RXSF

there should be an onboard way to charge the batteries. like some electricity is used to power an electric generator/alternator, that again generates the battery back in a full circle like the prius. either that, or sacrifice the sunroof for a roof made out of solar panels.

or maybe, since it is easier than producing hydrogen filling stations, make every metered parking spot a fillup station for electricity. you pay the meter, and then it works. simple as that. once the meter runs out, it will stop.

CK6Speed

iTrader: (1)

Exactly what I said either in this topic or another. I think there should be a solar charger that in most situations can extend the range of the vehicle when the conditions are right. Also, some sort of regenerative breaking recharging should go into cars like these.

The pay at the meter is something I figured people would do to generate income. Just like parking, they can charge you whatever they want unless it is regulated by the state or feds. I really hate to see how much money they will charge. You figure, the party providing the service has to pay for the electricity,, then pay for the infrastructure to his own business, then make a profit. So the end user buying electricity from him will be paying much more than your standard electricity rate. Some sort of limited self charging of the car IMHO is the best all around solution.

LexFather

I remember when Lenox Mall here in Atlanta had about 8 charging parking spots for EV cars. I don't recall ever seeing any electric car there.

Again, for the city or dense areas, it could work. Though say you have a huge shift to EV cars, well now your power grid gets even MORE taxed and we have seen blackouts already.

RXSF

true, but assume the meters are city provided. then the city would pay for the electricity which im sure they can strike a deal with the local energy provider. this will not necessarily generate income for the gov but they just have to eat the bill in order to promote zero emmision vehicles

Sens4Miles

I think they'll start popping up all over the place. Hell, McDonalds and other fast food joints could generate additional income by putting a few meters in their parking lot. EV owners can pull in, get something to eat, and charge up their car over lunch. I see a lot of potential with many different businesses to help generate additional income for themselves instead of feeding the oil companies.

cpone

You mean to tell me that you have only had your cell phone run out of juice once, you have forgotten to get your morning cup of coffee only once, forgot to go BUY a bag of beans only once. That is amazing man, you should just call yourself a robot.


I have NO problem with offering choices to people. I HOPE they develop the EV and that its works reliably enough. But I find it funny that you mention having a choice, when I could have sworn a week or two ago you were all for banning SUV's outright.



You are making a more rational answer now in terms of CHOICE, but when you talk about the EV fitting the needs of 95% of the population like its a FACT I laugh at how ridiculous that sounds.

Its an imaginary number. Based little on reality and more on an eco warriors want for more EV's.

Here is my thing as well, for MOST, 95% of people that LIVE in NYC and metro areas like it. They have NO WHERE TO CHARGE THEIR CARS FOR THE NIGHT. NOWHERE! PERIOD.

Cars park in the street now in some areas blocks from the home, and have no way of being charged realistically. 95% of people in NYC live in Apts, with no access to a plug outside. I know I lived there for 20 years. I just talked to my boy in NYC and asked him how would an EV work for you. He simply said it would NOT. No way around it.

The same goes for MOST metro areas. 95% of people living in metro areas do not have the access to a plug every night and every day to plug their vehicles in for 4-6 hours. That is the biggest hurdle for an EV to break into the mass market.

The reason the ICE vehicle works is because people can park the damn thing on the grass in the middle of a field with no power supply near by and if they run low, drive a mile or two and gas it up in under 2 minutes. THAT is the issue at large with EV's.

When they are able to overcome that hurdle and a few others EV's would be the #1 100% mode of transportation for everyone. THAT is what I want, when I raise these issues and people like me, that is what we seek. For people to understand that the EV still needs more refinement to be a real serious viable option.

Sens4Miles

No, of course I have. But again, if the range on these EVs are 100 miles per charge and most people drive 40 miles or less per day, you may not even have to charge it up every day. It would be ok to forget one day and still carry out your daily routine without any problems. Also, if this car from Nissan comes with a charger capable of charging it up in 30 minutes, I see no issues with forgetting one day, then realizing you're on no charge and then taking 10 -15 minutes out to charge it up even halfway before going about your day. This is not as big of a problem as you're making it out to be.


