electric cars and solar panels

[Old Rocks]

In the past we have given tax breaks and credits to get people to buy Hummers and other non-neccessities. A basic car is a neccessity for most Americans. As is energy for their homes.

Right now, we have the potential for making both the solar panel and the electrical car economically practical right now. Eestor of Texas and Voxtel of Oregon has created processes that will completely change the cost structure of these industries.

Now if we can give a business a $25,000 break for something as useless as a Hummer, I fail to see why we cannot do this.

Give a direct tax break of $3500 for the purchase of an electric car, the same for a purchase of 5 kw solar panel. But if you install both simutaneously, the credit is doubled, $14,000 total. Anounce this a year ahead of time, and then continue it for two years.

That would handle both the problem of getting the idea of electric cars started, and the fueling of them, with the side benefit of forcing a distributed grid.

 

[KittenKoder]

So ... now you want the electric companies who only produce energy the way you like to have a monopoly and control all the wealth.

 

[Old Rocks]

My sweet Kitten, you have a truly perverse way of seeing things in a post that do not exist. Point out where I even mention an electric company?

 

[KittenKoder]

My sweet Kitten, you have a truly perverse way of seeing things in a post that do not exist. Point out where I even mention an electric company?

You don't need to say it, but that's what the end result will be to anyone with a decent understanding of economics. Making laws to force this only creates another monopoly, of which laws are really good at creating.

 

[Mr. H.]

In the past we have given tax breaks and credits to get people to buy Hummers and other non-neccessities. A basic car is a neccessity for most Americans. As is energy for their homes.

Right now, we have the potential for making both the solar panel and the electrical car economically practical right now. Eestor of Texas and Voxtel of Oregon has created processes that will completely change the cost structure of these industries.

Now if we can give a business a $25,000 break for something as useless as a Hummer, I fail to see why we cannot do this.

Give a direct tax break of $3500 for the purchase of an electric car, the same for a purchase of 5 kw solar panel. But if you install both simutaneously, the credit is doubled, $14,000 total. Anounce this a year ahead of time, and then continue it for two years.

That would handle both the problem of getting the idea of electric cars started, and the fueling of them, with the side benefit of forcing a distributed grid.

"Economically practical" usually applies to something both economical and practical. I see neither in your post.

Changing cost structures of industries isn't done with the stroke of a pen. It's done with capital intensive-labor intensive efforts.

If you want to force a distributed grid you've come to the wrong country.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

My sweet Kitten, you have a truly perverse way of seeing things in a post that do not exist. Point out where I even mention an electric company?

You don't need to say it, but that's what the end result will be to anyone with a decent understanding of economics. Making laws to force this only creates another monopoly, of which laws are really good at creating.

Trying to have a conversation with one of the board eco terrorists is a waste of time dear.

 

[Old Rocks]

Monopolies? I see nothing in the program I outlined that would create a monopoly. In fact, it would open up the gate for many startup companies making new types of solar cells, batteries and capicitors for electrical storage for all types of uses.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Monopolies? I see nothing in the program I outlined that would create a monopoly. In fact, it would open up the gate for many startup companies making new types of solar cells, batteries and capicitors for electrical storage for all types of uses.

You are aware I hope that 60 percent of all electricity generated in the US is made with fossil fuels?

Solar panels are full of things that are real bad for the environment as well.

I wouldn't mind getting panels but if you can not see what this does to the Country you are not worth the time to talk to.

Remind us again how you support the building of Nuclear power plants to get us off fossil fuels for electrical generation.

 

[KittenKoder]

Monopolies? I see nothing in the program I outlined that would create a monopoly. In fact, it would open up the gate for many startup companies making new types of solar cells, batteries and capicitors for electrical storage for all types of uses.

Only if they are already rich enough to pay for the over priced equipment. Keep dreaming, they do come true, just this one never will. It will create a monopoly.

 

[Ringel05]

electric cars and solar panels

I had electric race cars as a kid, now I have a solar panel, a built in safety cushion and drive a truck.

 

[Screaming Eagle]

Right now we have two major problems with solar power and electric cars. 1. Solar power cells are too expensive per kw produced and they take up too much space. 2. The available storage technology is terribly lacking. Our batteries suck, even the newest ones. They rely on rare-earth metals and I'm not sure we could put enough of these cars on the ground just for every American household to have one without running out, let alone the rest of the world.

We'll get there, but it is going to take time. No matter how much money you throw at it we will not fix these problems overnight. Not to mention the government has no business at all doing such a thing. That is the market's problem. If it was such a clear bet wouldn't it already have plenty of private funding?

