# abc and the volt



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Will they ever tell the TRUTH about the EV-1? Or the truth about the electric car battery,that we HAD one,with range that worked????Now Shelved by the Oil companies???

Too Funny,if it wasnt so painful!

Now this is ABC news and THEY say about the EV-1 that it was a marketing failure and ran on 1200 pounds of lead acid batteries.Also report GM STILL looking for a battery that can do 40 miles...Hmmmm HOW ABOUT THE EV-1! 10 years ago that did 140 miles on NiMh???The 2nd generation GM EV-1 was all battery powered with the Nimh EV-95 battery,had 140-150 mile range,had air conditioning that would freeze you out of the car,and outran Porches!!

EV1 at 5700ft



Nothing like good reporting from the MSM.

Now,to get the link to work....You need to copy and paste below to your browser,cant make a link work

javascript:void(window.open('http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/ynews;_ylt=AmiLqDjBNfr8fF5Li3YvnCab.HQA?ch=4226720&cl=9208251&lang=en','playerWindow','width=793,height=608,scrollbars=no'));


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

http://www.ev1.org/chevron.htm

Unfortunately, plug-in hybrids are forced to use lead-acid or lithium batteries, and it's no accident. Electric car batteries must be able to put out enough power to run the EV without an engine, be able to "deep cycle" for acceptable range (over 100 miles on a charge), and must have long "cycle life" of at least 1000 to 2000 fill-ups (over 100,000 miles, and usually over 200,000 miles, before the batteries need replacement). > >>

*The existing and proven EV-95 NiMH battery from Panasonic*, which lasts longer than the life of the car, has adequate power for acceleration without an Internal Combustion ("IC") engine, and *can drive an EV at 80 mph for up to 120 miles, went into production in Jan., 1997. These batteries are powerful enough to run an EV from start to 80 mph and for over 100 miles, and have cycle life of at least 1500 -- over 150,000 miles before they need replacement*> >>










A 4 minute video about the EV-95.*But REMEMBER FOLKS! This doesnt exist,its all in our minds.So says ABC News and GM.*
HOPEFULLY,SOMEDAY,GM will save the day and find a 40 mile range battery. 
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDRBRuvct54&feature=related[/ame]

The only thing left to attack on electric car being made is price,the battery is too expensive.Hmmm...when youre making each cell by hand that does indeed make for an expensive battery.Start producing them on an assembly line by the millions the cost drops a lot.

Never happen though.The Oil companies will see to it.They got the EV-95 and shelved it,they are now bought into the 2 most likely companies to produce a Li-ion battery now. Geez I get tired of being played by the powers that be.

Cant beat the electric,buy it and shelve it.Thats happened before,it will happen again.Bet on it.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Go ahead,it wont run at 40 below...blah blah blah.It WILL run for the huge majority of us.


----------



## Jim-mi (May 15, 2002)

During the Olympics GM ran a real glitzy add . . .at the end the ultra glitzy pic of """The new electric"""..............


pretty picture............

we'll see.


----------



## clovis (May 13, 2002)

I read a book several years ago by Micheal Shnayerson called The Car that Could: The story of the EV-1.

*Super interesting!!!!!*

(It has been several years since I read the book, so bear with me if I am off just a little in what I remember.) 

I understand the difficulties that GM faced building the EV-1, that it was a severe money pit, without much hope of making it commercially successful.

Of course, batteries were the difficult challenge then, as they are today. GM pulled a fast one on both Chrysler and Ford, and bought the company that was the forefront leader in EV batteries. GM bought them just before they signed an agreement with Ford and Chrysler that all three would equally fund battery research thru that battery company.

If I am not mistaken, the guy that developed the switching circuit board, or the brains of the car, is now with Tesla, (Maybe the guy that founded Tesla?????) and is using the same design that he developed for the EV-1. Interestingly enough, as the story goes, he locked himself in his house until he figured out how to make the circuit board, an* extremely difficult task*.

I understand that GM decided to lease the cars, instead of selling them, because they were so technically advanced for their time.

