Is Elon Musk ready for the straitjacket ?

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 20:40:40 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
wrote:

Here's some real world number for you: ...

I picture you a bit over a century ago, standing on a soapbox in some
town square, ranting about how automobiles will never replace horses,
because of all the oil they require, and the impossibility of pumping
that much from the ground, of refining so much, of the millions of
dollars required to build fueling stations around the country. How the
system is already set up for hay, and that is going to keep working.
How buggy makers will completely dominate those silly makers of
horseless carriages, with their economically impossible gasoline
engines.

Yup, you'd be the guy who hung onto your buggy whip manufacturer
stock.

Chris L Peterson wrote in
:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 20:39:17 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying
Sissy wrote:

The experts have been saying that for 50 years. People have
become skeptical.

The long term trend HAS been a steady rise.

Except when it collapses. In point of fact, when adjusted for
inflation, the price of crude has been remarkably stable, except
for spikes caused by politics, not shortage of supply.

Collapses and spikes are normal. Take them out, and you're left
with a steady rise over the last 75+ years.

When adjusted for inflation, no, not really.

The laws of physics, however do not. 3 megawatts to fill in
less than five minutes, when 350 kilowatts requires liquid
cooling on the cable, and will literally explode if shorted
out. So, at a minimum, seveal times as long to charge up.

You seem to have ignored the part about not needing to fuel at
a station. The vast majority of users will fuel at home,
overnight, or at work while parked. And those who do use
stations will seldom need to charge fully.

No matter where you charge, the electricity isn't coming out of
yoru ass. It sill has to be generated *somewhere*, and
transmitted to where it is used. That's ten *trillion* kilowatt
hours per year for the US. And that's in addition to current
demand, which would require additional generating capacity to be
built, and significant upgrades to the grid to handle the
additional load.

Producing the electricity isn't a real problem.

Because you generate ten trillion kilowatt hours our of your ass?

You are literally hallucinating.

Your argument
was about the load, which is a function of rate. The rate will
not typically be high.

The majority of charging will be in the hours after people get home
from work, which is already a peak load time.

You are literally halluicnating.


In addition, home charging stations are not as fast charging as
the 50 Kw stations used as the equivalent of a gas station. If
you can manage a 30 amp station, you get about 30 miles of range
per hour of charging. Not all homes can manage a 30 amp service.

You don't typically need fast charging at home. And most will
have access to charging at their destinations.

How many employers are going to spend $40,000 _per employee_ to
install charging stations?

You are literally halluicnating.

Indeed, one huge
benefit a large electric car fleet provides is load
normalization across the entire grid.

Not when *everyone* is plugging their cars in at the same time.

You are literally halluicnating.

Economics will create a
system with a huge number of public charging stations just for
that reason.

I'm sure they monkeys that fly out of your ass will get right to
work on that.

You are literally halluicnating.

It doesn't matter if the car companies aren't making gasoline
cars.

Which isn't going to happen, even for the US market.

Yes, it is. It's already happening.

What car company isn't making gasolien powered cars now? (You will
*never* answer that becase they answer is "none of them.")

Gasoline cars will be the
exception in 20 years, not the rule. And awkward as hell given
that there won't be many filling stations. And expensive to
operate given high carbon taxes.

You are literally halluicnating.

Take your meds, son. You *need* them.

And you still haven't address the "at least ten times as long to
"fill up" as a gasolien car, and that wil equipment that generates
so much heat it has to be liquid cooled, and will explode if
mishandled" issue, And you never, ever will, because there is no
solution.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

I note that you do not dispute a single word. That means you agree,
and *can't*.

Thank you for admitting I'm right.

Loser.

You are literally halluicnating.


Chris L Peterson wrote in
:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 20:40:40 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying
Sissy wrote:

Here's some real world number for you: ...

I picture you a bit over a century ago, standing on a soapbox in
some town square, ranting about how automobiles will never
replace horses, because of all the oil they require, and the
impossibility of pumping that much from the ground, of refining
so much, of the millions of dollars required to build fueling
stations around the country. How the system is already set up
for hay, and that is going to keep working. How buggy makers
will completely dominate those silly makers of horseless
carriages, with their economically impossible gasoline engines.

