The Big Electric Car lie [Archive] - David Icke's Official Forums

View Full Version : The Big Electric Car lie

ap12345

24-11-2009, 07:14 PM

I have just been doing some quick calculations working out how much electricity would need to be produced in order to replace all of the Cars out there with electric ones, and I was shocked to discover that the energy necesary for this is relatively small.

based on the EV1 which had batterys which supplied 16kwh for a 55 mile journey, and based on the fact that the average journey for the 30million cars per day is around 20 miles, i came out with a figure around 50 twh per year.

The severn barrage which would only cost 12billion to build, a tiny fraction of what the government wastes every year, would supply 17twh per year, add to this several nuclear power plants or coal fired power plants and we in a stroke have totally removed our dependancy on oil.

The inga dam planned for africa would produce 370twh per year, this is enough to run 222 million electric cars bases on the 20 miles per day usage. This

The hoover dam from the 30s produces 4twh per year, this is enough to run 600,000 cars based on US consumption, that is an average usage of around 60-90miles per day.

The technology for clean energy has existed for decades but it is being suppressed. How many times have you heard that electric cars can't work they take up too much electricity we couldnt produce enough power.

Petrol engines are simply not necesary for anything other than freight. The range of electric cars coculd be extended indefinately by the integration of an onboard gasoline generator for long journeys.

there are projections that by 2030 there will be 1.2 billion cars on the road. If we base the fact that on average they drive 20 miles on any given day that is around 7.5 kwh per car, times 365 = 2700kwh per year per car times 1.2 billion 3285twh or that is 33 three gorges dams or 350 severn barrages.

We might ask ourselvesgiven this information why are we still polluting the air we breath?

eternal wheel

24-11-2009, 10:43 PM

ap12345

25-11-2009, 11:38 PM

and where will you get the energy to charge all your leccy cars?
unless you're gonna cover the entire country in thousands of wind turbines, it'll be a coal/fossil fueled power station, coz the severn barrage certainly won't get built.....
http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g303/flumpkins/smokestackpollution.jpg
nuclear's not a viable proposition short/medium term.
to quote richard hammond,
"electric cars are a red herring, why not cut out the middle man and pour the fossil fuel straight into the car?? hydrogen is the future, the person who finds a way to cheaply and safely store hydrogen will go down in history..."

petrol engines arn't used for freight, deisel ones are. ;)
onboard "gasoline" generator? you mean like a toyota pious??:rolleyes:

an average of 20 miles a day?? thats only just over 7000 a year. i do 3 times that in my petrol guzzling 4x4, and that's considered low.

oh, the specs for the EV1 are 26.4 kWh for 75-odd miles, not 16. kinda throws your maths out a bit......

A: Electric motors are more efficient than a petrol motor, most of the energy produced from your 4X4 is wasted in heat expulsion from the exhaust and radiator. Electric power plants are way more effcient than this, so you will do more miles per kg of fossil fuel burnt than putting it directly into your incredibly inefficiente internal combustion engine. But then i wouldnt expect you to understand any of this seeing as your get your "scientific" knolege from TopGear. You clearly have no idea how your car even works.

B: Actually the EV1 was built with 16kwh lead battery packs, the 26kWh and updated motor, had a 150-300mile range. plus this car didnt even have regenerative breaking.

C: Hydrogen? are you insane, do you know how hydrogen is produced, it is through electrolysis you moron. It takes 10-20 times the electricity to split water into oxygen and hydrogen to put into an INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE, which needs to throw away 90% of the heat=energy produced from the reaction to stop the engine overheating and seizing up...A hydrogen car is many times more inefficiente than either a gasoline or electric engine.

Onboard gasoline generator, prius? no you moron, the prius has regenerative breaking and an internal combustion engine not a generator, I am talking about a generator not an engine, something that doesnt lose incredible amounts of energy through transmission or a radiator to stop it overheating.

95% of the energy created through the burning of the gasoline in your car is wasted through the radiator, transmition and breaking. It is an absolutely pathetic design over a century old, not only inefficient but prone to failure and unreliablity.

