Fossil Fuel vrs. Electric

[greyben]

This thread appears to be more appropriate for the Stove Huggers forum and none of the forums are appropriate for political statements or name calling.

Electric vehicles will eventually dominate if the economics of their production and use warrant. At this time they appear to be a strong future contender. There is a lot to be said about eliminating routine maintenance such as oil changes, filters, cooling system, etc. Electrical power for recharging is readily available and fuel costs are about 1/2 of fossil fuel. It is probably a good time time to reconsider any long term investments in gas stations.

[wittsend]

It would seem a drive on/drive off rail system would help with the range issues of electric cars. This much like a water going ferry system.

[Jett289]

Breath-taking stupidity!! The "carbon footprint" of an electric car is about 2 1/2 times that of a gas powered car before it even rolls the first mile. The battery tech requires rare elements that do not exist in adequate quantities for all cars to be electric. Most power plants are coal powered with more becoming gas powered. Every time you convert one form of energy to another you lose efficiency - as much as 90%. If there is anything stupider than a politician ( or more morally bankrupt) I've yet to identify it. They blame our pick-up trucks for rising atmospheric CO2 when the problem in the wanton destruction of rain forests and oceanic phytoplankton. It isn't the internal combustion engine that will kill us all--it is the morons in Washington, Paris, London, and Berlin

Thank you Jeffry Cassel .. You are exactly right and well said .. Look up battery construction and the materials needed to build them .. I'm all for new technology and strongly believe we should be moving forward in that department .. Governments with their ridiculous time lines is what costs money creates such extremely high taxes ..
I would love to see someone build a Studebaker electric .. You wouldn't need a transmission or rear axle correct ? Just a couple wheel motors ..

[jclary]

Well...As soon as I get through putting the finishing touches on my ANTI-MATTER PROPULSION mechanism...all such discussions will be moot.

[packard352]

Hm, I'm not so sure a bit of broadening the mind open exchange of ideas and debate is unhealthy even if not immediately Studebaker related.

In the US, a company has been hard at work developing a truck that could be transformative to long distance trucking and intensive use of truck-type vehicles (think of sea ports). The company in question, Nikola Motor Company, has been working on a vehicle that can travel 800 - 1200 miles. It will be hydrogen powered and therefore, will be me far more environmentally friendly than say EV's. If Nikola can deliver on their project, this truly will be transformative. For any interested, or not heard of this company / project - another weblink.

https://nikolamotor.com

However, lest any on here feel I have a vestured interest, I don't... and continue to praise and chat to anyone prepared to listen about the merits of my 56J! Engine sourced and build by Jack Vines (thanks Jack!). I also big Jack up at an opportunity via FB.

[Studedude]

'Reckon they'll develop an electric powered generator?

[sals54]

Breath-taking stupidity!! The "carbon footprint" of an electric car is about 2 1/2 times that of a gas powered car before it even rolls the first mile. The battery tech requires rare elements that do not exist in adequate quantities for all cars to be electric. Most power plants are coal powered with more becoming gas powered. Every time you convert one form of energy to another you lose efficiency - as much as 90%. If there is anything stupider than a politician ( or more morally bankrupt) I've yet to identify it. They blame our pick-up trucks for rising atmospheric CO2 when the problem in the wanton destruction of rain forests and oceanic phytoplankton. It isn't the internal combustion engine that will kill us all--it is the morons in Washington, Paris, London, and Berlin

Yeah... plus the exciting prospect of getting home in Southern California on a 110 degree day, at 5 PM, and cranking up the air conditioning at home, cooking on the all electric stove, turning on all the home electronics, TV and electric lawn mower and plugging in the power sapping electric car. All at the same time. And multiplied by 30 million residents. I'm sure the electric grid in California can handle it. Especially since it hasn't seen an upgrade in the last 20 years. Thank you Gov Brown and all the idiots in the Sacramento Capitol.
The blackout is coming.

[Lynn]

I will keep my thoughts to myself on the air quality issue.

Regarding the "phase out" of internal combustion engine cars in favor of electric, and how it will affect our Studebakers (that was the OP's question, right), I personally don't believe it will have any impact in my lifetime, and perhaps not my children's lifetime (they range from 40 down to 23). How can that be if gas cars are phased out by 2040??????? As has been pointed out, that only applies to the production of gas cars, not to whether one could still drive a gas car. That will take many many more years.

Although I said I wasn't going to comment on the pros and cons of gas v. electric (lots of variables, and lots of arguments on both sides), I do want to mention one thing: I find it strange that some backwards thinking Countries wish to legislate a particular type of engine out of existence rather than focus on what comes out the tail pipe. Suppose, just for the sake of argument, that I invent a true zero emission internal combustion engine. Hmmm. Why should it be outlawed? Especially, it the electricity being generated by coal (not saying it has to be, but it it is) that is powering my plug in electric car causes more pollution than my new ICE. That makes no sense. Car makers have made tremendous strides in cleaning up what comes out of the tailpipe. It is silly to assume they can't continue to improve.
The analysis (and the laws that follow) should be based on real numbers and real carbon footprint impact.

