Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . .
| OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86160] |
Tue, 05 June 2007 22:41  |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
recent discussions.
One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had no
idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem. Definitely
worth a rent.
The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after the
first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second half
switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it seems
like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what you
think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of solar
panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill the
electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
sacrifice.
Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
S
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86162 is a reply to message #86160] |
Tue, 05 June 2007 23:03  |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I wish I could find the sources, but a lot of people are giving up
on photovoltaic panels. They simply take too much energy to make
and use too much rare materials, for the amount of energy they
produce in their lifetime.
Up here in the Mojave, there is a field of mirrors that direct sunlight
to a central tower where the heat makes steam which drives a turbine.
Looks like a great idea to me.
DC
btw, We owned several Saturns and know a bit about the electric
car saga from someone who serviced them.
They were cool little cars, but very limited range and very expensive
batteries to replace. Really kind of a technology dead-end.
I think something like that will be useful at some point for an urban
sort of car.
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>recent discussions.
>
>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
no
>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem. Definitely
>worth a rent.
>
>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after the
>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
half
>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it seems
>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>
>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what you
>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of solar
>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
the
>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>sacrifice.
>
>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>
>S
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86163 is a reply to message #86160] |
Tue, 05 June 2007 23:33 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
1.) A hundred square miles is NOTHING, expecially here in Texas;
if what you say is true, there's no reason we couldn't power
the entire U.S., plus sell solar energy to Canada & Mexico, by
building a single giant solar array between El Paso or Van
Horn, and Midland/Odessa.
2.) How much would it cost to build said solar array?
Neil
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>recent discussions.
>
>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
no
>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem. Definitely
>worth a rent.
>
>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after the
>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
half
>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it seems
>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>
>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what you
>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of solar
>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
the
>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>sacrifice.
>
>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>
>S
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86164 is a reply to message #86162] |
Tue, 05 June 2007 23:40 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
That sounds interesting (the mirrors thing.)
According to the movie, GM was not using the most up to date battery
options, probably because they'd already decided to scrap the model,
claiming lack of demand. Su-u-u-ure. Lack of demand. That makes sense.
S
"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:46664e26$1@linux...
>
> I wish I could find the sources, but a lot of people are giving up
> on photovoltaic panels. They simply take too much energy to make
> and use too much rare materials, for the amount of energy they
> produce in their lifetime.
>
> Up here in the Mojave, there is a field of mirrors that direct sunlight
> to a central tower where the heat makes steam which drives a turbine.
>
> Looks like a great idea to me.
>
> DC
>
> btw, We owned several Saturns and know a bit about the electric
> car saga from someone who serviced them.
> They were cool little cars, but very limited range and very expensive
> batteries to replace. Really kind of a technology dead-end.
> I think something like that will be useful at some point for an urban
> sort of car.
>
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>
>>recent discussions.
>>
>>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
> no
>>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>
>>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>Definitely
>
>>worth a rent.
>>
>>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after the
>
>>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
> half
>>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>
>>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>>seems
>
>>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>
>>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what you
>
>>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>>solar
>
>>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
> the
>>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>
>>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>
>>sacrifice.
>>
>>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>
>>S
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86165 is a reply to message #86163] |
Tue, 05 June 2007 23:41 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Well, you basically had the same question I did, which was, "If this is
true, why aren't we doing it?!" I have no idea of the cost. I recorded the
show though, so if they don't talk about cost there, I can at least get the
names of the people proposing this.
S
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:46665527$1@linux...
>
> 1.) A hundred square miles is NOTHING, expecially here in Texas;
> if what you say is true, there's no reason we couldn't power
> the entire U.S., plus sell solar energy to Canada & Mexico, by
> building a single giant solar array between El Paso or Van
> Horn, and Midland/Odessa.
>
> 2.) How much would it cost to build said solar array?
>
> Neil
>
>
>
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>
>>recent discussions.
>>
>>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
> no
>>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>
>>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>Definitely
>
>>worth a rent.
>>
>>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after the
>
>>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
> half
>>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>
>>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>>seems
>
>>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>
>>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what you
>
>>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>>solar
>
>>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
> the
>>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>
>>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>
>>sacrifice.
>>
>>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>
>>S
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86170 is a reply to message #86163] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 00:12 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
100 sq. miles is a lot of ground to cover. Kansas is 400 miles E/W and 200
miles N/S so picture this array covering 1/6 of an area the size of Kansas.
