What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

20% California EV Owners Going Back to Gasoline

Sunni Man

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
56,819
Reaction score
18,835
Points
2,280
Location
Patriotic American Muslim

Humanity cannot afford continuing to emit CO2 at the current rate - you apparently disagree
I never once stated that petroleum powered vehicles don't need to be eventually phased out, and replaced with something less polluting and not based on using up finite resources.
But battery powered vehicles are just replacing one set of problems with another set of equally bad problems. .... :cool:
 

Sunni Man

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
56,819
Reaction score
18,835
Points
2,280
Location
Patriotic American Muslim
They did not have lithium ion batteries in the late 1800s. They didn't even have them in the late 1980s. That IS a new development. There is an enormous amount of NEW technology used in the production of a modern automobile.
There has also been many improvements in both milage and pollution in gasoline and diesel engines.
The vast industrial strip mining for the lithium, lead, and other rare earth minerals, for the batteries, is going to scar huge areas of land and pollute it big time. ... :cool:
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
11,093
Reaction score
3,045
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
The right wing idiocy is in full view on this thread....

Eventually, the nation will be almost completely dependent on electric cars for it's transit needs.

Never going to happen.
EVs are extremely inefficient and produce far more pollution.
While electric motors are good, at about 50% efficiency compared to ICEs at more like 45% efficient, you have to remember that EVs have a chain of 50% loss from generating electricity, 10% loss in transmission, 50% loss in charging batteries, 50% loss from draining the batteries, and then add the 50% loss of the electric motors.

Nor are batteries every going to be small or light enough for planes, trains, ships, or trucks.
The test trucks them made so far have half the cargo used up for batteries.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
11,093
Reaction score
3,045
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
Here is why Hydrogen powered cars are future.... not battery powered cars. ... :cool:

But.....why?
It's a very short video that explains why. .... :cool:

Why hydrogen? It was funny when he said it wasn't more explosive than gasoline.
It's a pain in the ass to handle. Highly compressed or liquified?
What about embrittlement? Why not natural gas instead?

Natural gas brings us back to global warming again.
Hydrogen is easily reusable forever.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
11,093
Reaction score
3,045
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
The right wing idiocy is in full view on this thread....
Eventually, the nation will be almost completely dependent on electric cars for it's transit needs.
The lefty liberals always claim they are all about science.
But when you point out the flaws in their reasoning when it comes to one of their pet projects.
Liberals throw science out the window, and cling tightly to their leftist partisan hack beliefs based on feelings. ... :cuckoo:

Not throwing science out the window. The 2021 technology isn't what is going to be the standard in 2050.

Just like you're not cranking your internal combustion engine any more like they were doing in 1920.

If there was a message board around in 1925, you dumbfucks would be chiding people who said that we were going to be able to drive without hand cranking the engine.

For the life of me, I don't get the silly assed joy you guys get deriding new technologies and new ideas that, deep down, you guys know will be commonplace eventually.

There is nothing new about EV technology.
It is old school.
We just know the density isn't there, and energy waste make it require far more pollution in the long run.
EV says NOTHING about how you can get the energy from.
Right now it is all fossil fuel anyway.
So you gain nothing with an EV, except to shorten your range.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
11,093
Reaction score
3,045
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
The right wing idiocy is in full view on this thread....
Eventually, the nation will be almost completely dependent on electric cars for it's transit needs.
The lefty liberals always claim they are all about science.
But when you point out the flaws in their reasoning when it comes to one of their pet projects.
Liberals throw science out the window, and cling tightly to their leftist partisan hack beliefs based on feelings. ... :cuckoo:
Let me point out the flaws in YOUR reasoning.

Humanity cannot afford continuing to emit CO2 at the current rate - you apparently disagree, but that's your problem. Ergo, we must move away from burning fossil fuel for transportation and energy generation, the two largest culprits. Under the limitations of present day technology, that means moving to EVs with their shortish ranges and long charge times. I am certain that technology will improve on that as time goes by. We might end up with fuel cell vehicles that fill up with hydrogen in seconds from modified gas stations or develop batteries that can hold enormous amounts of energy and charge quicker than you can say "Bob's your uncle". But, the inconvenience of current technology until such developments take place is just a price we are going to have to pay.