That wasn't me


Well since you lived in NYC, then you already know that nobody that lives there even has a car. Everyone pretty much uses mass transit. So not only will EVs not work for people living in New York City, but no car really will. Most of the traffic in this city comes from taxis and buses and those that live in the suburbs of Jersey, Connecticut, & Long Island who commute regularly.

So I agree with you that EVs (without a backup generator) will not work that well in New York City right now because of the layout and dense structure of the city, but they will work with the rest of the population who live just outside of the city and in all suburban areas throughout the country. Keep in mind though, that anyone who actually lives in Manhattan and owns a car (very small percentage) probably do not drive more than 10 miles in any given day anyway. They could literally charge their car up probably once a week and still have enough juice before the next charge up. Manhattan is probably the only area in the country where EVs will be an issue (at least until some charging stations become available). But given the fact that so many taxis in NYC have switched to using hybrids in their fleet, I'm guessing it wouldn't take too long for those stations to start popping up throughout the city, as EVs would clearly become a viable option for drivers who will benefit from the gas savings).


Right, but you have to start somewhere. To expect a 600 mile range and a 2 minute charge up from the start is unreasonable. EVs needs to be embraced first, then they can be refined and developed further as technology improves. My issue with comments from people like you is that you're inadvertently pushing down the idea of EVs by making negative statements and pointing out their limitations, yet rarely ever praise their benefits. EVs are already a real serious viable option, they just aren't an "ideal" option for you and people like you right now. But for people like me and others like me, they are. Like I said, no one car will fit the needs of all. But we should at least have the choice to choose the kind of car we want to drive. An EV pickup truck could one day fit the needs of someone who needs a pickup truck with a 400 mile range. But an ICE compact sedan will never fit the needs of someone who needs a pickup truck.

cpone

I would love to see this rapid charger.
I have my doubts about charging in 30 minutes, but lets say for arguments sake it is. You still would need an ICE vehicle no?




Could have sworn it was.
I'll double check.



As a person that lived in the city for years in an apartment and could never find parking after 5pm I can without a doubt in my mind say you are full of it.
There are LOTS of people that live in apartments that drive cars to work and live in the outer Boroughs.


You can go ahead and extend your same argument to the rest of metro areas in every city in the country, as they are all pretty much modeled the same way. You can also go ahead and exclude anyone that lives in an apartment complex from your original figure of 95% of the population, since 75%-80% of the US population lives near or around major cities in urban areas.

Most people do NOT own homes, most live in apartments, and condos. Making a rechargeable vehicle impossible for these people.


You're argument is NOT correct. See above.
80% of people live in urban areas, those people in urban areas are NOT capable of charging a car easily and simply.


What stations? EV charging stations?
That is a good possibility, but again impractical for a person to stand there in NYC of all places and actually WAIT for anything.

The solution again needs to be simple, and quick. People do not want to wait.
I proposed a system where the battery gets swapped at a station easily. There are scientists working on new battery technology right now.



This is where you are lost once again.
People want a viable solution NOW.
They do not want to embrace anything slowly.
Car manufacturers need to create viable options that can REPLACE the ICE easily and quickly for it to catch on. Its why the EV the first time did NOT catch on. Please don't give me verbatim the 'Who killed the electric car' documentary. I saw it, it didn't fly. The car did not catch on for several reasons. Some of which I have already stated.


I am NOT pushing down the IDEA of Ev's. In fact I am excited that its coming along. HOWEVER, I like many others want a REAL COMPARABLE option. Something that can and has to REPLACE the simplicity of the combustion engine. I am looking at it from an average consumers standpoint. I am not looking at it with an agenda. I have no benefit from knocking down the EV. But I do have a benefit in making sure that if THIS IS THE OPTION that people want, that we PREPARE FOR IT BEFORE we start rolling thousands off the assembly line.

