EV boosters are right---You've convinced me. Like you, I no longer worry about the engineering or the poor quality reported by Fisker owners and especially don't worry about this little fire issue. Who cares about the possibility that EVs catch on fire when they are sitting in a garage. It does't happen very often, and the battery pack survived as every bit of the rest of the car burned to the ground.--- Just remember that lots of rich celebrities drive EVs. For instance, Justin Bieber has a Fisker Karma. AND if Justin Bieber has a Fisker Karma then buying an EV is a no-brainer----I mean really a no-brainer.

Justin Bieber has a Fisker Karma and he take hot babes like Selena Gomez for rides in it and you can be like him and buy one too!


Selena Gomez went on a date to the Chik-fil-A with Justin Bieber in his chrome Fisker Karma! These cars are really good for the environment because they run on electricity made from coal and they only cost 100,000!

snark alert

[Timo]

Funny! I've also thought that big-time celebrity wannabes who drive EVs diminish the public's perception of their technological value. I'm not a huge Karma fan, but i certainly like the Karma a whole lot more than i have any respect for Justin Bieber.

Ane speaking of the Bebe, i heard through the grapevine that he's Demi Moore's new couger meat.

Sorry. I couldn't resist.

[Plantagenet]

The Fisker corporation is behaving outrageously. Here is a letter from the attorneys of the man whose Karma spontaneously caught fire in his garage, describing what has happened in this matter so far:

statement from the attorneys representing the Fisker Karma owner, Jeremy Gutierrez. The statement is reproduced below.


Houston, Texas, May 9, 2012 – On the afternoon of May 2, 2012, Mr. Jeremy Gutierrez's brand new Fisker Karma hybrid electric vehicle caught fire while parked in his garage, setting fire to his home while his wife, mother, and child were inside. Thanks to the fast action of Mr. Gutierrez, he was able to evacuate his family from the home moments before portions of the house were engulfed in flames, including his child's bedroom.

The Fort Bend County Fire Department immediately responded to the scene and as able to contain and extinguish the fire before total destruction of the Gutierrez's family home. The fire department recently completed their investigation and determined the origin of the fire was, in fact, Gutierrez's newly purchased Fisker Karma hybrid electric vehicle that he just took possession of two weeks earlier. Chief Investigator for the Fort Bend County Fire Marshal's Office Robert N. Baker has concluded that the fire was accidental in nature.

Since the date of this incident, Mr. Gutierrez has been fully cooperative with public safety officials, as well as insurance adjusters and the vehicle manufacturer's investigators. In fact, Mr. Gutierrez fully accommodated the precise and somewhat peculiar demands of Fisker Automotive, who sent their self-proclaimed “SWAT Team” of engineers and inspectors (that included their own forensic cause and origin investigator) to the Gutierrez home within 24 hours of the fire. They descended upon the Gutierrez home in alarming numbers and immediately demanded a 24-hour lock-down of his home, including the remains of the Fisker Karma vehicle. They also cordoned off portions of the Gutierrez home with non-transparent tarps to block the view from the public. Fisker even had access to eyewitnesses, who were interviewed by Fisker investigators and those investigators were shown video footage of the Fisker vehicle on fire .... Mr. Gutierrez accommodated every request with the hope of have a full, fair and open inquiry into the cause of the Fisker vehicle fire that set his house ablaze and endangered his family.

Despite the fact public safety and law enforcement officials have determined Mr. Gutierrez's home and vehicles are not a crime scene, Fisker Automotive released a public statement on May 8, 2012 implying fraud or malicious intent were open questions. The family is stunned by this implication. The Gutierrez family has afforded every accommodation to Fisker and access to all evidence that public safety and law enforcement official examined. Fisker's statement is a grave disappointment, especially in light of the damages the family suffered and continues to suffer.

The Gutierrez family has suffered enough. They are temporarily displaced from their home, and have lost three vehicles. They value their privacy and wish to have this investigation completed immediately so they can return to their home. The law firm of Johnson, Trent, West & Taylor, L.L.P., a Houston-based law firm, has and will continue to represent the Gutierrez family during this time. Please direct all inquires on the matter to our firm; do not contact Mr. or Mrs. Gutierrez directly. Attorneys for the family, Lori Hood or Rafe Taylor, can be reached at (713) 222-2323.



Read more: autoweek news story on Fisker Karma fire