Wrong.
EVs do not reduce the fossil fuel dependency at all.
Essentially all electricity comes from burning fossil fuel, and EVs actually are so inefficient, it would produce more pollution than we are now.
If you go hydrogen fuel cells, it is far more efficient to simply combust the hydrogen.
A lot less pollution because you get more hp per lb of hydrogen.
Face facts, EVs make no sense.
The cleanest of all, is bio-diesel, which actually cleans more than it produces.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
11,093
Reaction score
3,045
Points
170
Location
New Mexico

Not throwing science out the window. The 2021 technology isn't what is going to be the standard in 2050.
Battery powered cars is old technology, they have been around since the late 1800's.
But the looney liberals act like it's something new and exciting, it's not. ... :cool:
Hardly. Battery powered cars with the capabilities of the Tesla or better ARE something new.

No they are not.
Tela batteries have nothing remotely new about them.
All the tech was known for centuries.
And the rare earth minerals they need can't be scaled up.
It can't work to replace current cars.
Nor does the weight ratio work, like in airplanes.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
67,246
Reaction score
14,688
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
71,501
Reaction score
26,478
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?

Not too long ago I went to Dallas, Tx. and stayed at a hotel located just off the Interstate.
In the corner of the hotel parking lot there was about a dozen Tesla charging stations.
I would see people setting in their cars reading a book while their Tesla's were charging.
That must be annoying if you're driving long distance, and turn a 10 hour trip into 15 or more hours, by having to charge up every 300 miles. Basically, forcing you to split the drive into 2 days and waste money spending the night in a hotel.
Add to that, you can't always drive the shortest route to your destination because of no charging stations along the way. ... :cool:

If you do a ten hour trip in a gas car you need to make pit stops anyway as well as one gas stop. If you're diving an ev you can top off your car at a level 3 charging station and do 50% in probably 15 minutes. That isn't a huge deal. It's routing your trip around those charging stations which makes it longer. However, i honestly don't see anyone making more than 4 pit stops during a 10 hour trip to top off your car. Technically you can probably get away with 3. This is all assuming you have a 300 mile range or better. It really depends how much you charge each time.

As for the article i'm surprised more of those early ev owners haven't gone back to gas. The ev market didn't start getting better till quite some time after 2017 when Tesla entered the market. Before that the ev market was complete trash. The fact that 80% of early ev owners still use their crappy evs shows you we have some committed ppl out there. With new advancements in charging times we'll see a complete shift very soon. A new start up is already coming out with new battery tech promising a full charge in 5 minutes. I know some of you would rather we stay in the stone ages while other countries pass us by, but you can't stop progress.






Progress doesn't need government mandates. If it is truly a superior product people will flock to it.

People and car companies need to be forced to accept new safety and health standards otherwise nothing will happen. You think every car company would have installed seat belts, air bags and crumple zones in their cars without safety mandates from the government? Now car companies are competing with each other to make their cars the safest ones on the market.


Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?

Not too long ago I went to Dallas, Tx. and stayed at a hotel located just off the Interstate.
In the corner of the hotel parking lot there was about a dozen Tesla charging stations.
I would see people setting in their cars reading a book while their Tesla's were charging.
That must be annoying if you're driving long distance, and turn a 10 hour trip into 15 or more hours, by having to charge up every 300 miles. Basically, forcing you to split the drive into 2 days and waste money spending the night in a hotel.
Add to that, you can't always drive the shortest route to your destination because of no charging stations along the way. ... :cool:

If you do a ten hour trip in a gas car you need to make pit stops anyway as well as one gas stop. If you're diving an ev you can top off your car at a level 3 charging station and do 50% in probably 15 minutes. That isn't a huge deal. It's routing your trip around those charging stations which makes it longer. However, i honestly don't see anyone making more than 4 pit stops during a 10 hour trip to top off your car. Technically you can probably get away with 3. This is all assuming you have a 300 mile range or better. It really depends how much you charge each time.