Now picture how this would change the entire ecosystem of an area this size.
Now picture a a few hundred ELF sabatouers in dune buggies with shotguns
loaded with .00 buckshot and/or an equal number of doofusses
(doofi???......I never can decide) with 22's goin' "Look Jethro!!!.......big
shiny targets!!! hyuk!!! hyuk!!!!
Of course, I guess we could arm the perimeter of this thing with a few Ageis
rotary cannons with interlocking fields of fire set to target on a movement
censor and pretty much solve that problem..
sorry..........just thought I'd add a bit of surreality to a perfectly
logical thread.....
I haven't been over to the hot springs for my lithium soak in three
days.....sorry.....
;o)
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:46665527$1@linux...
>
> 1.) A hundred square miles is NOTHING, expecially here in Texas;
> if what you say is true, there's no reason we couldn't power
> the entire U.S., plus sell solar energy to Canada & Mexico, by
> building a single giant solar array between El Paso or Van
> Horn, and Midland/Odessa.
>
> 2.) How much would it cost to build said solar array?
>
> Neil
>
>
>
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>
>>recent discussions.
>>
>>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
> no
>>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>
>>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>Definitely
>
>>worth a rent.
>>
>>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after the
>
>>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
> half
>>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>
>>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>>seems
>
>>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>
>>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what you
>
>>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>>solar
>
>>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
> the
>>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>
>>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>
>>sacrifice.
>>
>>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>
>>S
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86179 is a reply to message #86170] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 01:23 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think it would be doofii.
S
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message news:46665ffe@linux...
> 100 sq. miles is a lot of ground to cover. Kansas is 400 miles E/W and 200
> miles N/S so picture this array covering 1/6 of an area the size of
> Kansas.
> Now picture how this would change the entire ecosystem of an area this
> size.
> Now picture a a few hundred ELF sabatouers in dune buggies with shotguns
> loaded with .00 buckshot and/or an equal number of doofusses
> (doofi???......I never can decide) with 22's goin' "Look
> Jethro!!!.......big
> shiny targets!!! hyuk!!! hyuk!!!!
>
> Of course, I guess we could arm the perimeter of this thing with a few
> Ageis
> rotary cannons with interlocking fields of fire set to target on a
> movement
> censor and pretty much solve that problem..
>
> sorry..........just thought I'd add a bit of surreality to a perfectly
> logical thread.....
>
> I haven't been over to the hot springs for my lithium soak in three
> days.....sorry.....
>
> ;o)
>
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:46665527$1@linux...
>>
>> 1.) A hundred square miles is NOTHING, expecially here in Texas;
>> if what you say is true, there's no reason we couldn't power
>> the entire U.S., plus sell solar energy to Canada & Mexico, by
>> building a single giant solar array between El Paso or Van
>> Horn, and Midland/Odessa.
>>
>> 2.) How much would it cost to build said solar array?
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>>
>>>recent discussions.
>>>
>>>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
>> no
>>>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>>
>>>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>>Definitely
>>
>>>worth a rent.
>>>
>>>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after
>>>the
>>
>>>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
>> half
>>>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>>
>>>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>>>seems
>>
>>>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>>
>>>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what
>>>you
>>
>>>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>>>solar
>>
>>>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
>> the
>>>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>>
>>>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>>
>>>sacrifice.
>>>
>>>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>>
>>>S
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86180 is a reply to message #86165] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 01:54 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Oh, hang on . . . just noticed you said "a hundred square miles" . . . no, a
hundred miles square, as in each side of the square is a hundred miles. But
obviously, this doesn't mean necessarily all in one place. This is the guy
who put this idea forth in the film http://www.mcdonough.com/full.htm
Clearly a damn hippie out to destroy the economy.
Anyway, if you see the movie, there are a number of scientists talking about
the state of solar power. Anyway, it was nice to see a climate change film
that was encouraging in terms of alternatives.
S
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message news:466658df$1@linux...
> Well, you basically had the same question I did, which was, "If this is
> true, why aren't we doing it?!" I have no idea of the cost. I recorded
> the show though, so if they don't talk about cost there, I can at least
> get the names of the people proposing this.
>
> S
>
>
> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:46665527$1@linux...
