I Have The Power!

at 12/12/2007 9:45:27 AM, wow said:
Altair''s batteries also have amazing cycle life which is supposed to outlast the vehicle. Proponents speculate these batteries will still have value for the electric grid after the vehicle''s useful life. Actually, Altair seems to expect most of its business will be done with the electric grid in the short term (see headlines regarding Altair & AES Corporation).

at 12/13/2007 6:13:51 AM, What do the batteries cost ? said:
Technology for name sakes is useless, unless adopted and reused. I do not see any discussions on the Cost of such batteries.

at 12/13/2007 3:05:40 PM, EVangel said:
Electric vehicles (EVs) are not for everyone. As stated at the EV1 Funeral, they can only serve 90% of automotive needs.

at 12/18/2007 5:01:01 PM, Ron E said:
Altair batteries are great, but there are a few problems standing between them and viable product. 1)At this stage they are hand packed and not in production and are prohibitively expensive. Phoenix motors will be relying on carbon credits to make their option pay. Batteries themselves would cost about 75k from what I can work out from other posts, although I haven't seen any officially published figures. 2) In order to recharge in 10 minutes, special infrastructure and charging units are required. You cant simply plug into a wall outlet, that would still take several hours.

at 12/22/2007 9:13:38 AM, Bill Dale said:
I have been following developments with Phoenix Motorcars and Altair for more than a year now. Yes, the batteries are presently very expensive. but so what? If your monthly expenses for gasoline are $500- $700, and switching to an EV means you will be spending maybe $400- $600 less (roughly $100/ mo. for electricity), and no expenses for tune-ups, filters, oil changes, transmission service (EVs do not need transmissions) and dramatically less spent on brake service (regen braking in EVs mean brake jobs only need to be done maybe every 8-10 years or so) the premium price you spend for the car is offset by your operating costs. EVs are huge time savers, and time is money. Yeah, it takes maybe 3 extra minutes to recharge an EV than to fill up an SUV, but if you''re saving 50 bucks or so, is it worth it? Besides, most of the time you''d be recharging at home anyway, where it doesn''t matter how long it taxes... you''re not waiting for it to recharge-- it takes 2 seconds to plug in, you walk off and forget it until you leave. That''s far better than having to inhale carcinogenic fumes, and drip gasoline on your hands and shoes while wasing several minutes of your time at Chevron. And gasoline has risen 60 cents just in the last year-- how long will it be before it''s $4., or $5., or not even available? And if you want to save the $100. per month for electricity, buy one of the new breakthrough solar panels from Nanosolar that only cost a tenth as much as solar panels previously-- then you just pay the mortgage on your car and the solar panel, and when yourc payments are done, you drive virtually COST FREE-- just insurance, yearly registration, tires, and other pittances. You don''t even spend an hour or two fretting over whether you''ll have to spend another $300. on a catalytic converter to pass a smog test. When you really wrap your head around just what you gain by driving an EV, it''s no contest. And the most important reason-- that it is zero pollution-- is more than just icing on the cake.

at 12/25/2007 10:19:27 AM, OK Bill said:
When household daily energy consumption goes from 4.5 KWH per day to 14 - 18 KWH per day what will happen to the cost of electricity. Remember when demand becomes inelastic the market is free to increase prices. Suddenly your $100/month becomes $500 - 700/month and you are saddled with the initial increased cost of the new system. Then you have to deal with major infrastructure costs such as new power stations, major expansion of the grid, and impacts to consumer safety during grid outages like those in Oklahoma, or the entire east coast outage a few years ago. Its one think to be without heat, quite another to be unable to get somewhere warm, or supply food to the house.

at 12/28/2007 8:39:32 AM, BillWilliam said:
The electric vehicle is currently our only practical alternative to the ICE. Hydrogen takes a lot of energy to produce and the infrastructure to distribute it would cost billions. Bio-fuel? There is not enough land on earth. Algae may hold a promise. But it still would pollute the urban landscape. Altairnano, 123 Batteries have a start on usable batteries. With higher production the costs should come down. Another company has a design for a capacitor that can hold enough energy for much more than a hundred miles of range. The cost and size make it practical now. The company is called EEstor. Little is known about them other that the patent, ^ United States Patent 7,033,406, and some news releases. See Wiki for more info good and bad. You should not make blanket statements like the Battery is dead because you will look like a fool tomorrow.