I understand that the project was extremely expensive, and was at a time that GM was bleeding cash.

Car companies have it tough. They can sink millions upon millions of dollars into a design/prototype/model, and see it fail due to unseen circumstances. 

Do I wish that GM had continued the EV project? Yes. Do I blame them for scrapping the project? No. 

I own a business, and it is easy to sink tons of cash into a sinking ship. The hard part is knowing when, and if to pull the plug on some work. For instance, I print and publish manuals. It is easy to sink $500 into a project, just to find out you need to spend another $500 just to get it ready for the press. What happens if it flops? I have had some real losers on a few that I have taken to print. It is easy to get $2000 into a project, just to see it fail, with stacks of unsold copies just sitting on the shelf. 

I have a wife that I answer to about failed manuals, and GM has stock holders. I am not sure which is worse, LOL.

I can't blame GM for dropping the EV-1 due to the project being a money pit, it appeared that mechanical issues could arise, states began backing down from legislation that would have forced GM to sell a percentage of EV's, consumers were bucking at the thought of having to install an expensive charging system if they bought an EV from GM,
big time battery heating issues, range issues, cold weather EV issues, etc, etc, etc.

At any rate, a very enjoyable read that gives you new perspective, and a deeper understanding to the EV-1 program.

I strongly recommend the book if you are interested in GM's EV-1 project.

Maybe find it thru your library's loan exchange system, or on abe.com.

Clove


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

My question is; If this technology is "proven" then why isn't anyone else doing it? There surely has to be someone out there that can build these cars if they are all they are hyped to be... Gm isn't the only car builder in the country This is a serious question, I'm not trying to bait anyone or start a GC topic here... So if you have an honest answer please post it, if not please take it to the GC forum..

Thank you


----------



## WisJim (Jan 14, 2004)

It can cost a car company millions of dollars to do all the crash testing required to be allowed on the highways. That is why you see a lot of "NEV" Neighborhood Electric Vehicles with limited speed, and 3 wheeled "cars" that can be licensed as motorcycles.

One of the reasons that some of the small companies that built electric cars in the 1970s and 80s went out of business was the cost of complying with the increasingly strict and complex crash testing requirements.

If we put lithium batteries in our 1981 Comutacar (100% electric car, charged from our PV and wind system), we could increase the range of the car from 40 miles to 100+ miles, but it would cost about $12,000 or more for the batteries, compared to $900 or so for the lead acid ones that it has in it now. Lithium batteries that would be comparable to the stock lead acid would currently cost $4500, and there isn't a lot of experience using them, so far.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

Ouch, well that is why I don't have one.. my most expensive vehicle cost me $5200 and I can't afford to buy a new vehicle...I guess I'll have to wait till there are used ones on the market... LOL... Looks like it might be a long wait...


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

The funding came thru government to produce the car.

The battery was paid for by you and me,the taxpayer.

The company that got the battery funds,was sold to GM,the company being Ovonics.GM then sold the battery to the oil companies were it sits today.

80,000 for a handmade car,with handmade batteries is hardly unreasonable.I saw a youtube video on making Li-ion batteries,its all handmade from bars of lithium on down.Its a few techs sitting in a building the size of your house.You bet that makes for one heck of an expensive battery.

But its no more complicated than a ubiquitous lead acid battery.Its plates,insulators and a case.Some have a circuit board with individual cells connected to it.There is nothing there to justify it costing much more than a massed produced battery.

But the electric has problems. Like it doesnt NEED a transmission,radiator,smog,spark plugs,OIL,pistons,rings,valves,exhaust,etc etc etc etc. So it doesnt need OIL,it doesnt NEED tons of parts that wear out. THAT destroyed the EV1,it was bad news for auto companies and obsolescence,it was REALLY bad news for OIL companies.

Without the political will to FORCE these cars onto the road those companies arent about to make one,or allow one.

Once the commissioner of the California Air resources Board killed the mandate he was hired by GM as the head of their Hydrogen car project. No connection here.....move along......no battery exists.

Cant have a simple car,give em a traditional car that runs on an OIL powered fuel cell,with all the expensive parts of a traditional car.

