The Chevy Volt

Page 3 of 4 [ 62 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Joined: 7 Feb 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 260

14 Jun 2011, 3:44 pm

Saw this article the other day, which would be related to the Volt and other electric plug in autos.

"British Study: Electric Cars Not So Green"
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/06/13/br ... -so-green/

Excerpt:

Quote:

The past few days have been a one-two punch to the eco-friendly market. First we heard that biodegradable products are not nearly as environmentally friendly as advertised, and now this:
ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.
An electric car owner would have to drive at least 129,000km before producing a net saving in CO2. Many electric cars will not travel that far in their lifetime because they typically have a range of less than 145km on a single charge and are unsuitable for long trips. Even those driven 160,000km would save only about a tonne of CO2 over their lifetimes.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

09 Sep 2011, 10:59 am

The Chevrolet Volt got a write-up in this month's Consumer Reports.

If you're only driving 35 miles per day, and recharge the battery every night (and thus run on electricity alone), then your cost, based on national-average electricity rates, is 4 cents per mile.

However, for those of us who live in areas with actual winters, the electric heater is rather poor.

Once you've used up the battery and the motor kicks in, then you're only getting 29 mpg (compared to 44 mpg for a Toyota Prius or 40 mpg for a Honda Civic Hybrid). A 90 mile trip ends up costing more in a Chevrolet Volt compared to these two cars.

Plus, you pay up front about $20,000 more for the Chevrolet Volt than you do for either of these two Japanese cars.

I've already learned my lesson: DON'T buy American cars--just get a Japanese car. The Japanese make better cars, any way you look at it.

number5
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

09 Sep 2011, 12:41 pm

pandabear wrote:

I've already learned my lesson: DON'T buy American cars--just get a Japanese car. The Japanese make better cars, any way you look at it.

I thought Saturn made a good car. Very efficient, well built, cheap to fix, but apparently it was too efficient (from the owner's point of view). Not enough profit for the makers and so it goes...

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

09 Sep 2011, 5:18 pm

Nuclear powered automobiles are the future.

Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

09 Sep 2011, 5:28 pm

i thought the volt could run its gennie on ethanol?

if so it is a very cheap alternative, even today when the industry is practically nonexistent.

_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

09 Sep 2011, 6:00 pm

androbot2084 wrote:

Nuclear powered automobiles are the future.

There will be no nuclear powered automobiles. There will be electric cars and the electricity will come from nuclear powered generating stations. A nuclear reactor is too heavy to be carried in a car or a plane. In a ship, it is feasible to carry a nuclear reactor.

ruveyn

MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland

10 Sep 2011, 1:59 am

thorium powered cars are coming closer to reality. 8 grams can provide you with up to 300,000 miles of driving. Emission free with no need for charging, it can power your car your entire driving lifetime.

http://www.txchnologist.com/volumes/adv ... clear-cars

_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

10 Sep 2011, 3:47 am

MarketAndChurch wrote:

Wake up! The shielding is so heavy it makes such a vehicle impractical. The way to use nukes is to generate electricity at a nuclear generating plant and ship the electrical energy to a nearby charging station.

Electricity is not radioactive. A thorium reactor is.

ruveyn

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

10 Sep 2011, 9:41 am

ruveyn wrote:

MarketAndChurch wrote:

Wow. Ruveyn sure wakes up early for an old man.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

10 Sep 2011, 10:54 am

pandabear wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

MarketAndChurch wrote:

Wow. Ruveyn sure wakes up early for an old man.

Ruveyn has forgotten more physics than some of these Idiot Children ever knew.

ruveyn

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

10 Sep 2011, 12:22 pm

So what's wrong with a nuclear powered car that weighs as much as a big rig tractor trailer?

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

10 Sep 2011, 12:29 pm

androbot2084 wrote:

So what's wrong with a nuclear powered car that weighs as much as a big rig tractor trailer?

You have no idea about how much a reactor weights. You need something the size of a large ship to have a movable reactor. Our nuclear submarines displace as much tonnage as a WW2 air craft carrier. Our nuclear powered air-craft carriers displace as much tonnage as two Titanics.

ruveyn

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

10 Sep 2011, 12:39 pm

If a nuclear reactor cannot be used in an airplane why did the Government spend a billion dollars to develop the concept?

JakobVirgil
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,744
Location: yes

10 Sep 2011, 12:59 pm

androbot2084 wrote:

If a nuclear reactor cannot be used in an airplane why did the Government spend a billion dollars to develop the concept?

Because they are stupid and always willing to waste taxpayer money
as long as it does not help anyone (cuz that would be socialism)
and they can paint a flag on it.

_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??

http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/

androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

10 Sep 2011, 1:33 pm

A Conservative would tell me that he would rather have his tax money go to the atomic powered airplane rather than some welfare queen.

cw10
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 973

11 Sep 2011, 3:48 am

Want efficiency in an engine? Turbo Diesel.

http://www.transmitmedia.com/golfTDI/

Just an example. I really don't know why most of the world doesn't use it. The modern turbo diesel engines are quiet and just as responsive as gasoline engines, and they use maybe 30% less fuel, something like that.

And if you run out of diesel, make peanut oil.

http://www.dieselsecret.com/drdiesel.html

Page 3 of 4 [ 62 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Jump to:

The Chevy Volt Post Reply New Topic

The Chevy Volt