Poll: Electric Cars
- Thread starter Mathew952
- Start date
Recommended Videos
![[Gavo]](https://eg-forums-escapist-data.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/33/33764.jpg?1620201950){kind=avatar}
Regardless of what electric cars look like now, I'm not buying one unless they can make a functional, efficient one that looks like this this [http://www.classicchevy5speed.com/images/1969_Camaro_Tremec_TKO_600_Install_WU/69Camaro030.jpg],
While they're at it, they can work on sticking a shifter in there. I'll cling to my 6-speed gearbox 'til I die!The Electric Victorian said:
Was it the Enertia [http://www.enertiabike.com/]? That thing makes my '92 Katana look fast by comparison...Hunde Des Krieg said:
People also don't realize where the power comes from to charge those batteries on full electric only cars. The anti-nuclear loonies forget that coal burning plants are what give them power... so the people that push electric cars and usually the same ones that are anti-nuclear. Thus shuffling polution from one spot to another. And it's not a small amount, either.
Besides, Top Gear tested a BMW M3 versus a Prius on the track, and the hybrid got 2mpg worse. They also tested a Subaru Legacy diesel, Jaguar XJ6 twin turbo and a Volkswagen Polo BlueMotion. They raced from Basel in Switzerland to Blackpool in North-West England, a 750 mile journey, on a single tank of fuel. That's right. The Twin turbo Jag went as far as a VW Polo and Legacy diesel. Clarkson was driving the Jag much of the way over the speed limit and with all the instruments on (Including AC) because he wanted to run out of fuel near his house... and it never happened.
It goes to show you that hybrid and electric cars need to go a lot further in development and distribution before they will ever surpass internal combustion engined cars. Right now they aren't worth the extra money you spend on them.
Give us efficiency, but not at the cost of sanity.
Besides, Top Gear tested a BMW M3 versus a Prius on the track, and the hybrid got 2mpg worse. They also tested a Subaru Legacy diesel, Jaguar XJ6 twin turbo and a Volkswagen Polo BlueMotion. They raced from Basel in Switzerland to Blackpool in North-West England, a 750 mile journey, on a single tank of fuel. That's right. The Twin turbo Jag went as far as a VW Polo and Legacy diesel. Clarkson was driving the Jag much of the way over the speed limit and with all the instruments on (Including AC) because he wanted to run out of fuel near his house... and it never happened.
It goes to show you that hybrid and electric cars need to go a lot further in development and distribution before they will ever surpass internal combustion engined cars. Right now they aren't worth the extra money you spend on them.
Give us efficiency, but not at the cost of sanity.
Who said anything about electric cars being environmentally friendly...? Fossil fuels are a finite resource and our dependence on foreign oil supplies is a thorn in our side. Eventually, we'll need to find an alternative to to gasoline, not because we're environmentalists but because we have no other choice.....The Electric Victorian said:
Right, we need to get off of fossil fuels, I understand that. Obviously, Lithium batteries are a good way to go right? Ostensibly, no. The Handbook of Lithium and Natural Calcium states: "Lithium is a comparatively rare element, although it is found in many rocks and some brines, but always in very low concentrations. There are a fairly large number of both lithium mineral and brine deposits but only comparatively a few of them are of actual or potential commercial value. Many are very small, others are too low in grade."
We're trading one finite, expensive fuel source for another. Explain to me the part where this is a major improvement on gasoline. Like riftinducer said earlier, hydrogen-fuel cells are thus far the only reasonable alternative.
We're trading one finite, expensive fuel source for another. Explain to me the part where this is a major improvement on gasoline. Like riftinducer said earlier, hydrogen-fuel cells are thus far the only reasonable alternative.
Cars designed for fuel efficiency aren't going to run well if they're being driven at 200km/h. This is especially true for hybrids like the Prius, which won't engage their electric motors at all in a track setting. Drive them all around town or on a highway doing 100 and see how that changes the results...Turismo said:
To further drive home the point of lithium being just as silly as gasoline: in 1998 the cost of usable lithium was about $43 USD per pound ($95 per kg).
There is a car coming out that runs like 50 miles on electricity then switches to gasoline, that seems like a good idea. Sorry can't remember the name of the car, but I think it is a Ford?
Der...fuck?
I realize that designers are trying to emphasize the revolutionary and futuristic aspects of the electric car, but making it totally alien isn't going to help their cause.
Half those abominations either looked like castrated buggies or some kind of deformed fruit.
Here's hoping the sleek, sensibly designed Volt [http://www.cartype.com/pics/4240/full/chevy_volt_sf1.jpg] fixes all of this.
I realize that designers are trying to emphasize the revolutionary and futuristic aspects of the electric car, but making it totally alien isn't going to help their cause.
Half those abominations either looked like castrated buggies or some kind of deformed fruit.
Here's hoping the sleek, sensibly designed Volt [http://www.cartype.com/pics/4240/full/chevy_volt_sf1.jpg] fixes all of this.
You want a car with a renewable energy resource that balances efficiancy AND style? Look no further my friends. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon]
1) Those things are butt-ugly. I would never touch one.
2) The thing many people (some people in this thread come close) are missing, is that electric cars are overall worse for the environment. I don't mean in the metal or the manufacturing, I mean in terms of actually driving, more pollution is indirectly produced by an electric vehicle:
Let's start with a little bit of gasoline.
We can do 2 things with this gas; we can put it into a car, or we can send it to a power plant.
In the car, a few milliliters of gas are injected into the air, ignited, burned cleanly, and the expanding gas directly pushes the wheels (After a few gears and such, of course).
In a power plant, the gas (far more per second) is burned, this makes heat, which boils water (somewhat inefficient), which becomes steam (incredibly easily compressed compared to water), which turns a generator (mechanical friction loses energy), which goes to a transformer and power lines (a little power lost to heat, though the massive voltage minimizes this), which goes to your car, which turns generators (more energy lost to mechanical friction).
If nuclear-, hydro-, or wind-power were more widely used, then electric cars may become less damaging, but until then, stick with your gas guzzler; at least it doesn't burn gas by the barrel.
2) The thing many people (some people in this thread come close) are missing, is that electric cars are overall worse for the environment. I don't mean in the metal or the manufacturing, I mean in terms of actually driving, more pollution is indirectly produced by an electric vehicle:
Let's start with a little bit of gasoline.
We can do 2 things with this gas; we can put it into a car, or we can send it to a power plant.
In the car, a few milliliters of gas are injected into the air, ignited, burned cleanly, and the expanding gas directly pushes the wheels (After a few gears and such, of course).
In a power plant, the gas (far more per second) is burned, this makes heat, which boils water (somewhat inefficient), which becomes steam (incredibly easily compressed compared to water), which turns a generator (mechanical friction loses energy), which goes to a transformer and power lines (a little power lost to heat, though the massive voltage minimizes this), which goes to your car, which turns generators (more energy lost to mechanical friction).
If nuclear-, hydro-, or wind-power were more widely used, then electric cars may become less damaging, but until then, stick with your gas guzzler; at least it doesn't burn gas by the barrel.
No that wasn't it. I have seen that bike before, but the one I mean is by the same company that built the electrix(?) scooter, and the bike, besides being kinda wierd, was really fast looking.Horticulture said:
