GM Volt! Is it the solution to Foreign Oil?

[Navy1960]

First Hemperor welcome to USMB, and second, perhaps the things you are stating would be better debated in a different thread other than one that is discussing EV car's? While your concerns on what sort of car you do not want are yours, it' worth noting that as these EV car's and trucks become more and more available they will indeed be charged by the very technologies that you have posted and there is no way to get around that. One of the things we have discussed on here is perhaps an overall solution that includes not only upgrading these technologies in conjunction with the introduction of these EV car's but also a concentrated effort on a grid that supports it. As for the other things you posted again, there are several threads on USMB that discuss the very things you posted and I'm sure many here would find them worthy of debate.

 

[Old Rocks]

EEStor, the company behind the ultralight, ultra-efficient – and ultra secret – EEStor Electrical Energy Storage Units (EESU) that could change the electric car world, still isn't giving out much information about their product. But Ian Clifford, the CEO of Zenn Motors, is talking.

First, some numbers. The EESU could be a 52kwh pack that provides a 250-mile range and only weigh 280 pounds. ZENN now owns 10.7 percent of EEStor, up from 3.8 percent. Thanks to EEStor's recent permittivity announcements, ZENN has paid EEStor another $700,000.

Now, the intangibles. Clifford told GM-Volt.com that he sees the EESU prototypes "on a regular basis" and is waiting for a production prototype to be delivered by the end of this year. Clifford said that there is a "full production facility" at EEStor's pilot production plant. Possible in-vehicle application of the EESU could be around 600V, which Clifford says, "increases the drive efficiency, it makes the components somewhat smaller, and ultimately less expensive and obviously for mass commercialization." He couldn't say if he's actually seen one of the production EESU's, claiming non-disclosure agreements. He did promise, "absolutely," that demonstrations will take place in 2010. Read more at GM-Volt.com.

EESTor update from ZENN CEO Ian Clifford; demonstrations coming in 2010 — Autoblog Green

 

[Old Rocks]

over 450 watt hours per kilogram and over 700 watt hours per liter, charge in minutes, and, for all practical vehicular purposes, last indefinitely.” As well the company said it expects to offer the EESU in “a variety of electric propulsion systems for use in electric bicycles, scooters, motorcycles, and three-wheeled vehicles.”

They say they plan to offer a bike with a 1 kwh EESU weighing less than 5 pounds that will propel the bike over 100 miles.

EEStor Rides Again, This Time on a Bike | GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

 

[Old Rocks]

I am looking at the weight and volume figures on Eestor's caps, and, if they can truly deliver on that, then it would make good sense to retrofit large vehicles like pickups and vans to electric power, using hub motors. For a unit with equal weight to the engine, transmission, driveline, and third member, one could have a range of well over 500 miles.

 

[geauxtohell]

Its a cool looking car that gets 230 miles to the gallon. However, the gas engine does kick into until after 40 miles. Meaning you run entirely gas/oil free for the first 40 miles. See below the average round trip commute is 32 miles, meaning most Americans would run gas free most days. Before they get home and are able to charge their cars! Obvious some in the city would be screwed, but this would help many Americans.

Its coming out in 2010, with a price tag of $40K with a $7,500 government credit the car will be $32.5K, which is affordable to most Americans, esp when you take gas prices out of the equations.
Chevrolet Volt's official fuel economy: 230 mpg - Aug. 11, 2009

They report an average one-way commute time of 26 minutes (over an average distance of 16 miles).

Poll: Traffic in the United States - ABC News

Until you can get around that whole thermodynamics thing, we will never be rid of foreign oil.

Though more gas milage is a good thing.

 

[Navy1960]

I thought you all might find this interesting in the debate over fossil fuels. We all know that in the commercial aviation industry uses fossil fuels at a big rate. so I have two articles that I thought you all might enjoy that basically shows that technology does exist to move this nation away from owing it's life to OPEC and IMHO these are the sorts of things that this nation needs to be investing in heavily to repidly move this nations energy production back to this nation..

ScienceDaily (Feb. 1, 2009) — NASA and 11 other research groups are testing two non-petroleum-based jet fuels in the pursuit of alternative fuels that can power commercial jets and address rising oil costs.
Alternative Jet Fuels Put To The Test

On May 14, 1961, the world's first nuclear ramjet engine, "Tory-IIA," mounted on a railroad car, roared to life for just a few seconds. Three years later, "Tory-IIC" was run for five minutes at full power, producing 513 megawatts and the equivalent of over 35,000 pounds force (156 kN) thrust[citation needed]. But despite these and other successful tests the Pentagon, sponsor of the "Pluto project," had second thoughts; Intercontinental ballistic missile technology had proved to be more easily developed than previously thought, reducing the need for such highly capable cruise missiles. On July 1, 1964, seven years and six months after it was born, "Project Pluto" was cancelled.
Project Pluto - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The latter technology existed over 40 years ago, and can you imagine how far along this nation could have been had these technologies been allowed to develop over a 40 year time span?

