[Oeva-list] O/T subsidies
Theoldcars at aol.com
Theoldcars at aol.com
Tue Apr 26 20:41:20 PDT 2011
Hello Steve
Response to some of your points. To make it a little easier I put our names
at the start.
Steve: "It seems that in practice, the Leaf can not provide a 100 mile,
un-recharged
range at suburban road speeds and with a modicum of climate control, ie
heat."
Don: If you moderate the temperature only as needed you can lower the loss.
Also you can preheat or cool the vehicle while its still on the charger
using you phone. There is a slight loss heating or cooling but its not that
bad. You can also improve your range if you drive like an EV driver.
Steve: "(My employer, who, in other areas touts their "green" record, has
declined
to provide any form of on-site chargeing facilities, citing liability as
their concern.)"
Don: Employers are just like everyone else. They have their own concerns
and priority's. I offered employees free charging and their own parking
charging locations for any employee interested in driving electric years ago.
Soon learned people even if given the fuel for free find it more convenient
to stick with what they know. I think it will take 5 or 6 dollar a gallon
gas before wallet shock is enough for the majority to consider other
alternatives.
Steve: "I'd rather see us subsidize neither one.. and allow domestic oil
production
where it is econnomically feasable. (This includes removal of any subsidy
currently in place for oil..) Remember that the royalties for US drilled
offshort oil come back to the US Treasury."
Don: Well that just seems to be the way the United States works. Full of
special interest that cost us all a lot more in the end. Some we agree on and
others we don't. I don't see this system changing anytime soon. I also
don't ever see an end to the cost of subsidizing oil including the added cost
of being the world police to maintain the flow of oil. I just can't get my
arms around using a limited resource and calling it economically feasible.
Yes it might be that today but tomorrow its always going to cost more. I
don't need to ride this bus to the end of the line to see where it goes. Its
not going to be good for our nation to keep hanging on to the hope that
prices will become feasible
Steve: "Really? Where? Neither Iraq or Afghanistan have significant
quantities of
oil. We don't have a significant presence in any of the other oil producing
regions... (Libia, you might argue has some US presence.. and that would
be true.)"
>
Don: I believe we still have about 50,000 troops in Iraq as of this year.
They reduced the number and have pulled back to the forts but Iraq is
anything but a sure bet. 10,000 in Kuwait and 8000 in Qatar.
We also keep a very strong show of force close by with aircraft carriers
and the escort fleet that surrounds them. We have 10 aircraft carriers and
several of them are stationed to maintain the flow of oil when a show of
force is ordered. Even if they actually are doing nothing they still cost a
lot of money. Its not just one aircraft carrier there is a whole fleet that
moves with them. It is hard to find the exact amount but it is estimated
that we spend 50 billion dollars a year just on the Middle East. Who knows
what the real cost is but regardless of the amount its a waste of money.
Steve:"So you are going to subsidize production of this new technology.. in
Japan?"
Don: Well better Japan then China which seems to be making everything.
China is another huge problem but that is way off topic for EVs.
Don: Nissan is going to start building the Leaf and the battery packs here
in the US. Nissan already has started construction of a battery plant. The
battery plant building is the size of 16 football fields. As far as
vehicles made here very little of GM, Ford or Chrysler parts are made here. Most
of the car parts come from all over the world. I know this to be true since
we see the labels and they say where they are made. We buy a half a
million in factory made OEM parts a year and most are not made in the United
States.
Steve:"Don, I'm glad you are an early adopter.. I've done the same with
some other
technologies.. and it's important to get some EV's out in the real world
to see if they can replace ICE's."
Don: To see if they can actually replace ICE vehicles has already been
done. See link
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV)
Don: The RAV4 EV had a one hundred mile range and some have already gone
150,000 miles on the original NiMH battery pack. Unfortunately Chevron/Texaco
bought a controlling interest in the NiMH battery and flat refused to sell
the NiMH battery for an EV. I know this to be true because I called the
company and asked them about buying a large quantity of NiMH batteries. They
were very nice to talk to but I was told they were only interested in
working with Hybrids. If I was working on Hybrids they would have been more then
willing to proceed. It did not matter that these were an OEM part in an
OEM vehicle and the same exact replacement battery. He told me he would like
to but he was just following orders.
Don: I will leave it to speculation as to their motive but I bet they did
not spend even one days profit to buy out the rights to the NiMH battery.