 

[Old Rocks]

Available storage;

EEStor Gets a Trademark Patent on EESU and Provides Specs for a 24V EESU | GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

Cheap high efficiency solar;

Beaverton firm will produce cheaper quantum dots | Oregon Business News - - OregonLive.com

 

[driveby]

In the past we have given tax breaks and credits to get people to buy Hummers and other non-neccessities. A basic car is a neccessity for most Americans. As is energy for their homes.

Right now, we have the potential for making both the solar panel and the electrical car economically practical right now. Eestor of Texas and Voxtel of Oregon has created processes that will completely change the cost structure of these industries.

Now if we can give a business a $25,000 break for something as useless as a Hummer, I fail to see why we cannot do this.

Give a direct tax break of $3500 for the purchase of an electric car, the same for a purchase of 5 kw solar panel. But if you install both simutaneously, the credit is doubled, $14,000 total. Anounce this a year ahead of time, and then continue it for two years.

That would handle both the problem of getting the idea of electric cars started, and the fueling of them, with the side benefit of forcing a distributed grid.

If this was a good idea, it would have already been done.........

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Nanosolar: Technology

THIS WILL CUT THE PRICE OF SOLAR CELLS TO ABOUT 100$ PER KILOWATT

 

[Old Rocks]

Fitnah, if you look at the site here;

Beaverton firm will produce cheaper quantum dots | Oregon Business News - - OregonLive.com

You will see how their technology will fit hand and glove into what Nanosolar is doing. And lower the estimated cost even further.

At 40% efficiencies, the warehouse roofs in our cities could provide a very high percentage of the electricity used in those cities. At that efficiency, most of us could provide all of our electrical needs from our own roofs. And provide the fuel for our vehicles.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

EEStor and nanosolar and the other companies are coming up with some pretty impressive stuff. But we're not there yet. And when their products are released, it will take a while to ramp up truly massive production. That's a big IF for EEStor; I know a lot of EE's at the EEStor blog have expressed extreme skepticism to say the least. (I tend to think it's legit, but we'll see)

Don't push it. We don't want a situation like we had in the 70's, with diesels being released prematurely and people getting burned on the basic concept. Americans have had a distaste for diesel cars ever since.

Another problem: giving people large sums of money will only bid up prices on scarce resources. I don't care how much wealth you redistribute, the bottom line is, production has to scale up first. Imagine giving everyone in the year 1900 a car voucher. No matter how much money you give, there were not enough cars in production. It took time for Henry Ford and others to come up with clever solutions to bring production up. We saw this recently with the cash for clunkers program, where used car prices (and new/efficient car prices) were bid up. We saw this during the housing boom, when we implemented various policies built on the strange idea that everyone has to own their own home, and house prices went up. When the $8,000 tax credit for 1st time home buyers expires on December 1, we will see the average price of entry-level housing go down.

And likewise, a sudden artifical shift to electrics will mean a lot of unwanted gas cars being sold, and fewer people consuming gasoline. Which means that people will change their behavior, and find it more economical to continue driving gassers. Sort of like when we mandated energy efficient homes and cars--people bought bigger homes, turned up the thermostat, and began driving longer commutes.

I could also point out the potential problems with fast-charging. Yes, the EEStor device can do it and not explode. But you're talking about a *massive* shitload of electric power transferred in 5~10 minutes. Any fuckup will end in death. Not so for gasoline or diesel spills.

Want to help air quality, reduce gas consumption, stop suburban sprawl, and help the poor (who cannot afford Buck Rogers cars after all)? Support the new urbanist movement to scrap modern building codes and return to the way we used to build cities. Making cars optional will help the poor more than any government program, and curb pollution more than any electric car.

 

[xsited1]

In the past we have given tax breaks and credits to get people to buy Hummers and other non-neccessities. A basic car is a neccessity for most Americans. As is energy for their homes.

Right now, we have the potential for making both the solar panel and the electrical car economically practical right now. Eestor of Texas and Voxtel of Oregon has created processes that will completely change the cost structure of these industries.

Now if we can give a business a $25,000 break for something as useless as a Hummer, I fail to see why we cannot do this.

Give a direct tax break of $3500 for the purchase of an electric car, the same for a purchase of 5 kw solar panel. But if you install both simutaneously, the credit is doubled, $14,000 total. Anounce this a year ahead of time, and then continue it for two years.

That would handle both the problem of getting the idea of electric cars started, and the fueling of them, with the side benefit of forcing a distributed grid.

So you want the government to give an unfair advantage to electric car and utility companies with tax breaks which will have the side benefit of forcing a distributed grid.

Key words: Government, Force, Unfair Advantage

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Available storage;

EEStor Gets a Trademark Patent on EESU and Provides Specs for a 24V EESU | GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

I dont buy it.