>>
>> 1.) A hundred square miles is NOTHING, expecially here in Texas;
>> if what you say is true, there's no reason we couldn't power
>> the entire U.S., plus sell solar energy to Canada & Mexico, by
>> building a single giant solar array between El Paso or Van
>> Horn, and Midland/Odessa.
>>
>> 2.) How much would it cost to build said solar array?
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>>
>>>recent discussions.
>>>
>>>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
>> no
>>>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>>
>>>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>>Definitely
>>
>>>worth a rent.
>>>
>>>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after
>>>the
>>
>>>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
>> half
>>>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>>
>>>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>>>seems
>>
>>>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>>
>>>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what
>>>you
>>
>>>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>>>solar
>>
>>>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
>> the
>>>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>>
>>>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>>
>>>sacrifice.
>>>
>>>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>>
>>>S
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86182 is a reply to message #86160] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 02:04 |
Sarah
Messages: 608
Registered: February 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Good grief, there might be money to be made in this stuff . . .
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2001/07/45056
S
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message news:46664ab4@linux...
> Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
> recent discussions.
>
> One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
> no idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think
> they had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
> Definitely worth a rent.
>
> The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
> called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after the
> first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
> half switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the
> various alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and
> it seems like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I
> imagined.
>
> Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what you
> think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
> solar panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would
> fill the electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large
> chunk of desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like
> a small sacrifice.
>
> Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>
> S
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86193 is a reply to message #86164] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 07:14 |
dc[3]
Messages: 895
Registered: September 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think they had leased out all the ones they had, but the lack of
demand may refer to "enough demand to make full production
possible". There are real issues with battery powered cars.
They were a test bed and for that I think they did a good
job.
DC
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>That sounds interesting (the mirrors thing.)
>
>According to the movie, GM was not using the most up to date battery
>options, probably because they'd already decided to scrap the model,
>claiming lack of demand. Su-u-u-ure. Lack of demand. That makes sense.
>
>S
>
>
>"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:46664e26$1@linux...
>>
>> I wish I could find the sources, but a lot of people are giving up
>> on photovoltaic panels. They simply take too much energy to make
>> and use too much rare materials, for the amount of energy they
>> produce in their lifetime.
>>
>> Up here in the Mojave, there is a field of mirrors that direct sunlight
>> to a central tower where the heat makes steam which drives a turbine.
>>
>> Looks like a great idea to me.
>>
>> DC
>>
>> btw, We owned several Saturns and know a bit about the electric
>> car saga from someone who serviced them.
>> They were cool little cars, but very limited range and very expensive
>> batteries to replace. Really kind of a technology dead-end.
>> I think something like that will be useful at some point for an urban
>> sort of car.
>>
>>
>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>>
>>>recent discussions.
>>>
>>>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
>> no
>>>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>>
>>>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>>Definitely
>>
>>>worth a rent.
>>>
>>>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after
the
>>
>>>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
>> half
>>>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>>
>>>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>>>seems
>>
>>>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>>
>>>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what
you
>>
>>>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>>>solar
>>
>>>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
>> the
>>>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk
of
>>
>>>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>>
>>>sacrifice.
>>>
>>>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>>
>>>S
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86196 is a reply to message #86170] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 07:38 |
wireline[12]
Messages: 1
Registered: June 2007
|
Junior Member |
|
|
A great idea, unless you happen to be a land owner or actually live in Midland
(like I do)...what you are considering here is either some taxing entity
buying up a tremendous amount of acreage or just going in to take it...either
way the cost would be astronomical (pun intended)...
Then factor in the idea that a solar collector must be kept relatively dust
and dirt free to work...if you've ever been out here, you know that is impossible...even
something as relatively simple as the Very Large Array telescopes in Soccorro
NM can be a maintenance nightmare, and they don't rely on photo-electrical
transduction.
As far as cost - i think start off at $100 billion for just the land...then
factor in the cost of researching then actually developing something that
does not currently exist and may or may not be feasible or even possible.
I like Deej's idea of interlocking phase cannons though...
1.) A hundred square miles is NOTHING, expecially here in Texas;
>> if what you say is true, there's no reason we couldn't power
>> the entire U.S., plus sell solar energy to Canada & Mexico, by
>> building a single giant solar array between El Paso or Van
>> Horn, and Midland/Odessa.
>>
>> 2.) How much would it cost to build said solar array?
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>>
>>>recent discussions.
>>>
>>>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
>> no
>>>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>>
>>>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>>Definitely
>>
>>>worth a rent.
