...what about the other costs that add up to your bills. I think we should look at how much we spend on fuel including taxes and other chargers.
I don't follow. This is just a fuel calculator. KBB and Edmunds have total cost calculators. I think one of the points of DOE's is to show that electricity has not risen like gasoline has and is almost impervious to periodic spikes. That's because the supply/demand is steady or at least predictable, and there is a portfolio of various fuel sources that compete to make electricity. So this is a big benefit over oil. ICEs are stuck with oil and can't lower their consumption easily or by very much.
Oddly, the USA Today column linked to by Mr. Murray tried to imply the opposite, that we're due for some big crash of the grid and big price spikes if too many EVs are sold before we upgrade the grid! Like there's any possibility that might happen!! But yes, let's upgrade the grid now. Why would we not do that, with or without EVs?
@Charles – Yes the calculator looks at the fuel or energy cost, what about the other costs that add up to your bills. I think we should look at how much we spend on fuel including taxes and other chargers.
@saw911 – We are already seeing many Electric cars on the market, the question is how is electricity generated? (Gasoline, Nuclear power plants, or renewable energy sources). I think we need to look at ways of powering cars from renewable energy sources.
Except that in California they all demand their air conditioners.
Really?! I lived in southern Cal. for many years and AC was not used there nearly as much as it is here in the upper (humid) southeast, and even less so in northern Cal. Of course there are desert regions there but not so populous. There's also Arizona, Nevada, NM, Texas, and many other high pop areas where it's much hotter or more humid than California.
For the biggest simple gain in city traffic MPG, nothing would beat the stop-start system with added manual control. Except that in California they all demand their air conditioners. But it would work well in all of the normal world.
There is another way to make vast improvements in fuel economy, and it does not require any change in the vehicles at all. That method is to improve traffic flow and reduce or eliminate all of the waiting times when the MPG of any vehicle is ZERO!
Agreed. Let's do more to improve traffic flow. Except a lot of $$$ already gets invested in that and the general trend still is toward slower traffic. The equivalent MPG for an EV in that scenario, though, approaches INFINITY!
No, I REALLY don't want to move anywhere, especially not Amsterdam. I don't claim that my proposed solutions can be implemented, only yhat they would provide the desired results. It would be up to others, (Possibly a king or emperor) to make them happen. Possibly a hundred years ago those kind of rules might have passed, but I don't think that would happen today. BUT that does not make them bad ideas, only unworkable.
...carbon dioxide. And now it has become the villian because some folks say that it is trapping the sun's heat. It may also be reflecting heat back into space, and, in a more interesting possibility, it may be that global warming causes increases of carbon dioxide.
Please point to any scientific study that casts doubt as to whether CO2 traps more heat or to one that theorizes that CO2 reflects more heat or rises as a result of GW.
In my opinion, William K., I think sometimes politics is involved in these arguments against particular technologies. The oil and automobile lobbies have traditionally been so strong in the U.S. that they seem to find something wrong (and can vocalize it and get support for their dissent) with anything that could be a threat to them. I think the reason some of these alternative vehicle technologies have not taken off has nothing to do with the science of them, and I'm sure many would agree.
In many engineering workplaces, there’s a generational conflict between recent engineering graduates and older, more experienced engineers. However, a recent study published in the psychology journal Cognition suggests that both may have something to learn from another group: 4 year olds.
Conventional wisdom holds that MIT, Cal Tech, and Stanford are three of the country’s best undergraduate engineering schools. Unfortunately, when conventional wisdom visits the topic of best engineering schools, it too often leaves out some of the most distinguished programs that don’t happen to offer PhD-level degrees.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.