As for nobody wanted the EV1 that is such hogwash its insane.Sure,lots of folks dont.Lots of folks dont want 2 seater MR1's,Miatas,vettes,etc.That doesnt mean there isnt a huge market for sports car drivers,or a huge market for commuters for electrics.People who for the most part dont commute 50 miles a day,much less 140/day that the Nimh EV95 delivered.

As for the EV95 didnt work,thats hogwash too.Ive seen the actual results from SCE's fleet of EV95 powered cars,they delivered!

But thats OK,keep driving Dino and remember,"IT'LL NEVER WORK",just like solar thermal,just like wind.Cant be done.

BooBoo


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

mightybooboo said:


> Nice little article on how the best EV battery yet was killed,short and sweet,here is an excerpt.
> -------------------------------------------
> http://www.ev1.org/chevron.htm
> 
> ...


--------------------------------------------
Hard to build a viable electric vehicle when the battery is owned by Big OIL.And they are into the 2 most promising Li-Ion outfits too.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

mightybooboo said:


> The funding came thru government to produce the car.
> 
> The battery was paid for by you and me,the taxpayer.
> 
> ...


Ouch again!!!!

Now $80,000 may not seem to much for you, but for me that is more then we paid for our home and 21 acres... I understand that there are costs to make these, but to force (this is called socialism/communism) people like me to take on that finacial burden or to put it on the taxpayer is wrong....

If it can be built for a reasonable cost, then they will sell, until then it is just a dream. I know that if there was a way for me to power my home and vehicles with out paying the "Big Electric" companies I would be doing it, but that is me being frugal... Unfortunately from where I stand, I haven't found a way to do it that is affordable to me, or where it will pay for itself in a decent amount of time (25 years is not a decent amount of time)... But that is just my experiences and have nothing to do with anyone elses experiences...


----------



## Kevingr (Mar 10, 2006)

You either need a lot of money to buy any of this stuff, electric cars, solar or wind power or do it yourself. 

From what I've seen on the web a guy can build his own electric or electric-hybrid in the $10,000 range. it won't go long distance though.

Solar thermal from my own experience (see my other thread on wanting input from solar users) will cost you way more than it's worth to have it done by a professional. But Solar Gary did it himself for less than $6000.

A decent sized wind turbine on a large tower will cost way more that it's worth too, but building your own generator and tower seems to be within reach.

That's the way I see it from my last 3 months of intensively exploring this stuff.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

As I said,if you want a hand built car then it costs 80 grand.If you hand built any car then yes,is muy expensive.

As for the folks who wont drive a 2 seater,its bad in snow,etc? WHO CARES??!! So you wont,whoopee,others will.

My Jetta SUCKS in snow,thing wont move!They sell millions.Bet you snow people dont drive Jettas,so what? They shouldnt make them?

I dont base my vehicle choice around it doing everything,I base it on what I do MOSTLY. High speed freeway and twisty mountain roads.

I drive snow maybe 5%,so then I drive my snow car.Many folks just dont drive. But I DONT want to drive a snow vehicle the other 95% of the time with gas guzzling,poor handling like a truck.I rarely haul,must I ALWAYS drive a truck/SUV? Why. Most people dont base their choice on hauling alone.

What???? I would need ANOTHER vehicle?? Get real,most peple own more than one vehicle now.I have 4.On my street only 2 houses have 1 vehicle,both retired folks.

Would I buy a 2 seater commuter vehicle with 140 mile electric range AND on board diesel recharging capability,you bet I would,and it CAN be made at reasonable cost by the majors. And will be,look at Europe to lead the way.

ICE engines are dinosaur tech.100 year old tech.Model T's. The tech today is far beyond that.

Just beat the Oil Companies and electric will happen.

I saw the same arguments here a few years back on how solar THERMAL power doesnt work and wind doesnt work,and its sweeping the world.Growth is humongous,but what did I hear here??? "It'LL NEVER WORK"

Same with the electric car,it will change the world.And it too is coming as European governments FIGHT the Oil companies monopoly instead of being in bed with them like our politicians.Look at their solar and wind commitments in Europe!

