Whatever Happened to Electric Cars?

[HenryBHough]

Electric cars are cool!

Except in hot climates where air conditioning eats up the batteries so fast that they don't make it out of the parking lot.

Oh, and except in cold climates where the battery efficiency problem does let them get out of the heated garage and onto the street. If the driveway isn't too long.

But in air-conditioned cities there's no disputing that they're fantastic!

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

From the Blaze tonight:

Bammy promised in his 2011 State of the Union Address, that by 2015, electric cars would swarm this country's landscape thicker than illegal aliens. Yet 99.7% of the hundreds of thousands of electric cars he promised, are nowhere to be found. Yet one more idiotic pipedream by Bammy's warmies. Oh, and you the taxpayer forked over a $7,500 subsidy for every one that was sold. Just makes you feel green and cozy all over, don't it?

The Chevy Volt is what happened to electric cars. This was Obama's baby and it blew up and caught on fire.

Horse shit, you don't have a clue. There is no "$7,500 federal subsidy" -- only a NONREFUNDABLE tax credit (that means you only got to use it as a tax break and only if you qualified) It targets rich liberals, eh? Your boy Rush tell you that? The volt does not cost $81,000 per vehicle to produce, there are always start up costs for ALL new technologies.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

I'm not against their success...I am against their SUBSIDIES!

What subsidies? Please point them out.

 

[Jarlaxle]

You do know a electric cars could blow away a Corvette right on a quarter mile right? A electric motor is more power full than a gasoline motor, that's why they have diesel electric trains, why do I have to continue to teach you on this thread?

Locomotives use electric motors for two reasons: one, no transmission can handle the gargantuan torque of their diesel engines (at least, not without doubling the size of the locomotive), and two, the engine has a very-small RPM range. (They redline at ~1000RPM.)

 

[Jarlaxle]

You told me a electric car is almost as fast lmao

12.85? Hell, I went to high school with people who had faster stuff than THAT! I was running 12's in my 4500+lb Cadillac almost 15 years ago!

 

[Jarlaxle]

It still sucks, if we leave south Carolina at the same time , you in your crappy volt , I in my Dodge ram I would be in Chicago , had lunch at Mr. Beefs, checked out the museum of science and industry, got a hotel room and you would arrive an hour or so later

I'll fly to Chicago, rent a car, and have had lunch at Mr. Beefs, checked out the museum of science & industry, gotten a hotel room, had drinks in the hotel bar and picked up a stewardess and be having great sex by the time you got there.

All that plus a flight is a hell of an itinerary for one day!

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

That's because they are being forced to do so. And they lose money on every one they sell. Use you google search and look that one up too.

Chevy Volt costs $80K to build? Not true, says GM

Late last year, the Internet went wild with the "news" that each Chevrolet Volt that was built cost taxpayers $250,000. That figure was completely untrue, of course, but the question of how much GM is paying to make each Volt is as close to a perennial one as we have 'round these parts when it comes to the new generation of plug-in vehicles. The latest figures, which come to us via "auto industry consultants who spoke with Reuters," suggest that, currently, each Volt costs GM around $80,000, or at least somewhere between $76,000 and $88,000.

That 80k breaks down this way: Each Volt currently has $56,000 in fixed costs – $18,650 in development costs and $37,350 in tooling costs – as well as $24,000 in parts and labor, according to the consultants. With each Volt sold, the $56,000 will drop by a little bit, but it's a slow process. Reuters says GM has invested an estimated $1.2 billion into the Volt program so far and when you divide $1.2 billion by the 21,500 Volts sold in the U.S. so far, you get $56,000. This does not take advertising and marketing costs into account, or the number of Volts (and Opel Amperas) sold overseas. In response, GM issued a statement clarifying just how much Reuters is relying on current sales numbers to get to the $80k number, saying, Reuters' estimate is "grossly wrong." The full statement is available below.

What GM isn't saying is how much, exactly, it costs to make a Volt. But Doug Parks, GM's vice president of global product programs, did admit that the Volt is a losing proposition, financially. He told Reuters, "It's true, we're not making money yet. ... [It] eventually will make money. As the volume comes up and we get into the Gen 2 car, we're going to turn (the losses) around."

 

[HenryBHough]

GM loses money on every Volt but makes it up on the volume.

I knew a fella that had a clothing business like that.

Had.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Superchargers

A ways to go yet, but considering how quickly Tesla is putting these stations up, by 2020, you will never be more than 100 miles from one.

Two glaring problems. One, partially-charging a battery is one of the fastest ways to kill it! And two, it cannot last...it is not a sustainable business model.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

GM loses money on every Volt but makes it up on the volume.

I knew a fella that had a clothing business like that.

Had.

That's par for the course with any new technology. Anything from video players to combustible engines went through the same growing pains.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I'm not against their success...I am against their SUBSIDIES!

What subsidies? Please point them out.

Off the top of my head, the $7500 tax credit. (A subsidy by any other name still sucks.)

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

I'm not against their success...I am against their SUBSIDIES!

What subsidies? Please point them out.

Off the top of my head, the $7500 tax credit. (A subsidy by any other name still sucks.)