>>>
>>>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after
the
>>
>>>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
>> half
>>>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>>
>>>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>>>seems
>>
>>>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>>
>>>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what
you
>>
>>>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>>>solar
>>
>>>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
>> the
>>>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk
of
>>
>>>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>>
>>>sacrifice.
>>>
>>>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>>
>>>S
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86201 is a reply to message #86196] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 08:22 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
We're building a large solar power plant in Colorado right now. Large
plants can be cool for utilities, either direct photo-voltaic or mirrors
powering a steam turbine.
Our plant will be PV but I think the turbine idea has advantages for a
large plant.
The cool thing about PV though, is it doesn't have to be large in one
location. Sure, you could buy 100 square miles and cover it, but you
don't need to. You can split it up and distribute it throughout the
demand area. So in Colorado, we also have a program to encourage people
to install grid-tied solar PV systems.
We have decent solar exposure here. We also have a lot of rooftops out
in the sunshine doing nothing but holding up shingles, tar and such.
By putting PV up on those rooftops we see multiple benefits:
1) We don't need to buy ANY additional land for solar.
2) We can use all that available rooftop sunshine to generate power.
3) At the same time we can shade the buildings below.
4) Building owners who want to make a PV investment can earn money
over time on that investment by covering their own power needs and
selling the excess to the power company.
It's fun to watch an electric meter run backwards!
5) We can avoid building other power plants, such as coal, to handle
peak demand. Peak demand happens here primarily to run air conditioning,
which is conveniently needed when the sun is out.
We cover that demand without generating pollution.
6) A distributed power system is less of a target for terrorism. You
can't blow up every rooftop.
7) A distributed power system is more efficient, it generates the
electricity where it's needed with less transmission loss.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
wireline wrote:
> A great idea, unless you happen to be a land owner or actually live in Midland
> (like I do)...what you are considering here is either some taxing entity
> buying up a tremendous amount of acreage or just going in to take it...either
> way the cost would be astronomical (pun intended)...
>
> Then factor in the idea that a solar collector must be kept relatively dust
> and dirt free to work...if you've ever been out here, you know that is impossible...even
> something as relatively simple as the Very Large Array telescopes in Soccorro
> NM can be a maintenance nightmare, and they don't rely on photo-electrical
> transduction.
>
> As far as cost - i think start off at $100 billion for just the land...then
> factor in the cost of researching then actually developing something that
> does not currently exist and may or may not be feasible or even possible.
>
> I like Deej's idea of interlocking phase cannons though...
>
>
> 1.) A hundred square miles is NOTHING, expecially here in Texas;
>>> if what you say is true, there's no reason we couldn't power
>>> the entire U.S., plus sell solar energy to Canada & Mexico, by
>>> building a single giant solar array between El Paso or Van
>>> Horn, and Midland/Odessa.
>>>
>>> 2.) How much would it cost to build said solar array?
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>>> Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>>>> recent discussions.
>>>>
>>>> One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
>>> no
>>>> idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>>>> had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>>> Definitely
>>>> worth a rent.
>>>>
>>>> The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>>> called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after
> the
>>>> first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
>>> half
>>>> switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>>>> alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>
>>>> seems
>>>> like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what
> you
>>>> think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>
>>>> solar
>>>> panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
>>> the
>>>> electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk
> of
>>>> desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>>>> sacrifice.
>>>>
>>>> Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>>>
>>>> S
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86202 is a reply to message #86162] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 08:25 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
DC wrote:
> I wish I could find the sources, but a lot of people are giving up
> on photovoltaic panels. They simply take too much energy to make
> and use too much rare materials, for the amount of energy they
> produce in their lifetime.
That's not true, actually.
Solar panels are a big win, energy-wise. The current standard is
silicon-based. Thin film tech is also looking promising.
You'd better find the source so we can examine it under the light.
> Up here in the Mojave, there is a field of mirrors that direct sunlight
> to a central tower where the heat makes steam which drives a turbine.
>
> Looks like a great idea to me.
That is a great idea for large plants.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> DC
>
> btw, We owned several Saturns and know a bit about the electric
> car saga from someone who serviced them.
> They were cool little cars, but very limited range and very expensive
> batteries to replace. Really kind of a technology dead-end.
> I think something like that will be useful at some point for an urban
> sort of car.