 

[mdn2000]

I NEVER WANT or NEED a COAL-POWERED CAR.
Nor NUCLEAR-POWERED CAR. Do BRAKES CHARGE BATTERY YET ? Ju$t $pinning Wheels $HOULD CHARGE $ome

Nikola Tesla's Flying-Machione www DOT LOD DOT org
www DOT Hemp4Fuel DOT com

Enough evidence to prosecute Rumsfeld for war crimes/UK ‘must release’ Iraq war files
UN official: Enough evidence to prosecute Rumsfeld for war crimes

Killing over a million people is Genocide.

Also there are the deaths an injuries suffered by the soldiers who were sent to the illegal war.

The list of crimes is quite extensive.

There is also the abuse of power. I would even call it treason.

No one should ever again, be allowed to commit these types of crimes and those who did, certainly should not go free. They are criminals.

David Edwards and Stephen C. Webster January 26, 2009

Monday, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak told CNN’s Rick Sanchez that the US has an “obligation” to investigate whether Bush administration officials ordered torture, adding that he believes that there is already enough evidence to prosecute former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

“We have clear evidence,” he said. “In our report that we sent to the United Nations, we made it clear that former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld clearly authorized torture methods and he was told at that time by Alberto Mora, the legal council of the Navy, ‘Mr. Secretary, what you are actual ordering here amounts to torture.’ So, there we have the clear evidence that Mr. Rumsfeld knew what he was doing but, nevertheless, he ordered torture.”

Asked during an interview with Germany’s ZDF television on Jan. 20, Nowak said: “I think the evidence is on the table.”

At issue, however, is whether “American law will recognize these forms of torture.”

A bipartisan Senate report released last month found Rumsfeld and other top administration officials responsible for abuse of Guantanamo detainees in US custody.

It said Rumsfeld authorized harsh interrogation techniques on December 2, 2002 at the Guantanamo prison, although he ruled them out a month later.

The coercive measures were based on a document signed by Bush in February, 2002.

There is a video at the source as well.

Source

UK ‘must release’ Iraq war files

January 28, 2009

The British government has been ordered to release the minutes of crucial ministerial meetings from 2003 at which the United States-led invasion of Iraq was discussed.

The information tribunal, which hears appeals under Britain’s data protection act, backed a decision to disclose minutes of cabinet meetings from March 13 and 17, where ministers held talks about whether the decision to go to war was allowed under international law.

The tribunal said: “We have decided that the public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the formal minutes of two cabinet meetings at which ministers decided to commit forces to military action in Iraq did not… outweigh the public interest in disclosure.

The cabinet office has 28 days to decide whether to appeal against the ruling.

Announcing its decision on Tuesday, the tribunal said: “The decision to commit the nation’s armed forces to the invasion of another country is momentous in its own right, and… its seriousness is increased by the criticisms that have been made of the general decision-making processes in the cabinet at the time.”

A spokesman for Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, said: “We are considering our response”.

Blair criticised

Tony Blair, prime minister at the time of the invasion, was widely criticised for backing George Bush, the then US president, in invading Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein despite failing to secure a second United Nations resolution on the matter.

Ministerial discussions focused notably on Peter Goldsmith’s, the then attorney general, advice on the legality of war.

Blair’s government strongly resisted demands for the advice of its most senior legal adviser to be made public, until a large section was leaked during the 2005 general election campaign.

Goldsmith then denied ministers pressured him into changing his mind to rule that invading Iraq would be legal in international law even without a second UN security council resolution.

The information tribunal said that “there has… been criticism of the attorney general’s legal advice and of the particular way in which the March 17 opinion was made available to the cabinet only at the last moment and the March 7 opinion was not disclosed to it at all.”

The tribunal ruling backed up an earlier decision by Richard Thomas, the information commissioner.

Thomas said: “I am pleased that the tribunal has upheld my decision that the public interest in disclosing the official cabinet minutes in this particular case outweighs the public interest in withholding the information.

“Disclosing the minutes will allow the public to more fully understand this particular decision.”

Source

Blair and his cohorts should be tried for war crimes as well.

Others in the Bush Administration as well as Bush, should also be charged with war crimes and crimes against Humanity.

The weapons alone that were used, are one good place to start.

The war was based on fabricated information and lies.

Torture was condoned. Killing over a million people is Genocide.

Also there are the deaths an injuries suffered by the soldiers who were sent to the illegal war.

The list of crimes is quite extensive.

There is also the abuse of power. I would even call it treason.

No one should ever again, be allowed to commit these types of crimes and those who did, certainly should not go free. They are criminals.

Obama Revokes Bush Executive Order on Presidential Archives
Obama shuts network of CIA ‘ghost prisons’
Indexed List of all Stories in Archives
Published in: crime waron at 4:02 am Comments Off
Tags: Bush, crimes against humanity, fabricated information, illegal war, lies, Rumsfeld, Tony Blair, torture, UK, United Nations Special Rapporteur, war crimes,

weapons of mass desperation

This was a joke right.

again if you produce it you produced pollution you did not have to, build homes within walking distance of work, problem solved.

Every dollar you spend on a new vehicle is a dollar more of pollution you created, its that simple, its actually more pollution with the tax subsidies that hides the real cost.