Yup, you'd be the guy who hung onto your buggy whip manufacturer
stock.



--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 08:21:00 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
wrote:

Collapses and spikes are normal. Take them out, and you're left
with a steady rise over the last 75+ years.

When adjusted for inflation, no, not really.

Yes, really.
http://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crud...-history-chart

Producing the electricity isn't a real problem.

Because you generate ten trillion kilowatt hours our of your ass?

The entire transportation sector currently consumes 600 billion kWh
per year. And that's internal combustion. Electric vehicles are about
three times more efficient. So take 200 billion kWh as the energy cost
of transportation for an electric fleet. That represents just 5% of
the U.S. total energy production.

https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data...pdf/sec2_3.pdf


How many employers are going to spend $40,000 _per employee_ to
install charging stations?

How much will a charging station cost when they are produced by the
millions? As much as a desk? I doubt it.

Indeed, one huge
benefit a large electric car fleet provides is load
normalization across the entire grid.

Not when *everyone* is plugging their cars in at the same time.

The reason normalization works is BECAUSE so many cars are plugged in
at the same time!

And you still haven't address the "at least ten times as long to
"fill up" as a gasolien car, and that wil equipment that generates
so much heat it has to be liquid cooled, and will explode if
mishandled" issue, And you never, ever will, because there is no
solution.

Because it isn't going to happen. That's not what the technology is
going to look like.

Chris L Peterson wrote in
:

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 08:21:00 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying
Sissy wrote:

Collapses and spikes are normal. Take them out, and you're
left with a steady rise over the last 75+ years.

When adjusted for inflation, no, not really.

Yes, really.
http://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crud...-history-chart

No, not really.

Producing the electricity isn't a real problem.

Because you generate ten trillion kilowatt hours our of your
ass?

The entire transportation sector currently consumes 600 billion
kWh per year.

I've already posted the numbers. State of the art cars like Tesla
use 3 KwH/mile. Americans drove 3.2 trillion miles in 2015. That's
ten trillion kilowatt hours.

Deal with it, hallucination boy.

Because it isn't going to happen. That's not what the technology
is going to look like.

To transfer enough energy into an electric car to drive 250 miles
as quickly as you can transfer enough gas to drive the same would
require a 3 megawatt cable. No amount of technology can alter the
laws of physics.

You are literally hallucinating. Get help. Seriously. You need
psychiatric help.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 10:09:26 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
wrote:

Yes, really.
http://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crud...-history-chart

No, not really.

The data is right there. Ignoring it doesn't change anything.

The entire transportation sector currently consumes 600 billion
kWh per year.

I've already posted the numbers. State of the art cars like Tesla
use 3 KwH/mile. Americans drove 3.2 trillion miles in 2015. That's
ten trillion kilowatt hours.

I'll stick with the actual numbers, not your assumed calculations.


Deal with it, hallucination boy.

Because it isn't going to happen. That's not what the technology
is going to look like.

To transfer enough energy into an electric car to drive 250 miles
as quickly as you can transfer enough gas to drive the same would
require a 3 megawatt cable. No amount of technology can alter the
laws of physics.

You can use multiple cables. You can charge slower. You can replace
the entire battery. You can replace the electrolyte. You can use cable
technology that cannot "explode" due to failures.

You really lack imagination.

On Sunday, October 22, 2017 at 2:07:17 PM UTC-5, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
"Chris.B" wrote in
:

On Wednesday, 18 October 2017 20:19:14 UTC+2, Gutless Umbrella
Carrying Sissy wrote:
snip the usual drivel

The latest news is that polymers are being rapidly developed to
allow present liquid batteries to become solid. Thus removing
the volatility and dangers of fire and explosion associated with
some popular rechargeable batteries. The polymer technology is
expected to make rapid progress leading to early adoption.

There is also a new carbon based battery which is looking very
promising.