>
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>> Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>
>> recent discussions.
>>
>> One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
> no
>> idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>
>> had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem. Definitely
>
>> worth a rent.
>>
>> The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>> called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after the
>
>> first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
> half
>> switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>
>> alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it seems
>
>> like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>
>> Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what you
>
>> think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of solar
>
>> panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
> the
>> electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>
>> desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>
>> sacrifice.
>>
>> Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>
>> S
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86207 is a reply to message #86193] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 09:01 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
DC wrote:
> I think they had leased out all the ones they had, but the lack of
> demand may refer to "enough demand to make full production
> possible". There are real issues with battery powered cars.
> They were a test bed and for that I think they did a good
> job.
Actually, some of the electric cars from that period (the ones that
weren't deliberately crushed) are still running.
If you want to buy a Toyota RAV 4 EV from that time period, they're now
going for around $50,000 on ebay. Used.
Yes, there is a demand. :^)
The California electric cars from that period were (and those that
weren't crushed still are) practical vehicles for the people that
drove/drive them.
Since then, Chevron has gotten a hold of the battery patent and there is
some talk that they may be making it difficult for car companies to use
those proven batteries for future EVs.
But several other battery approaches are coming on strong based on
lithium chemistry. Versions of these are being used in the upcoming
Tesla (http://www.physorg.com/news94479761.html)and Phoenix
(http://phoenixmotorcars.com/models/fleet-photos.html) vehicles. And
maybe in the Zap X (http://www.zapworld.com/ZAPWorld.aspx?id=4560).
I'm not sure what batteries will be in the XM200 or XS500
(http://www.milesautomotive.com/showroom_xs200.php).
The more affordable Zap Xebra
(http://www.zapworld.com/ZAPWorld.aspx?id=188) and Zebra truck
(http://www.zapworld.com/ZAPWorld.aspx?id=390) use lead/acid batteries.
That's good enough for short trip, low speed city driving.
The Xebras are available right now. The others should become available
over the next year or two.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> DC
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>> That sounds interesting (the mirrors thing.)
>>
>> According to the movie, GM was not using the most up to date battery
>> options, probably because they'd already decided to scrap the model,
>> claiming lack of demand. Su-u-u-ure. Lack of demand. That makes sense.
>>
>> S
>>
>>
>> "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:46664e26$1@linux...
>>> I wish I could find the sources, but a lot of people are giving up
>>> on photovoltaic panels. They simply take too much energy to make
>>> and use too much rare materials, for the amount of energy they
>>> produce in their lifetime.
>>>
>>> Up here in the Mojave, there is a field of mirrors that direct sunlight
>>> to a central tower where the heat makes steam which drives a turbine.
>>>
>>> Looks like a great idea to me.
>>>
>>> DC
>>>
>>> btw, We owned several Saturns and know a bit about the electric
>>> car saga from someone who serviced them.
>>> They were cool little cars, but very limited range and very expensive
>>> batteries to replace. Really kind of a technology dead-end.
>>> I think something like that will be useful at some point for an urban
>>> sort of car.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>>> Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>>>> recent discussions.
>>>>
>>>> One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
>>> no
>>>> idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think they
>>>> had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>>> Definitely
>>>> worth a rent.
>>>>
>>>> The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>>> called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after
> the
>>>> first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
>>> half
>>>> switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>>>> alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>
>>>> seems
>>>> like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what
> you
>>>> think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>
>>>> solar
>>>> panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
>>> the
>>>> electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk
> of
>>>> desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a small
>>>> sacrifice.
>>>>
>>>> Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>>>
>>>> S
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86212 is a reply to message #86180] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 10:06 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I like the idea Sarah, but I can tell you for a fact that every location on
federal or state lands where this can be accomplished will require an EIS
(environmental impact statement), and AE (archeological evaluation) and,
depending on where it is, certain other bureaucratic regulations......and
would have to be bulldozed over the concerns of environmental groups because
of an endangered cactus or bird/mouse/spider/fish/cricket or it will be
almost as time consuming and expensive as buying or leasing these tracts
from private landowners. If you go with the private sector, the first thing
they will want is a lease with an expiration date. It will be hard to get
something with an option o nenew every 20 years or so because they will want
to tie the price of renewal to some kind of unrealistic *future value* index
that they will dream up themselves and then try to justify by quoting the
escalating prices of real estate in Aspen or Jackson Hole. Trust me.....I
have been there/done that with wind turbine generators and methane gas
wells..............oh yeah....they are going to want a certain number of KWH
free of charge that would be enough for them to sell back to the grid and
make a tidy annual income, tax free.