*The tech at reasonable cost is there.Its an electric motor and batteries,it ISNT rocket science,its SIMPLER than Dino tech we have now.
*Of course we could just let Chevron control the EV95 tech and shelve the thing.You know,that 140 mile battery pack in a full size car with ALL the modern amenities at 80 mph and 1500 recharges and 150,000 mile lifespan.

Build them by the millions,not hand made and the price will drop a LOT,they are when its said and done just a battery.Nothing more.

Nissan and Renault are coming out with real world electrics,it can be done and is being done.

BooBoo <-----Who never gets tired of hearing "IT"LL NEVER WORK" because guess what,alt. energy DOES work and alt transportation will too.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Kevingr said:


> You either need a lot of money to buy any of this stuff, electric cars, solar or wind power or do it yourself.
> 
> From what I've seen on the web a guy can build his own electric or electric-hybrid in the $10,000 range. it won't go long distance though.
> 
> ...


GRID sized thermal solar electric and wind turbine power is economically competitve NOW.

How do I know? I live in between the 2 and my electric is 14.6 kw/hr with all charges figured in.And we are using wind and solar thermal generated power.Right from the grid.And it works VERY well too,the solar plants are THE most reliable power generators in SCE's inventory.

Hardly cost prohibitive.Hardly tech restricted.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

beowoulf90 said:


> Ouch again!!!!
> 
> Now $80,000 may not seem to much for you, but for me that is more then we paid for our home and 21 acres... I understand that there are costs to make these, but to force (this is called socialism/communism) people like me to take on that finacial burden or to put it on the taxpayer is wrong....
> 
> .


Hmmmm....as opposed to FASCISM where the government is in bed with the Corporations,IE BIG OIL?Bailed out any Bankers lately? There is MAJOR socialism/fascism for the wealthy elite.

As for forcing it,we force a lot of things in the real world,paid taxes lately?

Paid for roads,or sewage,or clean water? Thats 'forced' too and a darn good thing or we too could drop dead from water borne and sewage borne disease like millions around the world do every year.

Government does do good things too you know.This isnt 1776 anymore.We are 300 million now,not 3 million.Dont regulate environment we can be living in literal 3rd world cesspools like 100's of millions do.

Im ALL FOR regulating Big Oil *right out of their monopoly position*.Thats a good thing in my book.Monopolies arent,they rape you.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

http://www.reuters.com/article/companyNews/idUST36785520080519
---------------------------------------
Hmmmm....Nissan thinks it can be done.

I used to be so dead set against Japanese cars.Now I cant wait til the fools at the big 3 cont. to miss the boat and go completely under.They are worthless IMO.

Here is where the world is headed and GM and Ford just dont get it.They need BIG TRUCKS and SUV's to survive???? PUHLEEZE,Honda,Nissan,Toyota and Renault and VW DONT.

Bye bye American car makers,RIP. I wont cry your demise.The future is NOW,better grasp it while you can or else.
---------------------------------------
Nissan, NEC to invest $115 mln in battery factory
Mon May 19, 2008 1:18am EDT


TOKYO, May 19 (Reuters) - Nissan Motor Co and NEC Tokin Corp said on Monday their battery venture would invest 12 billion yen ($115 million) over three years to manufacture lithium-ion batteries starting next year for use in next-generation green vehicles.

Lithium-ion batteries are seen as key to making gasoline-electric hybrid cars more cost-competitive and to making pure electric cars practical by reducing the volume of battery packs needed to power them.

Automotive Energy Supply Corp (AESC), the three-way joint venture announced last year, would initially have capacity to build 13,000 units a year at a planned factory in Kanagawa, near Tokyo, first supplying batteries for forklifts in 2009.

It would ramp up annual capacity gradually to 65,000 units in 2011 for use in Nissan's in-house hybrid car and electric vehicles due in 2010.

A breakthrough by Nissan and the NEC group in the highly contested battery business could put Japan's third-biggest automaker back in the game for offering environmentally friendly vehicles after trailing its bigger rivals, Toyota Motor Corp, for the past decade.