As for the article i'm surprised more of those early ev owners haven't gone back to gas. The ev market didn't start getting better till quite some time after 2017 when Tesla entered the market. Before that the ev market was complete trash. The fact that 80% of early ev owners still use their crappy evs shows you we have some committed ppl out there. With new advancements in charging times we'll see a complete shift very soon. A new start up is already coming out with new battery tech promising a full charge in 5 minutes. I know some of you would rather we stay in the stone ages while other countries pass us by, but you can't stop progress.
Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?
Did you really ask that?
Like I said, education is horrible these days.

Odd that you didn't respond to anything else he said. Not surprising, but odd.

It's because it was a dumb argument to begin with, and made even dumber when his only comment was, "physics are a bitch," which doesn't even make sense. Weatherman has the mindset of someone still arguing in favor of morse code over smartphones to communicate and then tries to make it political. No one is even disputing the lack of range of many evs, even today as Tesla is leading the pack with a battery that can give you 375 miles, this still lags behind the 400+ miles you'd get on even the smallest gas tanks, but will anyone be saying that a couple of years from now with new improvements in battery endurance and charging, much less in 15 years!? Not to mention the batteries are easily the most expensive part of the car, once technology improves the price of EVs will also drop dramatically. I predict we could have batteries that will allow you to go 2000 miles on a single charge by then and that may actually be a conservative estimate.






Forcing people to do things HINDERS development. Companies who get free bailouts for stupid decisions never bother to try and make good ones.

Only a government drone could think rewarding failure is a good thing.
All car makers are moving towards EVs, some even having announced dates by which they will cease to produce ICE autos. Thus there will be competition among them to make the best EVs. Increasing range and reducing charge times will be the biggest point of competition, so the final two comments just don't hold water.




Only because they are being forced to do so.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
67,246
Reaction score
14,688
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
Natural gas brings us back to global warming again.
And has the benefit of being an actual source of clean energy.

Hydrogen is easily reusable forever.

Sure, all you need to do is get the hydrogen out of the water.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
71,501
Reaction score
26,478
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?

Not too long ago I went to Dallas, Tx. and stayed at a hotel located just off the Interstate.
In the corner of the hotel parking lot there was about a dozen Tesla charging stations.
I would see people setting in their cars reading a book while their Tesla's were charging.
That must be annoying if you're driving long distance, and turn a 10 hour trip into 15 or more hours, by having to charge up every 300 miles. Basically, forcing you to split the drive into 2 days and waste money spending the night in a hotel.
Add to that, you can't always drive the shortest route to your destination because of no charging stations along the way. ... :cool:

If you do a ten hour trip in a gas car you need to make pit stops anyway as well as one gas stop. If you're diving an ev you can top off your car at a level 3 charging station and do 50% in probably 15 minutes. That isn't a huge deal. It's routing your trip around those charging stations which makes it longer. However, i honestly don't see anyone making more than 4 pit stops during a 10 hour trip to top off your car. Technically you can probably get away with 3. This is all assuming you have a 300 mile range or better. It really depends how much you charge each time.

As for the article i'm surprised more of those early ev owners haven't gone back to gas. The ev market didn't start getting better till quite some time after 2017 when Tesla entered the market. Before that the ev market was complete trash. The fact that 80% of early ev owners still use their crappy evs shows you we have some committed ppl out there. With new advancements in charging times we'll see a complete shift very soon. A new start up is already coming out with new battery tech promising a full charge in 5 minutes. I know some of you would rather we stay in the stone ages while other countries pass us by, but you can't stop progress.






Progress doesn't need government mandates. If it is truly a superior product people will flock to it.

People and car companies need to be forced to accept new safety and health standards otherwise nothing will happen. You think every car company would have installed seat belts, air bags and crumple zones in their cars without safety mandates from the government? Now car companies are competing with each other to make their cars the safest ones on the market.


Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?

Not too long ago I went to Dallas, Tx. and stayed at a hotel located just off the Interstate.
In the corner of the hotel parking lot there was about a dozen Tesla charging stations.
I would see people setting in their cars reading a book while their Tesla's were charging.
That must be annoying if you're driving long distance, and turn a 10 hour trip into 15 or more hours, by having to charge up every 300 miles. Basically, forcing you to split the drive into 2 days and waste money spending the night in a hotel.
Add to that, you can't always drive the shortest route to your destination because of no charging stations along the way. ... :cool:

If you do a ten hour trip in a gas car you need to make pit stops anyway as well as one gas stop. If you're diving an ev you can top off your car at a level 3 charging station and do 50% in probably 15 minutes. That isn't a huge deal. It's routing your trip around those charging stations which makes it longer. However, i honestly don't see anyone making more than 4 pit stops during a 10 hour trip to top off your car. Technically you can probably get away with 3. This is all assuming you have a 300 mile range or better. It really depends how much you charge each time.

As for the article i'm surprised more of those early ev owners haven't gone back to gas. The ev market didn't start getting better till quite some time after 2017 when Tesla entered the market. Before that the ev market was complete trash. The fact that 80% of early ev owners still use their crappy evs shows you we have some committed ppl out there. With new advancements in charging times we'll see a complete shift very soon. A new start up is already coming out with new battery tech promising a full charge in 5 minutes. I know some of you would rather we stay in the stone ages while other countries pass us by, but you can't stop progress.
Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?
Did you really ask that?
Like I said, education is horrible these days.

Odd that you didn't respond to anything else he said. Not surprising, but odd.

It's because it was a dumb argument to begin with, and made even dumber when his only comment was, "physics are a bitch," which doesn't even make sense. Weatherman has the mindset of someone still arguing in favor of morse code over smartphones to communicate and then tries to make it political. No one is even disputing the lack of range of many evs, even today as Tesla is leading the pack with a battery that can give you 375 miles, this still lags behind the 400+ miles you'd get on even the smallest gas tanks, but will anyone be saying that a couple of years from now with new improvements in battery endurance and charging, much less in 15 years!? Not to mention the batteries are easily the most expensive part of the car, once technology improves the price of EVs will also drop dramatically. I predict we could have batteries that will allow you to go 2000 miles on a single charge by then and that may actually be a conservative estimate.






Forcing people to do things HINDERS development. Companies who get free bailouts for stupid decisions never bother to try and make good ones.

Only a government drone could think rewarding failure is a good thing.
All car makers are moving towards EVs, some even having announced dates by which they will cease to produce ICE autos. Thus there will be competition among them to make the best EVs. Increasing range and reducing charge times will be the biggest point of competition, so the final two comments just don't hold water.

The announcements are simple virtue signaling, just like the bans going 10-20 years in the future.

Until you can charge an EV in the same time as you can fill a gas tank, EV's won't compete. Until an EV's charge can last as long as a tank of gas under full load (propulsion, heat/AC, lights, electronics) EV's won't compete.

Unless of course you remove the competition.
"Oh, ye of little faith!" (...and even less imagination).

Faith would be not having to ban ICE vehicles, and assuming EV's will take over on the merits, not via government fiat.

Since there are so many layers of inefficiency to EVs, they will never take over.
If they ever did, it would greatly increase pollution, especially carbon.
The only real carbon neutral or even negative are bio-fuels for ICEs.





Biofuels are incredibly CO2 intensive. Ridiculously expensive as well.
 
OP
Weatherman2020

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
68,509
Reaction score
30,274
Points
2,290
Location
Left Coast, Classified
Natural gas brings us back to global warming again.
And has the benefit of being an actual source of clean energy.

Hydrogen is easily reusable forever.

Sure, all you need to do is get the hydrogen out of the water.
All it takes is energy to get the hydrogen out of the water.
F5DDA742-D813-4E10-98E1-59039FC1F6A4.gif
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
71,501
Reaction score
26,478
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
67,246
Reaction score
14,688
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
Natural gas brings us back to global warming again.
And has the benefit of being an actual source of clean energy.