Mankind's brightest has always provided an answer to our
specific needs.

Vastly more scientists, inventors and engineers are working
today than at any time in human history.

So, why aren't you?

Here's an analysis of why electric vehicles are unlikely to ever
completely replace gasoline in the real world. The numbers hold up
very well.

http://tinyurl.com/y8q43uau

http://driving.ca/auto-news/news/mot...-inconvenient-
truths-on-banning-gas-engines?
utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=lin k&ICID=ref_fark

The short version: A gas station with 16 pumps (and there are a lot
of those) would need 960 charging stations (coting $40,000 each)
using current 50 kW technology. Porche is working ona 350 kW
charging station, so that would reduce it to 128 stations (costing
$200,000 each). The 350 kW stations run so hot the charging cable
has to be liquid cooled (and if anything goes wrong, it *will*
explode). To equal the fuel time for a gasoline car for a 400 mile
trip - to simply transfer the amount of energy necessary to go that
far - would require a 3 *megawatt* charging station. That 16 pump
station would also need a 30 megawatt power line coming in. That's
_every_ _gas_ _station_ _in_ _the_ _country_. There are 168,000
places in the US that sell gasoline. If we assume they have an
average of 8 pumps each (which is a reasonable average), that's a
quarter of a *trillion* dollars just for the charging stations.

And note that this is all *in* *addition* *to* existing generating
(and distributing) infrastructure (since most of the charging will
be at peak hours). It would take generations to build the grid to
distribut that much power. The only feasible way would be for each
gas station to have it's own mini-nuke plant.

And according to the commonly accepted formula for comparison of
energy costs, for my 40 mpg Toyota to be replaced with a Tesla,
that uses 3 kWH/mile (which seems to be about as good as it gets
for passenger cars), electricity would have to cost 6 cents a kWH
to be the same price just for the energy (never mind having to pay
for the equivalent of a new engine every ten years). Currently, the
cheapest, off-hour price around here is 16.

So enjoy smoking your Kool-Aid, son. Your fantasies aren't going to
happen.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

"And according to the commonly accepted formula for comparison of
energy costs, for my 40 mpg Toyota to be replaced with a Tesla,
that uses 3 kWH/mile (which seems to be about as good as it gets
for passenger cars),"

That sounds positively WRONG! My own electric Volt goes 4.5 miles average for 1 Kwhr of energy expenditure. My power costs for overnight charging from the nearby Nuke is 7 cents/Kwhr, and some nights the cost actually dips below zero and they end up crediting up to 2 cents/Kwhr (they need the load at night and will pay you to use it). During the day I can charge here at the factory for 4 cents/Kwhr since we buy in bulk from the Nuke and from local wind turbines.

In effect, it costs me at most 62 cents for 8.9 Kwhrs to go 40 miles, gas costs would be $2.50 for the same distance.

My Volt has 48,000 miles on it, almost all on electric power, very little on gas. Battery range has not changed at all since the original purchase.

Razzy

Chris L Peterson wrote in
news
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 10:09:26 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying
Sissy wrote:

Yes, really.
http://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crud...-history-chart

No, not really.

The data is right there. Ignoring it doesn't change anything.

The same is true of charge times and the laws of physics, pookie.

Get help. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

Razzmatazz wrote in
:

My Volt has 48,000 miles on it, almost all on electric power,
very little on gas.

Your Volt is not an electric car, it is a hybrid, and thus, banned
under the proposed ban of gasoline powered cars.

Ergo, irrelevant.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 12:27:13 PM UTC-5, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
Chris L Peterson wrote in
news
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 10:09:26 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying
Sissy wrote:

Yes, really.
http://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crud...-history-chart

No, not really.

The data is right there. Ignoring it doesn't change anything.

The same is true of charge times and the laws of physics, pookie.

Get help. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself.

--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

methinks that your 3 Kwhr/mile is exactly backwards. All the new electric vehicles get more than 3 miles per KWhr (yes, even Teslas!). So you're off by a factor of 6 or more. ;^))

Razzy