Over the past year,* Nissan has announced big plans for electric vehicles, including their introduction in Japan and the United States in 2010, followed by a launch in Israel and Denmark in 2011 along with French partner Renault SA . It aims to mass-market electric cars globally from 2012.*

"*Nissan is determined to become a leader in this next shift in global mobility*," Nissan Executive Vice President Carlos Tavares told a news conference, adding that the venture's advanced battery technology was critical in reaching that goal.

AESC also aims to supply the rest of the industry, but acknowledged that competition was fierce.

"*There are more than 10 rivals competing in this field*," AESC President Masahiko Otsuka said.......

*Mitsubishi Motors, which has also been aggressive in promoting electric vehicles*, is due to begin producing lithium-ion batteries by 2009 in a joint venture with Mitsubishi Corp


----------



## Kevingr (Mar 10, 2006)

mightybooboo said:


> GRID sized thermal solar electric and wind turbine power is economically competitve NOW.
> 
> How do I know? I live in between the 2 and my electric is 14.6 kw/hr with all charges figured in.And we are using wind and solar thermal generated power.Right from the grid.And it works VERY well too,the solar plants are THE most reliable power generators in SCE's inventory.
> 
> Hardly cost prohibitive.Hardly tech restricted.


Grid sized systems may be, but I don't have $2million+ to invest in one, so I've never done the cost analysis on it. What I'm refering to is the 10kw machine in my back yard. Based on "my situation" $24,000+ for a 10kw machine and tower, plus installation will take decades to pay for itself.

As far as Thermal Solar I was refering to heating my home with it. I was quoted a price of $24,000 to install a system that will heat roughly half my house. Again, way to pricey, even at the current rising cost of propane, there's other options that are cheaper. But, if I do it all myself I can do it for 1/3 that cost or less. Doing it myself it makes economic sense, hiring someone to do it doesn't.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

True,what works on the grid may be ridiculously expensive IF you have grid power.Dont have grid power land is cheaper,running lines expensive,THEN even 24,000 turbine makes good sense.

Then the age old argument,how much does your 30,000 car return on investment?I will skip one new car for lifetime electric.All in just how you crunch numbers really.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

The major thing everyone is missing is the simple fact that when the EV-1 was introduced it was not economical viable due to the price of gasoline at the time, about a buck fifteen ($1.15) per gallon. With gas running about 3 times that such a car MIGHT be today. 

But there are a couple of buggers in the electric car pie. First off electric prices have increased by 50%. 

Second, the US electric grid is already straining. Could it handle the extra strain of millions of electric cars added to it?

The third thing is linked to the second one. Where is all this extra electricity going to come from?


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

The grid only strains during peak usage. The grid could handle 50% of todays cars being replaced with electric if they are only charged during off-peak hours. We even have the production already for it as many places cut back on production then. I figure California will soon have a mandate to charge them at night and have a POCO controlled switch on the plugins like they have for HVAC units now.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

mightybooboo said:


> Hmmmm....as opposed to FASCISM where the government is in bed with the Corporations,IE BIG OIL?Bailed out any Bankers lately? There is MAJOR socialism/fascism for the wealthy elite.
> 
> As for forcing it,we force a lot of things in the real world,paid taxes lately?
> 
> ...


I won't continue this in this forum....

but will say that I will fight Socialism, Communism, Fascism till my last breath.
and you are correct this isn't 1776, it is 2008 and you would have thought that people in this country would have learned that the forementioned styles of government don't work..... But alas others think they can force there views on those of us who don't share those views... 

One political party would like to force it's religious views on us and the other political party would like to force it's religious views on us...

You are correct it isn't 1776, but it should be!


----------



## OntarioMan (Feb 11, 2007)

In short, I think the "technology" is just too expensive and there is too little profit in the vehicles.

Everywhere you go, you hear about all the "consipiracy theories" surrounding cars like the EV1 and electric cars in general - but again, I think it boils down to profit. 