I have not even gone into the complete revamp of infrastructure both on the city level and on the electric grid. The hundreds of additional power stations and reactors that need to be installed and built. We haven't even TOUCHED the northern states which as early as YESTERDAY were getting snow. That would work out GREAT for them.

I haven't even touched on the beauty of the hurricane season in Florida and along the southern coast, and how the hell do I move my vehicle without power for days on end as I have seen. Lets not even get INTO areas in the midwestern states.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

an electric motor is far more efficient 90% than an internal combustion engine 30%. The torque curve is so instantaneous and long reaching the Tesla roadster only needs a 2 speed transmission to smoke you because its torque is everywhere from 0 to 13,000 rpm. Electric motor is also far simplier to service than a piston engine and has no emissions besides heat.

Hydrogen cars suck I can give anyone a list of major logistical/technical disadvantages, a battery breakthrough would instantly one shot kill any hope of a hydrogen car

gengar

Divide 500/3, and realize overnight wouldn't have worked in my situation. I'm also suspicious of the quoted 30-minute time. To fill a typical EV battery in 30 minutes would require current far beyond what is typically available on the electric grid at the consumer or business level, so it could require an entire revamp of the electric distribution to the recharge location. And I'd still need several stations along the trip route I took last week. The limitations are serious and an important consideration.

And to address another one of the statements you made, about us being too "negative" about it, which is laughable: The reason people point out serious limitations first is that these are the issues that keep EV cars from being acceptable to the population at large. It is simply not good enough to say "X% of people living in Y% of the places in the country can use an EV just like an ICE vehicle Z% of the time", because it's those times a person can't use an EV that are problematic and will cause a person to say that EV will not be acceptable. You must approach this realistically; the world is not a utopia.


Um, let's not forget that there is little to no environmental savings with an electric car powered by the US grid. Even the most generous studies have given EV only a 15% advantage over ICEs, because the vast majority of power on our electric grid comes from burning coal. This isn't France, where people are actually OK with nuclear.


You're kidding, right? There are two adjacent 150+ car garages under my NYC condo and they only service my block.


Sure, but keep in mind there are huge inefficiencies in transporting that energy to where it's needed. The loss in transforming and transmitting energy over and over again is staggering. That's where the efficiency loses so much versus gasoline.

Sens4Miles

No, why would I?



Sure, but the outer boroughs are nothing like Manhattan. Staten Island, Brooklyn, Queens especially are all very residential. Houses with garages, driveways, etc. Sure, some people do drive cars and live in Manhattan, but they're usually very well off and probably couldn't give a crap about the price of gasoline or electric cars in general.

Not if there are charging meters in these places. It wouldn't take much except maybe a petition from the residents to get one in these apt complexes. Most of them have huge parking lots and plenty of space anyway. Furthermore, most cities are not designed like NYC. There is no other city in the country like New York. Los Angeles for example is a huge city, but very spread out and everyone drives. You need a car to get around LA. You cannot rely on public transportation or on your own two feet to get where you need to go. In Manhattan, you can. Big distinction here.





Again, most traffic in Manhattan comes from people who commute from the other boroughs, Long Island, New Jersey, & Connecticut. I live here, I think I should know. For those that actually live in Manhattan AND drive a car (again very small percentage) who desperately want an EV, well, then it might not be the right choice for them from the beginning. However, going back to my other argument, not one vehicle on this planet is suitable for everybody's needs.



Oh please. No advertising = no sales. You make it seem like these car companies actually tried to get sales of EVs off the ground when they did everything but that. It sickens me when people try to pull that argument out of their *** and actually expect people to believe it.

People want a viable solution NOW? You really expect the ICE to be completely replaced by EVs immediately? Boy, you really have high demands and expectations. You want an entire industry to be changed overnight. Good luck with that one. Any time there is a technological advancement, it takes time to catch on and for people to convert. You know, we used to all watch movies on VHS, until DVDs came out. Although DVDs were out for years before the masses started to completely convert and replace their video tapes. Laser Discs for example were the first attempt at digital quality video, and although people bought them, they didn't replace the VCR until the tech was perfected and DVDs came out. Same thing applies here.