 

[Old Rocks]

EEStor and nanosolar and the other companies are coming up with some pretty impressive stuff. But we're not there yet. And when their products are released, it will take a while to ramp up truly massive production. That's a big IF for EEStor; I know a lot of EE's at the EEStor blog have expressed extreme skepticism to say the least. (I tend to think it's legit, but we'll see)

Good point. It is a start up technology, and lab models and mass manufacturing are too very differant things.

Don't push it. We don't want a situation like we had in the 70's, with diesels being released prematurely and people getting burned on the basic concept. Americans have had a distaste for diesel cars ever since.

Problem there was not that the diesel technology was premature, the problem was that the American manufactures tried to do it on the cheap. I had a VW Rabbit with a diesel in it, 1980 model, and was very satisified with it. Mercedes had been making good automotive diesels for tens of years at that point.

Another problem: giving people large sums of money will only bid up prices on scarce resources. I don't care how much wealth you redistribute, the bottom line is, production has to scale up first. Imagine giving everyone in the year 1900 a car voucher. No matter how much money you give, there were not enough cars in production. It took time for Henry Ford and others to come up with clever solutions to bring production up. We saw this recently with the cash for clunkers program, where used car prices (and new/efficient car prices) were bid up. We saw this during the housing boom, when we implemented various policies built on the strange idea that everyone has to own their own home, and house prices went up. When the $8,000 tax credit for 1st time home buyers expires on December 1, we will see the average price of entry-level housing go down.

The scaling point is correct, in my not so knowledgeable opinion. Still, the point I am trying to make here is that we need to get this technology off the ground, and start manufacturing here, before China and Europe take the market.

And likewise, a sudden artifical shift to electrics will mean a lot of unwanted gas cars being sold, and fewer people consuming gasoline. Which means that people will change their behavior, and find it more economical to continue driving gassers. Sort of like when we mandated energy efficient homes and cars--people bought bigger homes, turned up the thermostat, and began driving longer commutes.

That is the why of the tying in of the cheap solar to the electric vehicle. If you are powering it for free, and also providing power for you home, suddenly, the vehicle becomes a plus. Not only that, with electrical storage in the 50 to 100 kwh range, you have emergency power for your home for several days.

I could also point out the potential problems with fast-charging. Yes, the EEStor device can do it and not explode. But you're talking about a *massive* shitload of electric power transferred in 5~10 minutes. Any fuckup will end in death. Not so for gasoline or diesel spills.

No, this is not correct. I work as an industrial millwright in a steel mill. We routinely use many orders of magnitude more power than that safely. But the home charging systems would be slower, since most homes only have 220.

Want to help air quality, reduce gas consumption, stop suburban sprawl, and help the poor (who cannot afford Buck Rogers cars after all)? Support the new urbanist movement to scrap modern building codes and return to the way we used to build cities. Making cars optional will help the poor more than any government program, and curb pollution more than any electric car.

The quoted price of $100 to $150 per kwh puts the price of a small car unit, 50 kwh, at $5000 to $7500. That is not much differant from the price of an ICE and transaxle.

You have brought up good points. Things to watch. But I think that we do need to encourage these technologies. What it comes down to, is that they are going to be used in the future. We will produce them, and profit from them, or someone else will.

Someone else has been producing much of the new technologies for 30 years now, and the economy of our nation is suffering for that fact.

 

[Old Rocks]

Available storage;

EEStor Gets a Trademark Patent on EESU and Provides Specs for a 24V EESU | GM-VOLT : Chevy Volt Electric Car Site

I dont buy it.

It ain't for sell yet, so none of us do. But if they can do this, most of us will buy it.

Weir does have a proven track record.

EEStor's Weir on ultracapacitor milestone | Cleantech Group

EEStor is developing an ultracapacitor which it said will be longer lasting, lighter, more powerful, and more environmentally friendly than current battery technologies.

Texas Research International, acting as an independent laboratory, certified the level of crystallization in EEStor's composition modified barium titanate, or CMBT, powders at an average of 99.92 percent. EEStor said this puts it on the path toward meeting its goals for energy storage.

The company expects its ceramic ultracapacitor, which it said uses no hazardous materials, to have a charging time of 3 to 6 minutes, with a discharge rate of only 0.02 percent over 30 days. EEStor said that compares to more than 3 hours to charge a lithium-ion battery and a discharge rate of 1 percent over 30 days.

"It's all certified," said Weir. "No bullshit in this."

EEStor's milestone comes on the same day that San Diego-based competitor Maxwell Technologies (Nasdaq: MXWL) announced a supply deal (see Golden Dragon Bus to use Maxwell ultracapacitors).

Maxwell shipped its Boostcap ultracapacitors to Xiamen, China's Golden Dragon Bus for use in diesel-electric hybrid buses in Hangzhou.