[rockne10]

'Reckon they'll develop an electric powered generator?

Aren't we running electric powered alternators NOW?

I've heard several folks indicate more electricity means burning more coal; when actually it means more natural gas, and eventually solar, wind and hydro; industries that, while still in infancy, are currently growing at a rate of 14% a year. That tide IS coming, as well as greatly improved battery technology that will not depend on the mining and refining of the very hazardous materials used in current storage systems.

A quality analysis of our rail future needs to be intertwined with the future of electric transportation in all its aspects.

To borrow a phrase, "Who would've thought it would be so complicated?" And blame for all the disorganization and misplaced priorities can NOT be laid at the feet of any one single entity, government, politician, corporation, bean counter or individual average Joe or Jane American. Though the solution certainly must grow from the shared needs of each and every one of us. As Jack rephrased, we have met the enemy. That enemy is the fear of the inevitable changes required to travel into an inevitable future.

My first comment to this thread was that there will always be some niche market producing fuel for our vehicles, at whatever that cost might be. I'm not panicking.

[jclary]

Aren't we running electric powered alternators NOW?

We have electric "Power" generators, but I don't know of any viable electric "powered" generators. There is Hydroelectric, gas turbine, nuclear, coal fired steam, wind, & solar, but a true electric powered generator, that could produce more than it uses, would in effect be the long sought after "perpetual motion machine." Some technology uses what is known as "regeneration," that under certain conditions, produces and stores energy, but I'm not aware of any that reliably produces more electricity than used, without some dependency of other energy (conversion) support involved.

[Jett289]

Wind and solar contribute less then 1% to global energy demand .. Its far from taking over our current use never mind our increased demand each year ..
Here is a good article with some numbers to back ..

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/wind-turbines-are-neither-clean-nor-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/

Aren't we running electric powered alternators NOW?

I've heard several folks indicate more electricity means burning more coal; when actually it means more natural gas, and eventually solar, wind and hydro; industries that, while still in infancy, are currently growing at a rate of 14% a year. That tide IS coming, as well as greatly improved battery technology that will not depend on the mining and refining of the very hazardous materials used in current storage systems.

A quality analysis of our rail future needs to be intertwined with the future of electric transportation in all its aspects.

To borrow a phrase, "Who would've thought it would be so complicated?" And blame for all the disorganization and misplaced priorities can NOT be laid at the feet of any one single entity, government, politician, corporation, bean counter or individual average Joe or Jane American. Though the solution certainly must grow from the shared needs of each and every one of us. As Jack rephrased, we have met the enemy. That enemy is the fear of the inevitable changes required to travel into an inevitable future.

My first comment to this thread was that there will always be some niche market producing fuel for our vehicles, at whatever that cost might be. I'm not panicking.

[bensherb]

Wind and solar contribute less then 1% to global energy demand .. Its far from taking over our current use never mind our increased demand each year ..

At my house and shop, solar takes care of aprox, 90% of our electric needs. I guess we're above the curve.

We drove an 05 Prius over 200,000 miles without replacing any battery but we only had it 7 years.

That '03 Prius of mine has almost 300,000 miles on it, but it has demanded a new 12 volt battery at least every two years since new...and until recently it could only be had through the dealer, nothing else would fit. Bummer is it dies with NO warning and you're stuck where it dies, all control circuits shut down. If you put it in park you can't even get it out of park to push it without a good battery. Other than batteries it's only needed regular maintainence, tires, one coil (it has 4) and an inverter coolant pump in that time though.

[DEEPNHOCK]

'Reckon they'll develop an electric powered generator?

Someone is working on it somewhere...

[8E45E]

Heck my gas cars can sit for months, I hit the key and off I go, the prius will have a completely dead 12v battery requiring replacement after only weeks of non use. It's cheaper to drive my Tundra.

The battery in your Tundra (and most any newer car) will also be dead after two weeks of non-use for reasons stated here: http://forum.studebakerdriversclub.c...ighlight=solar

Craig

[Kato]

Breath-taking stupidity!! The "carbon footprint" of an electric car is about 2 1/2 times that of a gas powered car before it even rolls the first mile. The battery tech requires rare elements that do not exist in adequate quantities for all cars to be electric. Most power plants are coal powered with more becoming gas powered. Every time you convert one form of energy to another you lose efficiency - as much as 90%. If there is anything stupider than a politician ( or more morally bankrupt) I've yet to identify it. They blame our pick-up trucks for rising atmospheric CO2 when the problem in the wanton destruction of rain forests and oceanic phytoplankton. It isn't the internal combustion engine that will kill us all--it is the morons in Washington, Paris, London, and Berlin

You hit the nail on the head!