99 MPG?

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Tuesday, November 30. 2010

Only if you don't count the coal you are burning to power up the batteries. In reality, these "green" scam cars are worse for mileage than diesel.

Somebody here posted that some greenie told them that electricity was clean, and came from the wall. I picture lots of mice in the walls on treadmills, powering generators. But even those mice have to be fed.

Posted by The News Junkie at 17:41 | Comments (7) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

I propose the Hardin method of heating reduction.

Each day (in the winter), take home a gallon of hot water from the bathroom at work.

So far, it's only a stupid stealing of heat. Good enough to get past the guards, but not big deal.

Here's the clever part.

Put it in the refrigerator at home overnight.

That uses the refrigerator as a heat pump to get out more heat than you stole, for less than the price of generating the additional heat yourself.

Then, of course, the next day, take the then ice back to work, so that matter is conserved and nothing appears to be missing.

#1 rhhardin (Link) on 2010-11-30 18:11 (Reply)

It sounds like you've done this before. How well does it work? :-)

One part of this equation is the pollution. It is easier to control emissions from a single source than from many.

Having said that, this whole electric cars are a boondogle for now and maybe for a long time. They have their advantages, but with the subsidies, people who do not buy them are helping to pay for their development and sales. One of the cool things about regular capitalism (as opposed to the kind we now practice), is that the cost of development of new technologies is usually born by the wealthier since they are the ones who buy the new toys first when they are very expensive. Later, the price comes down because of economies of scale and better production, then the "unwashed" get in the game - reaping the benefits of the development paid for early purchasers. Of course, if it turns out to be a bad idea, then in general, only the wealthier people are stuck with a lemon, not everybody.

Collectivism not only spreads any gains but also the pains and since the giverment is the decision maker, there are likely to be a lot more pains than gains.

#1.1 mudbug on 2010-11-30 19:32 (Reply)

Yes, that's a cool thing about capitalism. The larger capitalists take the big risks. Not fair to people to socialize dowside risk.

Of course, in the US today, almost everybody is a capitalist to some extent. Everybody who has a pension plan or other investments.

#1.1.1 bd on 2010-11-30 19:38 (Reply)

It probably will never happen, When PIGS FLY, etc. Let the true cost be the reason that purchasing decisions are made. No free gubment money, just the cost ma'am nothing but the cost(sorry Jack)....

#2 dorf on 2010-11-30 19:43 (Reply)

I've heard card carrying PETA members claim that "if you have to eat meat, at least buy it at the supermarket so no amimals get killed making it".
After that one, I am willing to believe any claimed idiotic statement from greenies.

#3 J.T. Wenting on 2010-12-01 00:58 (Reply)

Who says you have to feed the mice?

Just get new mice when the other ones die.

Voila, problem solved.

#4 DrTorch on 2010-12-01 10:18 (Reply)

Electric cars run on grid current, which means mostly coal. True enough. If CO2 were meaningful in the climate, which it ain't, managing the CO2 production at the coal plant would be easier than managing CO2 in every gas engine, but it's stupid to manage CO2 anyway.
There are other, real pollution issues with coal and even with natural gas or nuclear power, and with gas or diesel engines. Electricity can come from hydro or solar, but not at reasonable cost. IF (big IF) electricity can be generated cheaper and cleaner than using petroleum fuels, AND IF battery ranges could be extended quite a lot, THEN electric cars would make sense. Even now, if the batteries were cheaper and had decent legs, the energy element actually favors electricity from coal or other sources over petroleum fuels. It's the other elements -- range, time to refuel or recharge, cost -- that are keeping conventional vehicles more practical than electrics. Engineering will produce answers better than politics will.

#5 Geoff Brown on 2010-12-01 11:06 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Tuesday, November 30. 2010

99 MPG?