Hydrogen is easily reusable forever.

Sure, all you need to do is get the hydrogen out of the water.
All it takes is energy to get the hydrogen out of the water.
View attachment 487944





Lots and lots and lots of energy.

And then you have to store the H2, transport it, compress or liquify it, hope it doesn't explode.
And it doesn't have much energy for the volume it takes up.
A silly, expensive solution looking for a problem.
 
OP
Weatherman2020

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
68,509
Reaction score
30,274
Points
2,290
Location
Left Coast, Classified
Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?

Not too long ago I went to Dallas, Tx. and stayed at a hotel located just off the Interstate.
In the corner of the hotel parking lot there was about a dozen Tesla charging stations.
I would see people setting in their cars reading a book while their Tesla's were charging.
That must be annoying if you're driving long distance, and turn a 10 hour trip into 15 or more hours, by having to charge up every 300 miles. Basically, forcing you to split the drive into 2 days and waste money spending the night in a hotel.
Add to that, you can't always drive the shortest route to your destination because of no charging stations along the way. ... :cool:

If you do a ten hour trip in a gas car you need to make pit stops anyway as well as one gas stop. If you're diving an ev you can top off your car at a level 3 charging station and do 50% in probably 15 minutes. That isn't a huge deal. It's routing your trip around those charging stations which makes it longer. However, i honestly don't see anyone making more than 4 pit stops during a 10 hour trip to top off your car. Technically you can probably get away with 3. This is all assuming you have a 300 mile range or better. It really depends how much you charge each time.

As for the article i'm surprised more of those early ev owners haven't gone back to gas. The ev market didn't start getting better till quite some time after 2017 when Tesla entered the market. Before that the ev market was complete trash. The fact that 80% of early ev owners still use their crappy evs shows you we have some committed ppl out there. With new advancements in charging times we'll see a complete shift very soon. A new start up is already coming out with new battery tech promising a full charge in 5 minutes. I know some of you would rather we stay in the stone ages while other countries pass us by, but you can't stop progress.






Progress doesn't need government mandates. If it is truly a superior product people will flock to it.

People and car companies need to be forced to accept new safety and health standards otherwise nothing will happen. You think every car company would have installed seat belts, air bags and crumple zones in their cars without safety mandates from the government? Now car companies are competing with each other to make their cars the safest ones on the market.


Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?

Not too long ago I went to Dallas, Tx. and stayed at a hotel located just off the Interstate.
In the corner of the hotel parking lot there was about a dozen Tesla charging stations.
I would see people setting in their cars reading a book while their Tesla's were charging.
That must be annoying if you're driving long distance, and turn a 10 hour trip into 15 or more hours, by having to charge up every 300 miles. Basically, forcing you to split the drive into 2 days and waste money spending the night in a hotel.
Add to that, you can't always drive the shortest route to your destination because of no charging stations along the way. ... :cool:

If you do a ten hour trip in a gas car you need to make pit stops anyway as well as one gas stop. If you're diving an ev you can top off your car at a level 3 charging station and do 50% in probably 15 minutes. That isn't a huge deal. It's routing your trip around those charging stations which makes it longer. However, i honestly don't see anyone making more than 4 pit stops during a 10 hour trip to top off your car. Technically you can probably get away with 3. This is all assuming you have a 300 mile range or better. It really depends how much you charge each time.

As for the article i'm surprised more of those early ev owners haven't gone back to gas. The ev market didn't start getting better till quite some time after 2017 when Tesla entered the market. Before that the ev market was complete trash. The fact that 80% of early ev owners still use their crappy evs shows you we have some committed ppl out there. With new advancements in charging times we'll see a complete shift very soon. A new start up is already coming out with new battery tech promising a full charge in 5 minutes. I know some of you would rather we stay in the stone ages while other countries pass us by, but you can't stop progress.
Ok, i'll ask the question, since no one else has. What does long charge times have to do with physics?
Did you really ask that?
Like I said, education is horrible these days.