Great for them which turned out to be terrible for the rest of the world.
See link
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries)
Steve: "It's only a small part of the problem..
Don: I really disagree with you on this. Oil imports are no small problem
and they are growing problem. I don't call the one of the largest transfers
of wealth in the history of the world a small problem. Were selling out our
country for oil because that is what were use to buying. In fact it is
such a large problem our nation would literally come to a standstill if the
flow stopped. In a couple of weeks it would become a nation wide crisis.
Steve: "A larger part of the problem is that US companies are content to
send
productive work overseas. And that US consumers are willing to buy
stuff built overseas, to the detriment of their own economy. And that
no one sees this as "unpatriotic"."
Don: I do see buying items made in China as being unpatriotic however it is
getting almost impossible to find anything not made in China. I now look
at the item and decide how badly I really need it. Most of the time I put it
back if made in China. I will though buy from anywhere else in the world
if there is not a USA option.
Steve: "At least until you have to replace the battery pack. The current
fleet of
Preius are beginning to come to the end of their useful battery life.. and
I understand that the "warranty" is often being fulfilled by replacing the
now dead pack with packs salveged from wrecked vehicles."
Don: I just talked to a 2003 Prius owner who now has their vehicle in our
shop. He just replaced his pack at a cost of around 3000 dollars. His
vehicle has 200,000 miles on it and is still going strong. Their range had
dropped a little and it turned out the pack was failing. I did ask why not get a
used pack and they felt it has done so well it was worth just getting a new
one. The warranty is 100,000 miles and I have not heard anything about
Toyota providing used packs under warranty replacements .
Steve: "It is interesting that you bring up Kenedy's speech about the
Apollo
program. It occurred during one of the most productive times in US
history.. and was largely conducted by US companies, using US workers.
(I know this, first hand.. I was one of them for 13 years.)"
Don: I am old enough to remember when Kennedy made the speech. We could
have productive times now as well if the United States would become energy
self sufficient. It can be done as a nation or if enough people see the
importance to act on their own.
Steve: "This is largly true.. although you still need lubricants of
various types."
Don: AC drive EV OEM vehicles are a little different then DC drive which
are usually used during conversions using a stick transmission. AC motors
have many advantages which is why you only see AC systems used by
manufacturers. No brushes and regen is a given A simple gear reduction of around 11 to
1. There are less lubricants used in an EV. In the stock OEM S-10 EV gear
reduction the fluid is never changed. Yes you still have lube points but
that is about it. The rest are sealed and some are not intended to be
changed.
I know the RAV4 EV, S-10 EV and the Ranger EV fairly well since I have to
do all their service work. None of these I bought new and were in need of
some service work. Mostly replacement modules in the pack.
The Leaf is the next generation of EV. It is an amazing vehicle I expect it
to do very well and Nissan is definitely committed. So this is very good
news for anyone considering an EV.
Don
In a message dated 4/25/2011 8:18:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
oeva-list-request at oeva.org writes:
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 21:05:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Steve's Account" <stevel at fern.com>
Subject: [Oeva-list] subsidies.
To: oeva-list at oeva.org
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1104241947480.31055 at hub.fern.com>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Thank you, Don, for your thoughtful reply.
> Hello Steve
>
> I have spent a considerable amount of time reviewing your reply.
>
> For the vast majority of drivers 100 miles of EV range is a game changer.
> So the Leaf makes what was wishful thinking now a reality.
It seems that in practice, the Leaf can not provide a 100 mile,
un-recharged
range at suburban road speeds and with a modicum of climate control, ie
heat.
> Some of your beliefs may be a bit skewed as Alan pointed out your
> misconception of the current charging time. It takes about 25 minutes
to
> charge for 80 miles of additional range.
Provided you can find a charger at your intended destination that meets
your
needs for the faster charge.
(My employer, who, in other areas touts their "green" record, has declined
to provide any form of on-site chargeing facilities, citing liability as
their concern.)
> Just as you seem to try and point out about electric. The true cost of
oil
> if far greater then at the pump. I would rather see us subsidize electric
> then subsidize imported oil.
I'd rather see us subsidize neither one.. and allow domestic oil production
where it is econnomically feasable. (This includes removal of any subsidy
currently in place for oil..) Remember that the royalties for US drilled
offshort oil come back to the US Treasury.
> Right now we are spending a lot of money to
> keep our military in many parts of the world to maintain the flow of
oil.