I'm not saying we shouldn't look into it though, just that it will be a
*lot* more expensive and difficult than perhaps it should be. when all is
said and done, putting these on federal or state lands would probably, in
the end, be the most cost effective way acquire the land........as long as
the grid itself was privately owned. If it becomes federally owned, our
utility bills will become a tax and setting up a private solar array will
not be possible because it will be considered tax evasion..
Deej
"Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message news:466677f9$1@linux...
> Oh, hang on . . . just noticed you said "a hundred square miles" . . . no,
> a hundred miles square, as in each side of the square is a hundred miles.
> But obviously, this doesn't mean necessarily all in one place. This is
> the guy who put this idea forth in the film
> http://www.mcdonough.com/full.htm Clearly a damn hippie out to destroy the
> economy.
>
> Anyway, if you see the movie, there are a number of scientists talking
> about the state of solar power. Anyway, it was nice to see a climate
> change film that was encouraging in terms of alternatives.
>
> S
>
>
> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote in message
> news:466658df$1@linux...
>> Well, you basically had the same question I did, which was, "If this is
>> true, why aren't we doing it?!" I have no idea of the cost. I recorded
>> the show though, so if they don't talk about cost there, I can at least
>> get the names of the people proposing this.
>>
>> S
>>
>>
>> "Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:46665527$1@linux...
>>>
>>> 1.) A hundred square miles is NOTHING, expecially here in Texas;
>>> if what you say is true, there's no reason we couldn't power
>>> the entire U.S., plus sell solar energy to Canada & Mexico, by
>>> building a single giant solar array between El Paso or Van
>>> Horn, and Midland/Odessa.
>>>
>>> 2.) How much would it cost to build said solar array?
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Sarah" <sarahjane@sarahtonin.com> wrote:
>>>>Saw two interesting documentaries recently on HBO related to some of our
>>>
>>>>recent discussions.
>>>>
>>>>One was "Who Killed the Electric Car?" which is just fascinating. I had
>>> no
>>>>idea this thing ever happened, but they looked pretty cool. I think
>>>>they
>>>
>>>>had a winner there, which of course turns out to be the problem.
>>>>Definitely
>>>
>>>>worth a rent.
>>>>
>>>>The other film I think was a "made for HBO." I'm not sure, but it was
>>>>called "Too Hot Not to Handle." I was just about to turn it off after
>>>>the
>>>
>>>>first half hour of depressing climate change stuff, but then the second
>>> half
>>>>switched to some really encouraging updates on the state of the various
>>>
>>>>alternatives to fossil fuels. My personal favorite was solar, and it
>>>>seems
>>>
>>>>like perhaps solar technology is a lot farther along than I imagined.
>>>>
>>>>Maybe some of you guys know something about solar and can tell me what
>>>>you
>>>
>>>>think of this . . . one of the solar scientists said that an array of
>>>>solar
>>>
>>>>panels a hundred miles square in one of our southwest deserts would fill
>>> the
>>>>electrical demands of the entire USA! I realize that's a large chunk of
>>>
>>>>desert, but if that kind of output is really possible, seems like a
>>>>small
>>>
>>>>sacrifice.
>>>>
>>>>Here comes the sun, doot n doo doo . . .
>>>>
>>>>S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86217 is a reply to message #86215] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 10:27 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Let us know what you find out. Here's a start:
"The battery we use is the NiMH, same as used in cameras and small
cylinder AA, AAA, etc. Toyota-Panasonic formed a partnership "PEVE" to
license and improve NiMH for EVs. Around this time, GM purchased the
worldwide patent rights to the NiMH battery. Later, GM decided to sell
those rights to Texaco, which then merged with Chevron. Chevron then put
the battery rights under control of a Joint Venture, "COBASYS," and
decided to fund a lawsuit against large-format (electric car battery)
competitors such as Toyota-Panasonic.
Chevron's lawsuit led to a settlement agreement with PEVE (and Sanyo,
etc.) whereby Toyota paid $30M to Chevron, Toyota was granted the rights
to use "small-format" batteries on the Prius, and Toyota agreed not to
build "large-format" versions of its batteries (needed for plug-in cars)
for export to the U.S. until 2014. At least, that's what it seems to be;
portions of the settlement agreement are still secret.