Odd that you didn't respond to anything else he said. Not surprising, but odd.

It's because it was a dumb argument to begin with, and made even dumber when his only comment was, "physics are a bitch," which doesn't even make sense. Weatherman has the mindset of someone still arguing in favor of morse code over smartphones to communicate and then tries to make it political. No one is even disputing the lack of range of many evs, even today as Tesla is leading the pack with a battery that can give you 375 miles, this still lags behind the 400+ miles you'd get on even the smallest gas tanks, but will anyone be saying that a couple of years from now with new improvements in battery endurance and charging, much less in 15 years!? Not to mention the batteries are easily the most expensive part of the car, once technology improves the price of EVs will also drop dramatically. I predict we could have batteries that will allow you to go 2000 miles on a single charge by then and that may actually be a conservative estimate.






Forcing people to do things HINDERS development. Companies who get free bailouts for stupid decisions never bother to try and make good ones.

Only a government drone could think rewarding failure is a good thing.
All car makers are moving towards EVs, some even having announced dates by which they will cease to produce ICE autos. Thus there will be competition among them to make the best EVs. Increasing range and reducing charge times will be the biggest point of competition, so the final two comments just don't hold water.

The announcements are simple virtue signaling, just like the bans going 10-20 years in the future.

Until you can charge an EV in the same time as you can fill a gas tank, EV's won't compete. Until an EV's charge can last as long as a tank of gas under full load (propulsion, heat/AC, lights, electronics) EV's won't compete.

Unless of course you remove the competition.
"Oh, ye of little faith!" (...and even less imagination).

Faith would be not having to ban ICE vehicles, and assuming EV's will take over on the merits, not via government fiat.

Since there are so many layers of inefficiency to EVs, they will never take over.
If they ever did, it would greatly increase pollution, especially carbon.
The only real carbon neutral or even negative are bio-fuels for ICEs.





Biofuels are incredibly CO2 intensive. Ridiculously expensive as well.
As well as environmentally destructive due to fresh water and fertilizer use to obtain the biofuels.
 

there4eyeM

unlicensed metaphysician
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
16,964
Reaction score
3,252
Points
280
The earth receives 3.86 x 10 to the 26th power watts of energy from the sun constantly. That is so many multiples of our energy consumption that you have to look yourself to believe it.
That is where inventiveness should be put into action. Yankee ingenuity.
Homemade electricity for homemade hydrogen. Decentralization. Independence. Less government. Lower costs. Far less pollution. Screws oil related interests.
 

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
15,864
Reaction score
1,775
Points
290
Location
N/A

Not throwing science out the window. The 2021 technology isn't what is going to be the standard in 2050.
Battery powered cars is old technology, they have been around since the late 1800's.
But the looney liberals act like it's something new and exciting, it's not. ... :cool:
Hardly. Battery powered cars with the capabilities of the Tesla or better ARE something new.

No they are not.
Tela batteries have nothing remotely new about them.
All the tech was known for centuries.
And the rare earth minerals they need can't be scaled up.
It can't work to replace current cars.
Nor does the weight ratio work, like in airplanes.
The lithium ion battery was invented in 1991.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
67,246
Reaction score
14,688
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
The earth receives 3.86 x 10 to the 26th power watts of energy from the sun constantly. That is so many multiples of our energy consumption that you have to look yourself to believe it.
That is where inventiveness should be put into action. Yankee ingenuity.
Homemade electricity for homemade hydrogen. Decentralization. Independence. Less government. Lower costs. Far less pollution. Screws oil related interests.

If only the Earth was covered in solar panels, eh?

Homemade electricity for homemade hydrogen.

But why? Why put up with all the losses of useful energy at each step?

Just charge your battery with solar.

Hydrogen is stupid.

Decentralization. Independence. Less government.

Yeah, you could probably get 2 or 3 miles worth on a really sunny day. Yawn.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top