You know, the F-150 is the best selling vehicle in this country. However, I haven't seen one on the road in months. My point? The EV does not need to be suitable for every person in every region in every state and in every city. It just needs to be put out as an option for those that want them. Nobody around here wants or needs an F-150, yet apparently it sells like hot cakes in other parts of the country. An EV would be 100% completely suitable for me, my family, and my friends who all live outside a big city and travel no more than 50 miles per day. For us, it works. We would never in a million years even consider purchasing an F-150, however.

Sens4Miles

Then an EV is not right for you.

No single car, truck, SUV, coupe, or sedan is "acceptable to the population at large".

No, you must approach this realistically. Realistically, there is no reason why EVs cannot coexist with ICE vehicles. They do not have to be "acceptable" to 100% of the population. They don't even have to be "acceptable" to 10% of the population.

Let me ask you this. Is the Kia Sedona acceptable to 100% of the population? Will you sit there and claim that 100% of the population should consider the Sedona or else Kia shouldn't make it available to those that want them? This constant argument that EVs must meet the needs and expectations of most are completely ridiculous. Hybrids make up 2% of all vehicles sold right now. However, the Prius is the 3rd best selling vehicle from Toyota, Lexus, & Scion combined (20,000+ units sold every month). So, should Toyota pull the plug on the Prius because 100% of the population isn't buying it? Give me a break.


Keywords in that sentence I suppose are "NYC condo". Anyway, yes, some people who live in Manhattan or have condos there do have cars. But most residents of Manhattan do not drive. That is a fact. Most do not have cars.

Little E

iTrader: (2)

I had a 2005 Nissan 350Z before I bought my 08 IS250. All I have to say is that I will never buy a Nissan again!

dunnojack

electric....... not for people who make road trips.

where the hell are you gonna get a 6 hour recharge on the road?

get the engineers to develop an engine that runs off sugar water, milk, or corn oil.

gengar

I didn't realize we were talking about a single car, truck, SUV, coupe, or sedan. But I'm enjoying your nonsequiturs, which seem to be a recurring theme here.

Yet another strawman. That is not the argument, nor has it been. I have never stated nor suggested that EVs "cannot coexist" with ICE vehicles on the road. That would be ridiculous. I mean, what are you trying to say about not coexisting... like if an EV and an ICE car wind up next to each other on the road, they'll start a fist fight or something?

I mean, you posted the article yourself - didn't you actually read it first? The article clearly states that Nissan is promoting electric vehicles as the "solution" and the "future", explicitly being critical of hydrogen power, hybrids, and ICEs. The point we are making is that EVs simply aren't a realistic solution to be the future of automotive travel.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fan of hybrids either. I think the whole green movement, hybrids included, is just a bunch of crock for celebrities and liberal treehugger wannabes to feel better about themselves by pretending to care. We would save far more emissions as a country by reducing source usage across all fronts than by switching to alternative cars. Lexus hybrids, for example, may save mpg in theory but don't save gas at all compared to other available options (even non-hybrid ones). But, unlike EVs, I'm willing to give hybrid technology a pass because it does have some benefits and it can be used in any vehicle out there. You keep telling me that we should excuse EVs because no one type of vehicle can satisfy everybody. Well, hybrid technology can be used in cars, trucks, SUVs, coupes, and the like, and it can be used just like an ICE. It doesn't have the same issues that trying to make EVs "the future" will.

A condo, especially on Manhattan, is just a euphemism for a dumpy apartment that someone bought. I don't even own a car there. But at least you are agreeing with my objection; "some" is certainly an improvement over your earlier declaration of 'none at all'. BTW, even using Manhattan's 25% rate of resident car ownership (it's much higher in the other boroughs, obviously) as applied to NYC's population still gives the city more total cars than many major cities in the United States.