That's not a subsidy, it's....

YOUR OWN MONEY!!!

Tax breaks are bad now???

I see.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Still a subsidy...and no amount of stupid graphics will change that fact!

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Still a subsidy...and no amount of stupid graphics will change that fact!

That's it, eh? You're right and there is no need for you to explain anything?

It is a non-refundable tax credit, that means you can only save your own money.

Also, the tax break itself was subject to a phase-out which has already occurred.

Plug-In Electric Drive Vehicle Credit IRC 30D

 

[Jarlaxle]

Still a subsidy, no matter how you try to spin it.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Really? There are a large number of coal powered generating plants being closed. As they dwindle, the generating capacity will be picked up somewhere. I am betting on nuclear and hydro, but the other sources are not going anywhere.

Natural gas.

Nat Gas is 3 times cleaner than coal. But it's still not where we want to be. The good news is, the coal fired can be converted to NG and some are doing that right now. All new ones are NG. While it's not the cleanest, we have reached the apex for Hydro and Wind and Solar will cheaply only add to the total output. Coal is still the cheapest but I lived and worked a coal fire plant and it snowed black snow.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Still a subsidy, no matter how you try to spin it.

You already said that several times. It's abundantly apparent that you cannot admit to being wrong under any circumstance.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Maybe it would help if you provided a quote from Obama vs something you made up

There are about 1% electric cars now where before it was zero.

If you're talking about electric cars as a percentile of all automobiles/light trucks registered in the US (not counting hybrids), the number of electric cars registered last year was 130,000 compared to 247 million non-electric/non-hybrid light vehicles. 1% would put the electric car count at 2,247,000, not 130,000. This is why your posts have zero credibility, dean. You're not even a mediochre propagandist, you're just a bad liar and a lazy one at that. Typical useful idiot in other words.

Electric car use by country - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Average age of U.S. car light truck on road hits record 11.4 years Polk says

Another interesting point in the Polk link above: The average age of petroleum-based vehicles in the US hit a historical high last year: 11.4 years. Because of Obama's marvelous economy, most people can't afford new cars/trucks, so they keep their old ones much longer, and they put the maintenance money into them that keeps them on our roads for 200,000+ miles instead of 100,000 miles.

I bought a new truck at Christmas. The sales manager at the dealership told me "Today, the used car market is pretty much the new car market. Nobody can afford the new ones anymore."

Add the fact that electric cars, from the CO/CO2 belching, coal burning electric generation plants with which they're umbilically attached, actually produce 2.8 times the greenhouse gas emissions of any petroleum powered light car/truck, and warmies really look more and more ludicrous every day, don' you agree? Or in dean's case, more and more ridiculous every day.

Since coal power generating plants only account for 39% of the power generated in the US, your "umbilically attached" comment is accurate in less than half of the country.

In fact, nuclear energy (19%), hydro (7%) and other renewables (6%) account for 32% of the power generated, so there is almost as much generated by renewables as by coal. As these technologies expand it will overtake coal as a source for electric power.

What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration EIA

So you admit (do the arithmetic) that electric cars ad at least 100% more in the way of noxious greenhouse gases to the atmosphere than petroleum-based vehicles?

Of course I don't. Even if you have only coal generated electricity, the controls on pollutants and greenhouse gases are better than those on the thousands of gas powered cars.

Bullshit. The tailpipe emissions of a modern car are basically zero. (Some cars, the emissions ARE zero!)

I suggest you post what cars are zero emission. I can't seem to find any that arn't either wind or electric powered. I think there are few experimental solars that make zero. But name one combustion engined car that is zero emission. Even Hydrogen is not zero emission.

Now, step away from Pauxsnews and actually do some research yourself.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Unfortunately the American left's dream of a sustained $5.00 a gallon gas has never materialized, and thus electric cars for the moment will not be manufactured in massive quantities.

 

[westwall]

But who the fuck would buy one as their primary car?

Not a single post of yours isn't a profane rag. So, you want to be in charge. You will some day. Hell just might need a new leader.

BTW, I happen to be a moderate like MOST Americans. In 2016, the Reps in Congress had better damn well get busy.

You reap what you sow. Your first post was belligerent and accusatory and you're surprised when you receive the same. Really......

You shot first. Then you complain when the other person shoots back. When that happens, you are just bitching.

Untrue. Your first post in this thread was an attack. Your responses were in kind. And you are the person whining. Not us.

Disagreeing isn't an attack. I realized something the other day talking to my Sister. She is hard core right wing. Everything brought up sooner or later leads to "Obamasomething" in a negative way. Sitting on my side, the hate just oozes. You don't talk with us, you talk to us. And anything that is said outside of your "Argument" is obviously an attack and deserves a whole series of Profanity. You have taken Liberal to the profane stages in your mind. So, it's equal to you yelling "N...ger" over and over. Well, profane one,, I disagree with you enough levels that forces me to "Disagree" with you.

You called anyone who didn't agree with you "stupid". That's not a disagreement, that's an attack. Thanks for playing but you are simply wrong, and intellectually dishonest to boot.