Really? Where? Neither Iraq or Afghanistan have significant quantities of
oil.
We don't have a significant presence in any of the other oil producing
regions... (Libia, you might argue has some US presence.. and that would
be true.)
> If
> oil was not a critical resource for the United States we would not be
> spending untold billions of dollars to do this. The sad part is this
money being
> spent produces nothing but a temporary supply line. On the other hand
if we
> took an equal amount of funds and invested it here in the United States
we
> will have spent our money far more wisely.
Which is why I'm advocating for US based drilling. You are definately right
we should be spending it here!
[snip]
> I would not be surprised if there is more oil that can be tapped. The
> problem is there will never be an unlimited supply so it will continue
> to be a costly resource.
Every time they have predicted the "end of oil", so far, they were wrong.
The first such prediction started in 1919.
But.. your point is valid.. it has gotten more difficult.
> The least expensive oil has already been found so new oil is only going
> to cost more.
Agreed.. which gives us the oppertunity to fund other technologies, by
creating a demand.
No energy source is free.
> I cringed when BP TV ads said they were going
> to cover the 20 billion dollar clean up of the Gulf. Yes they will pay
for
> it but that just means higher oil prices. Businesses pass cost on so
what I
> heard BP saying is your going to be paying for the clean up but BP will
> take the credit.
Thus is it ever.. When the banks mismanaged resources.. it wasn't the
banks that paid.. it was us.
And our litigious society hasn't learned that cleaning up from a disaster
is only made more expensive when you involve the courts.
Is is just because no one could be found to blame that FEMA covers some
disasters and not others?
I find it interesting that the government will endemnify certain industries
for "accidents", (nuclear power) and pillory others.
>
> I don't really see your point in the following sentence?
>
> "In addition, many of the generation facilities and transmission
facilities
> have been paid for either by the government or by rate payers."
In looking at the types of "subsidies" various industries get, electric
power
has received neumerous subsidies over it's history, including the examples
above. None of the major hydro projects could have been completed without
the government bankrolling them, even if it was eventually paid back.
Using electric power as a "fuel source" is, as such subsidized by the
existance of a distrubution network, at least partially funded by
others.
>
> Yes we have a good start for the infrastructure of electric as a fuel.
Just
> another reason to make full use of that investment. There is nothing paid
> for by the government it is all taken from the tax payer. Just like
tobacco
> in Oregon is charged taxes that is then used to fund roads. I am not
sure
> about the logic of taxing tobacco for roads but it does not have any
> bearing what type of fuel should be on the roads.
My guess is that "Sombody has to police up all the cigarette butts!" and
your car is about the only public place you might smoke without being
arrested! :-)
>
> More oil is not the answer and more oil would only delay the inevitable.
We
> should conserve what we have as there are many uses that would cost far
> more or there really is not a good alternative. That is why it is such a
> waste to use a limited resource for local driving.
On this we largly agree.
>
> The other reason additional oil is not the answer is at some point we
are
> going to be forced to find an alternative. It would be a very unwise
> decision to delay lowering our independence of oil. By procrastinating
> this will
> only serve to increase the cost of oil and drain our country of even
more
> money.
Which is why I say "domestic drilling"..
> You idea to control prices with more oil has merit if we could
> produce an excess of oil at a lower cost. This would not be a permanent
fix more
> like putting a band aid on when you need major surgery. If we actually
start
> replacing our dependence on oil that would help reduce oil prices. Unlike
> trying to find more oil finding an alternative energy would be a long
term
> answer.
And I think that hybrids are the near term answer.. At least until purely
electric vechcles can come closer to meeting the typical need.
>
> There must be a lot of people in Oregon who agree that we can have
cleaner
> electric. PGE?s renewable power program is the most successful program
of
> its kind in the country. My businesses buy 100 percent wind. So not
only is
> our business powered by wind so are the EVs.
Well.. as I understand PGE's program.. it's not that they ACTUALLY BUY
wind produced power to meet every killowatt hour of the subscribers to the
program.. but that they invest in schemes that may evenutally generate
wind power. And that, currently, there are not enough wind generation
plants
actually in use to come anywhere NEAR meeting the use by their
subscribers.
> In our case your claim of a dirty grid is less valid. We are willingly
> paying more and everyone will benefit. Not only will it help make
electric a
> cleaner fuel it will keep more of our money here and provide long term
local
> jobs. I would like to see more done but this is a good start.