at 12/30/2007 5:12:41 AM, matt said:
Per the 14-18 kWH per day comment... The average household uses 11,000 kWH / year. To drive this car 15,000 miles / year will require an additional 4000 kWH at a rate of 35 kWH/ 130 mi. Less than a 50% increase in electricity demand... Add some nanosolar to the house and voila no strain on the infrastructure... not to mention very cheap fuel in 10 years....

at 1/2/2008 5:32:12 PM, Jim Y said:
>When household daily energy consumption goes from 4.5 KWH per day to 14 - 18 KWH per day what will happen to the cost of electricity. ----- As long as it gets us off foreign oil, I DON''''T CARE! Besides, the cost of solar panel technology is coming down thanks to all kinds of new technology. Did I mention that using battery technology for cars would help REDUCE OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL?!!

at 1/3/2008 9:15:23 AM, Ron said:
Far more important than the amount of electricity pulled from the grid is the timing of the pull. Overnight charging would pull less than daytime air conditioning and would actually benefit the grid by balancing the usage of existing infrastructure. Daytime charging plus air conditioning would strain the grid and require additional infrastructure.

at 1/3/2008 12:22:38 PM, Chandler said:
Environmentally, this technology moves pollution and greenhouse gases from the automobile to the electric generating plant, where it is arguably more controllable. Economically, we also need to consider how long the batteries last before they must be replaced.

at 1/14/2008 11:57:24 AM, Bill Dale said:
Ron E: you talk about EV charge infrastructure as if it's expensive-- far from it, if you compare it to the cost of any other infrastructure such as for gasoline stations. All a charging station requires is a large NanoSafe battery that can be continually charged from the grid of nearby Nanosolar panels; not that many would be needed since most people would be charging at home anyway, and can be recharging from their own solar panels. <P> OK Bill: you pull numbers out of the air for increased power requirements if millions of EVs suddenly take to our streets-- according to the PUC, our peak usage would actually DECREASE due to Vehicle- to Grid (V2G)... (google it and understand what it's about.) This data was already available when you wrote your comment, but you just didn't bother to look for it. In short, V2G uses EVs that are plugged into the grid to back-feed energy to reduce peak energy loads on hot summer days when energy is typically in its highest demand. <P> As Jim Y says, eliminating dependence on foreign oil (and back-pedaling on global warming) should be our priority, not the cost of electricity or other fuels. Besides, are you so naive as to think the cost of gasoline will be stable as the cost of electricity rises? Gasoline has risen more than 60 cents in the last year, and will probably rise by more than a dollar in the next 12 months, especially with the explosive growth of China's and India's motoring public; millions of Chinese and Indians that until now used bicycles can now afford to buy polluting vehicles. This not only drives up the cost of gasoline and increases greenhouse gases, but brings us closer to the day when there will be no more gasoline. We must switch to EVs before we are forced to do so by oil depletion.

at 1/17/2008 7:53:20 AM, Richard K said:
Very interesting discussions on this site. One other potential cost increase for electric vehicles not discussed anywhere is how will the "government" pay for road repairs and building? Gasoline taxes will fall off dramatically if there is a major shift to electrics. Even some experimental vehicles using natural gas (CNG) generated at home does not allow for these revenue sources. All I'm suggesting is that the cost of operating an electric vehicle has to eventually include some sort of payment for roads. How? Probably for the registration of such a vehicle.

at 1/18/2008 10:56:56 AM, KatMo said:
@Richard K You do realize that road repair is done at the local, not federal level, right? So you realize that some places don't pay for road repair with a gas tax? So you realize that these places still have functional roads? There are a thousand ways to do it. Sales taxes, property taxes, registration fees, or maybe even some honest politicians who don't need to give themselves raises every year just because they can. Fret not, your local government will find its most effective and logical way to steal from you. We have no choice but to end our dependence on fossil fuels, for too many and well-known reasons to reiterate here. Electrical or hydrogen vehicles are the only solutions at present which address every issue except the one simple fact of reality: resources will always be limited, so prices will never magically go away. If we have to sacrifice some hard work and initial investment money, then we shall, simply because there's no alternative. -- k8 the gr8