It is only the cabal of the Oil and Auto industry and the general stupidity of people such as yourselves who get their scientific facts from TopGear that has ever kept it alive.

eternal wheel

26-11-2009, 09:43 AM

reduced to name calling by the 1st reply!! how fragile your aguement must be.
let's have a look, shall we?...

eternal wheel

26-11-2009, 10:06 AM

A: Electric motors are more efficient than a petrol motor,
your definition of 'efficient'?
my 4 litre 6 cylinder petrol engined 4x4 will easily drive to london and back (nearly 400 miles) on a tank full of fuel, at 70+mph. your pissy little toy electric car won't even get half way without you having to stop and knock on someones door and beg some of their electricity.

most of the energy produced from your 4X4 is wasted in heat expulsion from the exhaust and radiator.
you forgot noise and friction losses.

Electric power plants are way more effcient than this, so you will do more miles per kg of fossil fuel burnt than putting it directly into your incredibly inefficiente internal combustion engine.
agreed, but the technology simply isn't there to duplicate the range/power/speed of an internal combustion engine.
it's no good living in fairy world and shouting 'if my electric car was as good as your petrol one, it would be better'...

But then i wouldnt expect you to understand any of this seeing as your get your "scientific" knowledge from TopGear. You clearly have no idea how your car even works.
and you clearly have no idea of who i am, what or what i've done with I.C. engines...... (and i corrected your spelling of 'knowledge' for you. ;) ).

3: Hydrogen? are you insane, do you know how hydrogen is produced, it is through electrolysis you moron. It takes 10-20 times the electricity to split water into oxygen and hydrogen to put into an INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE,
my point exactly.
now read my post again.... if you could find a way of CHEAPLY and SAFELY producing/storing the hydrogen, you'd be made....

I am talking about a generator not an engine, something that doesnt lose incredible amounts of energy through transmission or a radiator to stop it overheating.
nuclear? solar? wind? you want a windmill on top of your noddy car? how sweet!!:)

95% of the energy created through the burning of the gasoline in your car is wasted
made up statistic. :rolleyes:

It is an absolutely pathetic design over a century old,
not only inefficient but prone to failure and unreliablity.
that's right. it doesn't work at all, does it? remind me again how many internal combustion engines have EVER been produced?

and how many patheticly designed, inefficient, unreliable, prone to failure electric noddy cars have been produced? ever?
and how many economies are based on the use of electric powered vehicles?
remind me, are electric motors and batteries a recent invention? is this why they are so shit?

the general stupidity of people such as yourselves who get their scientific facts from TopGear that has ever kept it alive.
if only you knew.....:rolleyes:;)

ap12345

26-11-2009, 10:37 PM

your definition of 'efficient'?
my 4 litre 6 cylinder petrol engined 4x4 will easily drive to london and back (nearly 400 miles) on a tank full of fuel, at 70+mph. your pissy little toy electric car won't even get half way without you having to stop and knock on someones door and beg some of their electricity.

you forgot noise and friction losses.

agreed, but the technology simply isn't there to duplicate the range/power/speed of an internal combustion engine.
it's no good living in fairy world and shouting 'if my electric car was as good as your petrol one, it would be better'...

and you clearly have no idea of who i am, what or what i've done with I.C. engines...... (and i corrected your spelling of 'knowledge' for you. ;) ).

my point exactly.
now read my post again.... if you could find a way of CHEAPLY and SAFELY producing/storing the hydrogen, you'd be made....

nuclear? solar? wind? you want a windmill on top of your noddy car? how sweet!!:)

made up statistic. :rolleyes:

that's right. it doesn't work at all, does it? remind me again how many internal combustion engines have EVER been produced?

and how many patheticly designed, inefficient, unreliable, prone to failure electric noddy cars have been produced? ever?
and how many economies are based on the use of electric powered vehicles?
remind me, are electric motors and batteries a recent invention? is this why they are so shit?

if only you knew.....:rolleyes:;)

The reason i got so pissed off is because you are completely bought into the official version of events given to you by the oil and car companies.

The simple fact is the EV1 was systematically removed from history, the cars were seized by GM and not just crushed but shredded so that they could never be reproduced. If the "noddy car" was so inferior why did GM go to all this troluble.

Also, how many Noddy cars have you ever driven? i bet not a single one, yet you come to sweeping generalisations based on the information fed to you from a TV program which wants to help sell petrol cars.

Your ignorance, is what stops people having free choice. I am forced to drive a petrol car because there is no alternative out there. I am also forced to breath in your and everyone elses car exhaust fumes.

And i did not make up a statistic. If you go and find out the amount of energy contained in a litre of petrol and compare it to kinetic energy produced by your car you will see it is a very low percentrage, once you factor in the transmition the amount of kinetic energy getting to your wheels is 10-20% depending on the efficiency of your car. Then when you take into consider braking, the kinetic energy lost in which, in a petrol engined car cannot be resored back to the engine you will see that 95% is actually conservative.

In regards to your question regarding a generator, i am talking about a bio-diesal powered generator, which runs at a constant low rpm and attains around 50% thermal efficiency instead of 20-25% efficiency of a typical gasoline car engine. Most electric engines have an efficiency of more than 80% this means with a diesal generator linked to an electric engine you are looking at around 40% (0.5*0.8) themal efficiency as opposed to 20-25% possibly less.

Furthermore, a gasoline based jet turbine is around 35-40% efficient so a turbine powered electric generator linked to an electric motor would produce 32% (0.4*0.8) efficiency, as opposed to 20-25%

This is before you even factor in transmition which there is not in an electric car and braking, so the energy getting to your wheels is likely to be as i said 10-20% depending on the car, then once you consider all the kinetic energy lost through braking, just think of braking from 60 to 30 to go round a roundabout only to accelerate back again, the majority of the fuel is used in acceleration, in an electric car generators in the wheels are used as brakes to slow the car charging the batterries ready to accelerate back up to 60, in the standar car you lose the majority of the kinetic energy attained from the original 10% efficient engine, as opposed to losing a small amount from a 80% efficient engine, you see what i am getting at, it become exponential the difference in efficiency when you factor in all of these seperate factors.

Do you really want me to go on? Surely this just illustates how hugely inefficient internal combustion engines are. The fact that its better to run an electric motor off a gasoline generator than an internal combustion engine alone, you see this shows how ridiculous Hammonds argument is.

Modern coal fire power plants are much more efficient than either diesal or gasoline generators so the electric car would actually probably conservatively be 5 times more efficient than the gasoline cars

Look, just by bringing in regenerative breaking the prius has taken a car which would otherwise do 50 miles to the galon to 75 miles to the galon, and that doesnt even claw back all the energy lost through braking.

As for your assertion that because our civilisation is built on the internal combustion engine, this lends to the "fact" of its superiority, I would say the fact that the only alternative the population has ever been offered is bycycles and animals, its no wonder this is the case is it?

For the last 20-30 years the technology has been availiable to produce electric cars which far outperform the standard ICE car in every way, but it has been seen to by the car companies and oil industry that these never see the light of day.

I havent even gone into renewable sources of electricity, such as the Mediteranean dam, the lodestone motor, the experiments telsa did extracting electricity from the atmosphere.

I would suggest you go and watch who killed the electric car and watch A list celebrities whom have the means to buy and run the best gas cars money can buy and i am sure have had, yet still prefered the EV1, which is 10 years outdated in terms of technology.

The electric car if properly developed by a major car company aiming for sucess could outpeform the best gas cars in every way. Speed, Acceleration, Reliablity, Range, Cost of running.

As for your lidicrous assertion that electric motors do not exist to compete with gasoline ones for power or speed, i guess this is why the TGV is such a slow train and the diesal belching ones are so fast right???

ap12345

26-11-2009, 11:14 PM

and how many patheticly designed, inefficient, unreliable, prone to failure electric noddy cars have been produced? ever?
and how many economies are based on the use of electric powered vehicles?
remind me, are electric motors and batteries a recent invention? is this why they are so shit?

1) Which needs more maintenance an electric or diesel train?

2) How many parts on average does a petrol engine need replacing in its first 80000 miles

3) Can a petrol engined cars engine do more than 100000 miles without regular maintenance and repair?

4) How many miles can a gear box drive without failing?

5) How many things are there to go wrong on a petrol car?

6) How many wars are caused by oil?

7) How many seperate elements are there to a standard gasoline car which could conceivably fail? Electric Car: Electric Motor, Electric Generation braking system, Battery, wiring.

Gas Car: Radiator, Fan, injectors, Valves, Gasket, Alternator, Battery, wiring, Exhaust sytem, gear box, clutch, accelerator, brakes, cam belt, fan belt, etc, etc, etc , etc

eternal wheel

27-11-2009, 08:39 AM

i must stop my slight sarcasm on this forum, no one seems to get it at all....:rolleyes:

The reason i got so pissed off is because you are completely bought into the official version of events given to you by the oil and car companies.
no i haven't.

The simple fact is the EV1 was systematically removed from history, the cars were seized by GM and not just crushed but shredded so that they could never be reproduced. If the "noddy car" was so inferior why did GM go to all this troluble.
economics.
GM make their money from petrol cars.

Also, how many Noddy cars have you ever driven? i bet not a single one, yet you come to sweeping generalisations based on the information fed to you from a TV program which wants to help sell petrol cars.
none. but i did see an electric dragster that was very impressive. other than that, i wouldn't be seen dead in one.

Your ignorance, is what stops people having free choice.
thanks, but i don't think i'm that powerful

I am forced to drive a petrol car because there is no alternative out there. I am also forced to breath in your and everyone elses car exhaust fumes.
bus? train? cycle? walk?

Do you really want me to go on?
nah. ;)

Surely this just illustates how hugely inefficient internal combustion engines are.
agreed, but electric power is not a viable alternative at the moment. i believe hyrogen fuel cells are the future.

For the last 20-30 years the technology has been availiable to produce electric cars which far outperform the standard ICE car in every way, but it has been seen to by the car companies and oil industry that these never see the light of day.
agree about the supression. i thought the biggest hurdle was crap batteries, rather than the motor itself?

The electric car if properly developed by a major car company aiming for sucess could outpeform the best gas cars in every way. Speed, Acceleration, Reliablity, Range, Cost of running.
i think range/weight are the biggest drawbacks. oh, and the styling dept's need a swift kick in the boll***s, too.

As for your lidicrous assertion that electric motors do not exist to compete with gasoline ones for power or speed, i guess this is why the TGV is such a slow train and the diesal belching ones are so fast right???
because it has a big leccy motor and no need to worry about a power scource, coz it has contacts on the top to get leccy from the overhead cabling.:rolleyes:
i bet it wouldn't be anywhere near as good if it had to carry it's own batteries... try to suggest like with like, it makes for a better arguement....
or are you suggesting a return to trams? or overhead cables on all roads?

sofa king

27-11-2009, 01:40 PM

electric IS more efficient than petrol or diesel.

internal combustion engines burn most of their fuel as heat, not movement. Not sure of the exact figures off the top ofmy head, but I have heard its as low as 20% of the energy in gasoline is translated into inertia.

Electric engines are so much closer to 100%. So even with 20-30% loss in electric transmission via power lines, they are still more efficient.

Now the million dollar question is what you burn to generate electricity (as mentioned above)

And then there is still the development of advanced battery tech to store the energy on board the car.

ap12345

27-11-2009, 06:09 PM

Tbh i think the problem with the batteries is not quality availiable it is price, there are various baterry technologies availiable which are more than adequate for 90% of the populations needs, lithium batteries are more than capable of delivering 300mile ranges @ 70mph but in the form required are presently extremely expensive.

When you talk about styling etc, that is my whole point, the car companies don't see electric cars as profitable, so the ones they create they design to fail, and if they dont fail they pull the project as with the EV1.

The issues relating to cost are irrelivent because just with all products the cost goes down the longer the technology has been developed and the more infrastructure there is in pla1ce. The only infrastructure in place at the moment to make electric cars is amateuristic, lacking design, and often functionabilty as it is usually a conversion of a gas car. The only car ever developed solely as an electric car by a major manufacturer, is the EV1.

The advantages of electric cars should lend to styling, the fact that there is no need for a heavy engine means that shapes can be used for electric cars which cannot in gas cars. The EV1 had the lowest drag coeficient of any production car in history. An electric car could within reason be designed to look any way the designer wanted, due to it not being constrained to the same extent as petrol cars by mechanics, centre of gravity issues etc. So ask yourself, why is it they all look like they do?

Weight has not been a problem since the advent of nickel hydride and lithium ion batteries, price is the problem (for now), range is not a problem either, why dod you need more than a 100mile range? the reason you think you do is because we live in a world where there are no electric charging stations for cars. If there were, there would be no problem, you could drive 100miles to work, leave it to charge in the car park at work where they have had a charging station installed who needs to comute more than 100miles? if you are driving cross country for a daytrip you could charge it where you park where you are visiting, or at the service station where you stop for lunch.

The problem is not range, but lack of effective charging infrastructure, if you could charge your electric car as quick as you fill your car with petrol there would be no issue. But who is going to invent and install this whilst there is zero demand for it?

I am sure if the electric car ever caught on there would be charging stations in every supermarket parking space and it would really be no issue whatsoever.

The way you talk you would think cars spend 90% of their time driving and not 90% of their time parking, unless you are a taxi driver or deliveryman.

I am just curious, how far is the furthest you have ever driven your car without stopping?

trust me hydrogen will never catch on, the explosive power of hydrogen is just too great, it can never be made safe, if someone sets fire toyour car it could maybe blow some windows out when the gas tank goes. If the fuel tank de pressurised and ignited full of hydrogen it could likely take out a city block, the hydrogen fuel cell is just something given to look like the car and oil companies are trying to develop alternatives to the petrol car, knowing that it is completely impossilble to accomplish. Once the oil companies have sold every drop of oil in the earths crust at highly inflated prices, the car companies will start selling electric cars, they just want to make as much money out of oil as they can in the meantime. If the electric car was widely taken on by the general population demand for oil would nosedive in an instant, the oil companies will not let that happen.

Unfortunately we are wasting all of the oil out there on cars, when we should be saving it for planes, because in 60 years when the oil runs out there will be no air travel, because there really is no cheap alternative to oil for aircraft, we will probably have to go back to zepelins.

All i can say is I hope driving your gas gusling SUV is worth robbing your grand children of foreign travel.

eternal wheel

27-11-2009, 06:19 PM

eternal wheel

27-11-2009, 06:29 PM

the EV1.

the EV1.

The EV1

do you have a vested interest in the ev1?

I am just curious, how far is the furthest you have ever driven your car without stopping?

not stopping at all, even for a piss? about 4-500 miles. including stopping for a quick piss on the verge, but not for fuel, probably double that, but i do a lot of milage, and used to do a lot more.

Unfortunately we are wasting all of the oil out there on cars, when we should be saving it for planes, because in 60 years when the oil runs out there will be no air travel, because there really is no cheap alternative to oil for aircraft, we will probably have to go back to zepelins.
good point, i hadn't thought of that.

All i can say is I hope driving your gas gusling SUV is worth robbing your grand children of foreign travel.
yup, abroard is full of foreigners, anyway.:p:D

ap12345

27-11-2009, 07:03 PM

agree with all that, the technology simply isn't there to put leccy stuff on an equal footing.

The technology is there, your main gripe seems to be that electric cars dont have enough range FOR YOU. Most people do under 100 miles per day, and as i mentioned before, if you had chargers at your works car park this would extend the range to 200 miles per day comute, i would say this is sufficient for 99% of the population.

I think for the majority of people the times they need to use a car with a range greater than 100 miles without stopping per year, could probably be counted on one hand. This hardly suggests a need for the average person to own a car capable of doing this.

Just because you move house every so often doesn't mean you buy a removals lorry...

eternal wheel

27-11-2009, 07:06 PM

Just because you move house every so often doesn't mean you buy a removals lorry...

i bought one and lived in it, for many, happy years.:D