What I've never understood is... the power companies don't pay a dime for
"wind" fuel.. So why is it that they charge a premium price for power that,
were it generated that way, would be cheaper?
Since a given electron can't be traced to it's source, your only hope of
keeping the power companies honest is to demand that they show that they
have a source for each kwh they are selling.
>
> You make a point that electric is a dirty fuel. You have a choice you can
> pay less and make it so or you can pay more and clean the grid up
faster if
> this is a concern to you. This again is where I agree with Lan. If were
> going to be using coal then it would be much easier to make it cleaner
in
> one location then in millions of vehicles.
Except that they don't hold power plants to the same standards they do
cars.. and since cars are replaced more quicly than power plants, it's
easier to modify the car fleet than the power company plants.
>
> Really there are other options for clean electric. As an example go a
> little over half way down the page at this link
Oh.. I'd love to see us use geothermal power... It makes a lot more sense
than many of the other alternatives.
And I'd like to see us REQUIRE that any new building built in an area
that requires over a certain number of heating degree days or cooling
degree days per year use ground source heating and cooling systems.
We could significantly cut the "fixed point" utilzation of fuel if we
did this. (As opposed to mobile uses of power such as cars, trains, ships,
aircraft etc.)
It is interesting that you bring up Kenedy's speech about the Apollo
program. It occured during one of the most productive times in US
history.. and was largely conducted by US companies, using US workers.
(I know this, first hand.. I was one of them for 13 years.)
>
> The United States is going broke and oil is a big part of the problem.
It's only a small part of the problem..
A larger part of the problem is that US companies are content to send
productive work overseas. And that US consumers are willing to buy
stuff built overseas, to the detriment of their own economy. And that
no one sees this as "unpatriotic".
> Were all either part of the problem or part of the solution. I really
> feel EVs
> can be a huge part of the solution.
cigarette butts
> EVs also have a very long list of
> other positives. However you don't need to be a fan or fanatic to drive
> an EV anymore. Nissan with the Leaf has now made it possible to go
about
> your daily driving more convenient and in the long run less costly.
It's not quite that effective.. but it's getting closer.
> No more going out of your way to find and wait at a gas station.
Nope.. now you hike MILES to the nearest charging station.. only to find
that it's not compatible with your vehicle or not otherwise available.
> No more
> engine oil changes, transmission or axle oil changes. No more air
filters,
> belts or major engine services. Even your brakes will last longer
> because your motor turns into a generator which helps stop the vehicle.
This is largly true.. although you still need lubricants of various types.
> Also since it is very doubtful
> gas will go down in the future you having an alternative fuel vehicle
that
> is free from future oil price hikes. New vehicles are usually always a
> poor investment. However with an EV with such a long warranty back by a
> major manufacturer is about as good as it gets.
At least until you have to replace the battery pack. The current fleet of
Preius are beginning to come to the end of their useful battery life.. and
I understand that the "warranty" is often being fulfilled by replacing the
now dead pack with packs salveged from wrecked vehicles.
> But wait there's more with the
> 7500 dollar federal tax credit taken off the top its almost a steal
while
> these funds last.
I'm glad the subsidy is in effect, for now.. but I'd like to see them
compete on a one to one basis, especially for vehicles produced overseas.
>
> Although the electric supply has a lot to do with EVs. I am afraid much
of
> this post is getting away from what the OEVA is here for. I also don't
> want to bore anyone with my point of views. Sometimes that is easier
said
> then done for a fanatic.
>
> Don
>
Don, I'm glad you are an early adopter.. I've done the same with some other
technologies.. and it's important to get some EV's out in the real world
to see if they can replace ICE's.
I think, for some, the current product will do just fine.
And I think hybrids will help fill in the gap. (And it looks like we will
have a small flood of hybrids, soon.. Lexus, Lincoln and others have
already begun advertizing them.)
We may soon see "battery replacement" versions of EV's, where you stop in
and swap batteries, instead of re-charging, leaving the heavy, expensive,
fast charging systems at "gas stations".
Just as we have "propane exchange" racks at grocery stores now, battery
exchanges might work as well.
The existing crop of EV's will start to prove that, one way or the other.
I'm looing forward to the general availability of the EV Transit. If they
can do that, with reasonable range and purchase price.. I'd seriously take
a
look at it.
Steve
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20110426/61e81f62/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Oeva-list
mailing list