Hence, Chevron and GM together led to the end of Toyota's RAV4-EV
program, it seems; at the current time, only Chevron is allowed to
market "large-format" NiMH batteries in the USA, and Chevron has decided
not to do so. In fact, Chevron won't sell its NiMH batteries to anyone
except large fleets, it says. When I say Chevron, I am referring to
their Joint Venture, "COBASYS," which is their unit controlling the
batteries."
From:
http://www.ocweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content2&ta sk=view&id=25134&Itemid=47
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
DJ wrote:
>> Since then, Chevron has gotten a hold of the battery patent and there is
>> some talk that they may be making it difficult for car companies to use
>> those proven batteries for future EVs.
>>
>
> Are you serious??? I'm doing some contract work for Chevron right now. I
> have worked for them before and I know a bit about how inefficient and just
> plain ol' scooterfucked some of the thinking is there. It's been an uphill
> battle dealing with them here due to a number of things they have requested
> that I do that I have flat out refused to do. I'm going to look into this. I
> may just opt out of my dealings with them completely. Wouldn't be the end of
> the world.
>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86219 is a reply to message #86217] |
Wed, 06 June 2007 10:29 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
thanks...will do.
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4666f028@linux...
>
> Let us know what you find out. Here's a start:
>
> "The battery we use is the NiMH, same as used in cameras and small
> cylinder AA, AAA, etc. Toyota-Panasonic formed a partnership "PEVE" to
> license and improve NiMH for EVs. Around this time, GM purchased the
> worldwide patent rights to the NiMH battery. Later, GM decided to sell
> those rights to Texaco, which then merged with Chevron. Chevron then put
> the battery rights under control of a Joint Venture, "COBASYS," and
> decided to fund a lawsuit against large-format (electric car battery)
> competitors such as Toyota-Panasonic.
>
> Chevron's lawsuit led to a settlement agreement with PEVE (and Sanyo,
> etc.) whereby Toyota paid $30M to Chevron, Toyota was granted the rights
> to use "small-format" batteries on the Prius, and Toyota agreed not to
> build "large-format" versions of its batteries (needed for plug-in cars)
> for export to the U.S. until 2014. At least, that's what it seems to be;
> portions of the settlement agreement are still secret.
>
> Hence, Chevron and GM together led to the end of Toyota's RAV4-EV program,
> it seems; at the current time, only Chevron is allowed to market
> "large-format" NiMH batteries in the USA, and Chevron has decided not to
> do so. In fact, Chevron won't sell its NiMH batteries to anyone except
> large fleets, it says. When I say Chevron, I am referring to their Joint
> Venture, "COBASYS," which is their unit controlling the batteries."
>
> From:
> http://www.ocweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content2&ta sk=view&id=25134&Itemid=47
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
> DJ wrote:
>>> Since then, Chevron has gotten a hold of the battery patent and there is
>>> some talk that they may be making it difficult for car companies to use
>>> those proven batteries for future EVs.
>>>
>>
>> Are you serious??? I'm doing some contract work for Chevron right now. I
>> have worked for them before and I know a bit about how inefficient and
>> just plain ol' scooterfucked some of the thinking is there. It's been an
>> uphill battle dealing with them here due to a number of things they have
>> requested that I do that I have flat out refused to do. I'm going to look
>> into this. I may just opt out of my dealings with them completely.
>> Wouldn't be the end of the world.
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86551 is a reply to message #86219] |
Wed, 13 June 2007 12:36 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Deej,
Did you find out anything interesting?
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
DJ wrote:
> thanks...will do.
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4666f028@linux...
>> Let us know what you find out. Here's a start:
>>
>> "The battery we use is the NiMH, same as used in cameras and small
>> cylinder AA, AAA, etc. Toyota-Panasonic formed a partnership "PEVE" to
>> license and improve NiMH for EVs. Around this time, GM purchased the
>> worldwide patent rights to the NiMH battery. Later, GM decided to sell
>> those rights to Texaco, which then merged with Chevron. Chevron then put
>> the battery rights under control of a Joint Venture, "COBASYS," and
>> decided to fund a lawsuit against large-format (electric car battery)
>> competitors such as Toyota-Panasonic.