at 1/28/2008 9:28:58 AM, Justin said:
People on the internet are so darn negative. Why? Its almost as if people are afraid of EV's. I have an electric motorcycle that I converted myself. It only gets 15-20 miles of range on a charge. But since I am using AGM batteries it charges to 90% in about an hour. So I can go somewhere for lunch up to 15 miles away. The regen is great, I never use my brakes. Its quiet, I never have to shift or clutch. I still have my truck for longer trips. From downtown to my house is about 8 miles. If I were to leave my city it would be on a trip that likely would take more range than a lithium car would have. So my bike only cost $3000 to build and I use it all the time. The time for electric vehicles is now. Just because they dont suite everyone doesnt mean that we should be labeling them as impracticle. I am in construction management and sometimes I can go do estimates on my e bike and sometimes I need to take two sheets of drywall to a jobsite. A honda civic isnt practicle for me, does that mean the car is useless. Some people should drive trucks, some hybrid cars, some gas motorcycles, some vespa scooters, some EV's. People should drive what suits them best. For my roomate we are Converting a 65 vw bug with enough range for him to get to work. Thats all he cares about. His big 4x4 jeep that he uses for weekend excursions is a pain to drive to work. He was going to buy a little gas car but realized that electric would work great for his 17 mile commute. Can any of you idiots find a problem with that logic.

at 1/28/2008 10:13:54 AM, Justin said:
Also, for those of you who envision road trips and five hour commutes in electric cars dont hold your breath. Most electric cars even lead acid cars can take a charge much faster that typical residental or commercial power can deliver. 12 12 volt 110 amp hour AGMs makes a 15,840 watt hour pack. Agms can charge to 90% in an hour but that would require 68.8 amps at 230 volts. Sure that could be done but it wont be soon that some infastructure of standard charging stations will be providing 413 amps at 230 volts to charge your ev in 10 min. Ev's will remain to be an alternative to ICE for local driving for quite some time. Also, to put it into perspective, I priced a battery pack for the 65 vw bug. A 100 ah 144 volt pack with BMS and a charging system would have cost 38,000. Sorry, thats no where near anythng that is practicle or makes sense. However, I think its great that I was actually able to obtain a quote from a company who was willing to construct and ship my pack. I see it as a promising sign of progress that these batteries are even available. If I were wealthy I would build myself a nice lithium powered car. I would also like to add that the tesla roadsters range is as much a product of its ground up ev design as it is lithium batteries. For instance you could convert a porsche 914 with lead acid batteries for under 10k with a complete bolt in kit and it will have a 80-90 mph top speed with an 80-100 mile range. Thats great. Its just that most EV er's want more seating and a more practical car. The two seater 914 is as practical as the tesla roadster. People seem to forget this when they compare the tesla to conventional EV's. How about an aluminum framed ev two seat roadster that goes 120 miles with lead acid and costs 20-30k and charges in one hour. You could build one today. Just remember with any Automobile you are going to have to compromise. No matter what. You cant get it all from one car. The sooner people accept that the sooner we will start to adopt EV's

at 2/1/2008 8:30:01 AM, Len said:
Go Justin. Exactly. "So darn negative" is just small minds trying to get attention.

at 2/15/2008 1:27:33 PM, Michael said:
SO ... I was thinking recently about Altiarnano batteries and PML in-wheel motors and wondering what it would take to build a "drop-in" replacement for my 1990 Honda Accord EX to convert it from gasoline to plug-in electric. Most of my driving in it is 5 miles each way to work with the occasional longer trip. Yes, it would be nice to be able to drive to Sacramento from Silicon Valley (150+ miles), but that's not essential if I can recharge in 10 minutes or so. Similarly, getting to highway speeds is important, but I don't need 4.0 second timing - 8 - 10 seconds is fine. And a top speed 80-85 mph would give me most of the passing "oomph" I need. The problem is that of it costs me $35k - $40k to do this it's NOT going to happen. We need to bring the costs down by an order of magnitude - to around $4000 - to make this a viable alternative. At $4000, that's 1333 gallons @ $3/gal (as if!). At 20 mi/gal, that's 26,666 miles of driving - or about 2 years for the average driver (~ 13k miles per year). So a two year investment (assuming gas prices are stable for 2 years) would mean never having to buy gas again. Anyone making a product, kit or business that could meet that price would be VERY popular (and prosperous). So - how do we do this?

at 3/29/2008 2:55:38 AM, Mark said:
Nano and ZAP alikes have shown something which the Electric Vehicle manufacturers should look forward too.

at 5/1/2008 9:49:35 AM, Glen said:
Buy Zap all of .43 a share now and look at the cars comming out in the next few years and ask yourself why would you want a gas car? I have over 1800 share and still buying all the time. I think this will be the next Google.

Post a comment

Display Name
Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above: