Batteries

Paul J Gans added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

First, I think thata Toyota's battery reliability is better
today than you claim.

Actually, it is NOT, which is precisely why Toyota stopped
charging $2,400 to replace them as customers balked at more Prius
sales.

Second, I think that a plug-in charger isn't going to be
a big feature.

Not a bright statement, Paul. Electricity today has an equivalent
price of LESS than 50 cents a gallon and CAN come way down from
that, if only the Far Left Loons and Green Nazis who want
electric cars will also build solar and nuclear. So, at 50 cents
a gallon, one can drive a Volt a long way for the approximately
$1.65 gas costs right now.

Third, I think that the projected price of the Volt will kill
it.

And, you would fix this how exactly?

These are not good times for automobile sales.

By the way, if you think that gas will stay at its present low
price... But that's another argument.

No, I doubt gas will stay at present levels, I think it will drop
to around 75 cents/gal before going back up. Perhaps you should
do a little research on the crude oil industry before making
prognosticatings. Saudi Arabia produces a barrel of oil for
between $1 and $2, depending on which oil field they're using,
the higher prices at the new ultra-high tech recovery fields some
400 miles from the older oil fields. Oil is only in the mid-$40
range right now because it is being propped up by restricting
supply to about match demand.

But, before we argue about the obvious solution - drill more,
drill now, save money - why don't we talk about why the Far Left
Loons from Kalyfornia and their Green Nazi allies absolutely
refuse to even talk about REAL energy reform, which includes
nuclear, large-scale wind, and large-scale solar. The
environmental Nazis simply won't let those 3 highly viable
technologies even get off the ground yet at the same time, they
propose draconian and insane ideas like cap-and-trade to attempt
to restrict electrical output from carbon-emitting powerplants.

And, before you shoot back a retort at me, be prepared to discuss
the COST of building whatever solution(s) YOU propose. At the end
of the day, it is easy to be a Monday morning quarterback or
armchair general on these difficult issues, but it is quite
another to actually implement alternative solutions without
MASSIVE government incentives paid for by - why, exactly again?
That's right, you and me!

--
HP, aka Jerry

"How do you have patience for people who claim they love America,
but clearly can't stand Americans? – Sydney Ellen Wade to
President Andrew Shepherd in the movie "The American President

By the way, if you think that gas will stay at its present
low price... But that's another argument.

What one must remember is two things:

1) at its price high, the country in the world with the
largest supply of gasoline-making fossil fuel is ... ta da ...
the United States of America, and by a rather large margin.

Not quite. The US consumes about 25% of the oil but has only
about 3% of the reserves. BUT, if you include in your estimates
the amount of energy in coal and such things as oil shale, then,
yes, the US is gifted with vast reserves. In fact, some call the
US the Saudi Arabia of Coal. However, to cost effectively convert
either coal or oil shale to actual gasoline, diesel and heating
oil requires an equivalent crude oil price ABOVE $200/barrel.
Yet, your point is valid, namely that we should and we MUST
develop these resouces as only the Far Left Loons and the Green
Nazis believe in a Tooth Fairy for energy independence.

Take president-elect Obama's pledge to invest $150B over 10 years
to put 1,000,000 alternative fuel vehicles on the road. Do the
math yourself, McDonald or anyone - that's about $150,000 per
car! Who will support such a hairbrained idea?!

2) if the global warming scare people get their way, none of
that will ever be used .... cars for ordinary people in the
USA and Europe will be banned long before it is used. That's
their main fear ... a plentiful supply of fossil fuel in the
USA. This will allow their main goal ... destruction of the US
economy and a global takeover by China, India, etc., where
there will be no reduction in development by the global
warming scare. Look at the way the scare mongers are talking.
Do you really believe that they plan to make large use, in the
US and especially worldwide, of the only possible replacement
for fossil fuels ... nuclear fission ... in the near future?
Of course not!

Exactly. First, there IS no such thing as a global warming
crisis, God Damnit! Hundreds, maybe thousands of world-renowned
environmental and climate scientists know and say that mean
temperatures are a tri-cylic event. But, the REAL danger is
meddling in what has always been Mother Nature's way of
controlling the planet. The swing from lowest to highest temps is
in the range of only 4-6 deg. C, with the swing in either the
cold or hot direction between 2 and 3 deg C. While seemingly
small, this really is rather large and if some misguided meddling
alters the equation by only a degree, the next "little ice age"
as has plaqued Europe countless times since the early Roman
Empire days, might become a REAL ice age.

We'll all be dead, of course, but I really would like to give a
living planet to my grandchildren. At this point, I just don't
know how, but I DO know that Al Gore is full of ****!

--
HP, aka Jerry

"How do you have patience for people who claim they love America,
but clearly can't stand Americans? – Sydney Ellen Wade to
President Andrew Shepherd in the movie "The American President

Paul J Gans added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

GM has stated that the first TWO years production will total
LESS than 20,000 cars. That I've seen, and I follow this as
closely as I can, GM hasn't made any comittments to a specific
volume and hasn't even settled on a battery for the production
car. So, I don't know what the scalability will be. I DO know
that ALL alternative fuel vehicles, but especially advanced
plug-ins, WILL be heavily subsidized by both the manufacturer
AND through tax incentives, which get paid by who/whom again?
That's right, ALL taxpayers not just those buying these cars.

Production is too small and too tentative. They've missed
the boat. Large numbers of folks won't go for the car until
it has a track record.

Besides, what's the advantage of a $40,000 car that goes 40
miles between charges?

YOu keep saying "they". Who is "they"? GM? GM, Ford, and
Chrysler? ALL the world's car makers? If you don't know, I'll
enlighten you - Ford, GM and Chrysler already have or soon will
have MORE alternative fuel vehicles on the road than all the Japs
combined. And, they sell TODAY more cars than ALL the cars made
by ALL the countries in the world and sold in the American market
COMBINED.

Now, exactly how many hybrid-electric cars are on the road or
will by by 20100 from Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Kia, or the others?
Yet another uninformed armchair general trying to second guess
the fighting of a war he doesn't understand, methinketh.

--
HP, aka Jerry

"How do you have patience for people who claim they love America,
but clearly can't stand Americans? – Sydney Ellen Wade to
President Andrew Shepherd in the movie "The American President

HEMI-Powered wrote:
[]
Sorry if I poked a sharp stick in your eye, David. I though you'd
said that you were trying to fix one of your own partially dead
batteries. Sometimes it is hard to follow who is reply to who in
these long-lived threads.

No problem, Jerry.

David

Paul J Gans wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
Paul J Gans wrote:

Of course they should have had a decent hybrid out in 2005, but
who is counting?

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/09/priustoric----g.html

No, the link above is a sorry story. But it rings true.

That depends on why one would call something a sorry story.

There is a certain impatience where advances in hybrids or pure
electrics is concerned, and IMO it is strongly driven by a notion that
the standard vehicle should be a muscle car.

Automobiles are, generally, way over powered. Hence they are overweight
(too big an engine, heavier car, heavier transmission, heavier wheels,
brakes, etc.)

US auto companies have never (or only rarely) had the patience to
introduce a technology concept and stick to it, learn and evolve after
tepid reception or sales success.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1 Read that sorry
story...

This one I remember quite well. It was the usual stuff. Nobody was
willing to stay with a concept to see if it would pan out in a couple
of years.

It's not just waiting, you have to continue to improve, invest and make
things happen.

When the 35mm (film) camera first appeared, folks looked at it and
laughed. When the first digital cameras came out (remember the
Sony?) folks laughed.

In both cases it took a couple of years to catch on.


But GM must still have the plans for the EV1 and they could probably
could have been quickly adopted to current production. Instead they
took four years (or more) to design a totally new car that won't make
it to the streets until 2010 or later.

I think the Volt is the better idea. I'm a huge, huge fan of the serial
hybrid idea over hybrids and electrics. In Canada a pure electric would
be useless in the winter (low battery endurance in the cold; cabin
heating requirements). A small engine's waste heat will not only heat
the cabin but could also heat the batteries into their best
re-charge and delivery temperature range.

I also think the big-3 need to reduce their product lines severely to
two brands each (regular and luxury). The current structure has been
said to cost GM alone $5B/yr in management, engineering,
marketing/distribution. There are far too many dealerships as well.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Alan Browne added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

That depends on why one would call something a sorry story.

There is a certain impatience where advances in hybrids or
pure electrics is concerned, and IMO it is strongly driven by
a notion that the standard vehicle should be a muscle car.

Alan, the impatience may be real but it is both unfair and
unrealistic. People have VERY short memories when it comes to
their car buying choices. When gas suddenly spikes upwards, as it
has a number of times since, say, the 1973 OPEC Oil Embargo,
buyers suddenly want to move to smaller vehicles and demand that
the car companies instantly respond. Others view this as an
opportunity to expand liberal ideals and demand the government do
something about the greedy, stupid car companies. Eventually, car
makers DO respond and things reach some sort of level.

But, later on, old habits come back as prices ease, people again
have an appetite for larger, higher performance vehicles whether
they actually need them or just like them, and their short
memories are erased.

I truly believe that the world's car makers are so confused and
dismayed right this minute as to be apoplectic . On the one hand,
people are clamoring for them to produce smaller, more fuel
efficient vehicles and governments are pushing them hard to do
so, but on the other hand, sales of the really little cars have
tanked again. So, if YOU were a car exec, what would you do? Car
companies must plan NOT for where buyer's tastes are right now,
but 3, 4, 5 years out. If they guess right, a new line of cars
will be a sales success. But if they guess wrong, they've just
****ed several BILLION dollars down the drain and are again
called stupid.

Automobiles are, generally, way over powered. Hence they are
overweight (too big an engine, heavier car, heavier
transmission, heavier wheels, brakes, etc.)

How do you figure they are over-powered? About any class of
vehicles I can think of from ANY company offer a range of engine
choices even within a given model. Just choose a lesser power
engine if you feel that strongly.

As to size, people have a fixation that they THINK they need a 7-
passenger big SUV to go shopping in. But, it is more what they
LIKE than what they need as can easily be seen by noting that
people are often alone in these huge beasts. So, why blame the
car makers for providing what people want?

US auto companies have never (or only rarely) had the patience
to introduce a technology concept and stick to it, learn and
evolve after tepid reception or sales success.

Back that up with facts. American car makers have been innovators
in about ANY and ALL major areas of automotive innovation you
care to name from large to small, from sedans to sports cars,
from large trucks to small, from mini-SUVs to large, and entire
market segments have been invented by Americans, such as the
minivan. Europeans design and build excellent vehicles but are
often followers rather than leaders. And, until only very
recently, the Japs have entirely been followers, believing that
alienating buyers with radical new vehicle designs will lose them
customers.

You ill-informed, short-sighted views are exactly an example of
the shortness of vision buyers have that so confuses car makers
who must invest billions as much as 5 years out predicting your
ill-defined, fickle tastes in vehicles.

But, since you feel so strongly, why not vote with your car
buying dollars? Buy much smaller, anemically powered, little ****
ass cars and tell them stupids in Detroit what you think. Tell
all your neighbors how dumb they are for driving around in
comfort in a car that can move when they want to. And, certainly
buy foreign so that our economic enemies will gain our jobs.

Have you seen the bumper sticker that says "Laid off yet? Buy
foreign and you will be." Think about it, and then give the car
makers, whichever you like best, intelligent direction on how
best to meet your needs and what you're willing to pay.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1 Read that
sorry story...

This one I remember quite well. It was the usual stuff.
Nobody was willing to stay with a concept to see if it would
pan out in a couple of years.

It's not just waiting, you have to continue to improve, invest
and make things happen.

Here's the thing: alternative fuel vehicles, including electrics,
are simply NOT cost effective and will not be unless/until gas
becomes considerably more expensive. And, if you've noted the
disparity in price between E-85 and gas, and you've taken the
time to calculate the true cost/mile driven, then you would
realize how out of whack things can get when governments get
involved in business by meddling in things they don't understand.

But GM must still have the plans for the EV1 and they could
probably could have been quickly adopted to current
production. Instead they took four years (or more) to design
a totally new car that won't make it to the streets until
2010 or later.

I think the Volt is the better idea. I'm a huge, huge fan of
the serial hybrid idea over hybrids and electrics. In Canada
a pure electric would be useless in the winter (low battery
endurance in the cold; cabin heating requirements). A small
engine's waste heat will not only heat the cabin but could
also heat the batteries into their best re-charge and delivery
temperature range.

Ah, you're a Canadian. So, tell us, Alan, what do YOUR country's
car makers say? Oh, you don't have ANY car makers that are
domestic to Canada? Gee, the last one went out of business in
1929? Then, that leaves the dumb-ass Americans and, in your view,
the dummies from Asia and Europe, huh?

But, are you really willing to pay $40,000 - more for you now
that the Loonie has dropped back to about 80 cents US - for a
Volt? As I've said, it is nice to be green, IF you have the
green.


I also think the big-3 need to reduce their product lines
severely to two brands each (regular and luxury). The current
structure has been said to cost GM alone $5B/yr in management,
engineering, marketing/distribution. There are far too many
dealerships as well.

I think YOU need to get educated. The Big 3, and the Japs,
Koreans, Chinks, Germans, everybody does NOT produce to your idea
or anyone's idea of "right", they produce for what SELLS, plain
and simple. Again, why not ask YOUR country's car makers to get
with the program. Dang! Stuck again with the fact that you have
NO domestic auto industry.

You uninformed, Green Nazis make me want to vomit the way you
attempt to tell people who understand the car biz how to do
things right. Who in Hell are you to tell anyone to produce just
two brands? Ever hear of competition? Freedom of buying choice?
It is competition for buyer's wallets that drives innovation AND
will eventually drive higher efficiency cars, and NOT people
wringing their hands and whining.

--
HP, aka Jerry

"Gentleman, you can't fight in here, this the War Room!" –
President Merkin Muffley, in the movie 'Dr. Strangelove or How I
Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb'

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 17:28:42 -0500, Alan Browne wrote:

In Canada a pure electric would be useless in the winter (low
battery endurance in the cold; cabin heating requirements).

Do you know that to be fact or is it an assumption? The electrics
I've read about and heard reports of use Li-Ion batteries. They
generate great amounts of heat in operation. More than enough, I'd
guess to keep the car moving snappily in frigid weather. But for
the driver and passengers - dress warm! In the long run it won't be
a problem anyway. As the water levels rise, Canada's fierce winters
will become quite mild!

SteveB toquerville@zionvistas wrote:

I need some new rechargeable AA batteries, and I hear eneloops are the best.

Eneloops (and similar ones from other producers) happen to
hold the charge for a rather long time even unused. That
makes them so useful --- "normal" rechargeables loose much ov
their charge over a few weeks.

I have several brands now that I use, and they are getting used up. I even
bought a car charger, as we go out to do real estate surveys, and having
batteries fail is a big deal. But it seems as though the ones we have are
not staying up as good as they once were.

Getting old ...

So, before I spring for the cash, I'd like to hear about what to buy.

Help appreciated.

What do you need? What are your needs?

As for me, I am using the Varta (Rayovac) 15 minute system (both
the old 15 minute "charge and go" and the newer "Ready2Use" (their
eneloop-variant) with their 15 minute charger --- I know that will
not give me the longest possible life cycle, but it allows me to
(re)charge all my batteries in a couple of hours instead of days.
And that's the dealmaker for me.

-Wolfgang