>>
>> Chevron's lawsuit led to a settlement agreement with PEVE (and Sanyo,
>> etc.) whereby Toyota paid $30M to Chevron, Toyota was granted the rights
>> to use "small-format" batteries on the Prius, and Toyota agreed not to
>> build "large-format" versions of its batteries (needed for plug-in cars)
>> for export to the U.S. until 2014. At least, that's what it seems to be;
>> portions of the settlement agreement are still secret.
>>
>> Hence, Chevron and GM together led to the end of Toyota's RAV4-EV program,
>> it seems; at the current time, only Chevron is allowed to market
>> "large-format" NiMH batteries in the USA, and Chevron has decided not to
>> do so. In fact, Chevron won't sell its NiMH batteries to anyone except
>> large fleets, it says. When I say Chevron, I am referring to their Joint
>> Venture, "COBASYS," which is their unit controlling the batteries."
>>
>> From:
>> http://www.ocweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content2&ta sk=view&id=25134&Itemid=47
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>> DJ wrote:
>>>> Since then, Chevron has gotten a hold of the battery patent and there is
>>>> some talk that they may be making it difficult for car companies to use
>>>> those proven batteries for future EVs.
>>>>
>>> Are you serious??? I'm doing some contract work for Chevron right now. I
>>> have worked for them before and I know a bit about how inefficient and
>>> just plain ol' scooterfucked some of the thinking is there. It's been an
>>> uphill battle dealing with them here due to a number of things they have
>>> requested that I do that I have flat out refused to do. I'm going to look
>>> into this. I may just opt out of my dealings with them completely.
>>> Wouldn't be the end of the world.
>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OT: Cars, climate, and stuff . . . [message #86605 is a reply to message #86551] |
Thu, 14 June 2007 08:43 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Not yet. Nobody's talkin.
"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:467048af$1@linux...
>
> Hey Deej,
>
> Did you find out anything interesting?
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
> DJ wrote:
>> thanks...will do.
>>
>> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:4666f028@linux...
>>> Let us know what you find out. Here's a start:
>>>
>>> "The battery we use is the NiMH, same as used in cameras and small
>>> cylinder AA, AAA, etc. Toyota-Panasonic formed a partnership "PEVE" to
>>> license and improve NiMH for EVs. Around this time, GM purchased the
>>> worldwide patent rights to the NiMH battery. Later, GM decided to sell
>>> those rights to Texaco, which then merged with Chevron. Chevron then put
>>> the battery rights under control of a Joint Venture, "COBASYS," and
>>> decided to fund a lawsuit against large-format (electric car battery)
>>> competitors such as Toyota-Panasonic.
>>>
>>> Chevron's lawsuit led to a settlement agreement with PEVE (and Sanyo,
>>> etc.) whereby Toyota paid $30M to Chevron, Toyota was granted the rights
>>> to use "small-format" batteries on the Prius, and Toyota agreed not to
>>> build "large-format" versions of its batteries (needed for plug-in cars)
>>> for export to the U.S. until 2014. At least, that's what it seems to be;
>>> portions of the settlement agreement are still secret.
>>>
>>> Hence, Chevron and GM together led to the end of Toyota's RAV4-EV
>>> program, it seems; at the current time, only Chevron is allowed to
>>> market "large-format" NiMH batteries in the USA, and Chevron has decided
>>> not to do so. In fact, Chevron won't sell its NiMH batteries to anyone
>>> except large fleets, it says. When I say Chevron, I am referring to
>>> their Joint Venture, "COBASYS," which is their unit controlling the
>>> batteries."
>>>
>>> From:
>>> http://www.ocweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content2&ta sk=view&id=25134&Itemid=47
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> DJ wrote:
>>>>> Since then, Chevron has gotten a hold of the battery patent and there
>>>>> is
>>>>> some talk that they may be making it difficult for car companies to
>>>>> use those proven batteries for future EVs.
>>>>>
>>>> Are you serious??? I'm doing some contract work for Chevron right now.
>>>> I have worked for them before and I know a bit about how inefficient
>>>> and just plain ol' scooterfucked some of the thinking is there. It's
>>>> been an uphill battle dealing with them here due to a number of things
>>>> they have requested that I do that I have flat out refused to do. I'm
>>>> going to look into this. I may just opt out of my dealings with them
>>>> completely. Wouldn't be the end of the world.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue May 07 03:46:48 PDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04825 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
