[Oeva-list] EVs to the rescue in Japan

cje at hevanet.com cje at hevanet.com
Thu May 12 13:57:05 PDT 2011


Dunno. I've got a ZAP truck -- I really like it and all, but there's no 
realistic way I could charge it with solar panels. ZAP sold a solar panel 
that fitted over the whole bed -- it was like 4x5' -- and according to 
the sales guy, the most the thing would do was keep your batteries topped 
off. It'd take more than a week to charge the thing, he said. 

The most I get out of this truck is like 20mi, less when I've got a worn 
battery, and its max payload is 500lb. So, if there was a disaster and 
the ZAP was charged, I'd be stuck going less than 20mi with me, a 
passenger,and maybe a backpack. Compare that to my F-150, which if I had 
gas in it, has 4WD and can go approximately 400mi, carrying essentially 
unlimited cargo. Which rig do I want in a disaster?

I understand that there are some people who have solar arrays covering 
their whole roofs, and more power to 'em, (heh!) but still and all, a 
gallon of gas carries more juice than a week's worth of roof-solar. 

All that said, sure, we do need to downsize and use more sensible cars. 
Why DOES everyone need hundreds of horsepower? My old Dodge Dart made do 
with 60 horses or something, and got about 20mpg. Now Toyotas come with 
200HP and get 30mpg -- why? Build 'em with 60HP and lighten them up. 

Not arguing with you on the downsizing thing. I'm just saying that in a 
disaster, give me something I can use to get far, far away, and fast.

Curt

> Curt, this is true as long as cars insist on having 200 to 300 horses in
> front of it.  There was a time when a man was lucky to have one.  Four 
or
> six to pull a carriage was considered royalty (or a stage coach 
perhaps),
> but you see my point.  Wall St. with its The Bigger The Better 
brainwashing
> is destroying our world.  Our greed for more power than the next guy is 
not
> our best approach to transportation - or anything else for that matter.
> What's the point of an EV saving the planet if it still needs to 
consume way
> more energy that it takes to move one or two human bodies?  How often 
do you
> tow tons of goods?  And couldn't you rent an ICE on those occations?  
You
> guys are not much of a solution.  Your only changing the nature of the
> problem.  Sure, there may be less gases emmitted, but, well, I'm sure 
you
> have all heard the arguments about the trade offs and power souces and
> pollution from other materials, blah, blah, blah.  But yes, Curt, as 
long as
> we are hedonistically inclined to grasp and cling to our 250 horses, or 
act
> like a spoiled child, then solar will never supply the energy.  Your 
right.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Jon Youngblood
> 
> jonyou at clear.net
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> I kinda have to disagree -- the amount of energy it takes to run a car 
is so
> much ridiculously more than any reasonably sized solar array could ever
> provide.. 
> 
>  
> 
> Curt Erickson
> 
> Lurkin'
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> > One more advantage of the EV over the ICE. The EV will only become 
> 
> > more important in times of disaster as more and more local 
residential 
> 
> > and commercial solar arrays are installed across the country.
> 
> > 
> 
> > http://nyti.ms/kbc5B6
> 
> > 
> 
> > --
> 
> > The EVs are coming
> 
> > 
> 
> > Gary Munkhoff, Editor&  Publisher
> 
> > Green Living Journal
> 
> > P.O. Box 677
> 
> > Cascade Locks, OR 97014
> 
> > 541.374.5454
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 





More information about the Oeva-list mailing list