Automakers have had the technology to build a 60 mpg gasoline powered vehicle for decades - why do they not build them in North America? Because the cars would be small, light, cheap - so same answer : no profit.

The price of fuel has certainly given north Americans an attitude adjustment - so it'll be interesting to see what happens in the next 10 years.



beowoulf90 said:


> My question is; If this technology is "proven" then why isn't anyone else doing it? There surely has to be someone out there that can build these cars if they are all they are hyped to be... Gm isn't the only car builder in the country This is a serious question, I'm not trying to bait anyone or start a GC topic here... So if you have an honest answer please post it, if not please take it to the GC forum..
> 
> Thank you


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

watcher said:


> The major thing everyone is missing is the simple fact that when the EV-1 was introduced it was not economical viable due to the price of gasoline at the time, about a buck fifteen ($1.15) per gallon. With gas running about 3 times that such a car MIGHT be today.
> 
> But there are a couple of buggers in the electric car pie. First off electric prices have increased by 50%.
> 
> ...


I know the grid and production are both seeing increases out here.Suspect many other places are too.

Good thing,we need some infrastructure work in this country.At least out here we are indeed seeing it.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

OntarioMan said:


> In short, I think the "technology" is just too expensive and there is too little profit in the vehicles.
> 
> Everywhere you go, you hear about all the "consipiracy theories" surrounding cars like the EV1 and electric cars in general - but again, I think it boils down to profit.


OM,what is CHEVRON doing OWNING the EV95 battery and refusing to license it for use. You dont see any connection between Oil stifling the only proven battery? Thats not a theory,those are proven facts.

1-The battery works
2-Chevron owns it
3-*Chevron will not license it for automotive large size packs*.

Proven facts.No 'conspiracy' theory.FACT.


----------



## OntarioMan (Feb 11, 2007)

Ya, I've seen "Who Killed the Electric Car" as well - and it stinks of Michael Moore type half-truths, one-sided stories and whatever else it takes to stir your emotion.

Chevron owns a battery technology - I'm sure that doesn't come as a big surprise to most anyone - and I'd assume that big oil companies own many other companies and many other energy related technologies. The assumption that they've purchased the technology to stifle the production of electric vehicles is the "consipiracy theory" - and I'm sure that only Chevron knows what their plans are for the technology. 

The demise of the EV1 - could it have been that there was no profit in that vehicle due to low demand and high vehicle cost, which is why GM pulled the plug? According to GM, that is exactly the reason - according to some docu-drama, there is lots of x-files consipiracies to keep us addicted to the black oil. Perhaps the truth was just too boring. We've been addicted to oil and will continue to be addicted for a long time.

To think that the large oil companies feel at all threatened by electric vehicles is, in my opinion, ridiculous. Not in our lifetime.




mightybooboo said:


> OM,what is CHEVRON doing OWNING the EV95 battery and refusing to license it for use. You dont see any connection between Oil stifling the only proven battery? Thats not a theory,those are proven facts.
> 
> 1-The battery works
> 2-Chevron owns it
> ...


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

OntarioMan said:


> In short, I think the "technology" is just too expensive and there is too little profit in the vehicles.
> 
> Everywhere you go, you hear about all the "consipiracy theories" surrounding cars like the EV1 and electric cars in general - but again, I think it boils down to profit.
> 
> ...


You are correct, car makers didn't make 60 mpg small, light, cheap cars in the US because there was no profit in them. The question you should be asking; why was there no profit in them? The answer is because Americans did not, and IMO do not, want to drive such cars. Unless the government forces Americans to buy such cars the odds are when the people get used to the higher gas prices they will start buying big cars again. Just like they did after they got used to the higher gas prices after the 70's. And even then they will expect the auto companies to come up with some car to get around the government rules. I give you minivans and SUVs.

For the most part Americans spend much more time in their cars than any other people in the world. Therefore they want to be comfortable in them. They see them as more than a way to get from here to there and back. Americans are willing to pay almost as much for a car as they would for a home because they spend so much time in their cars. I saw a show on cars which told about how the German car companies couldn't understand why American drivers wanted, almost demanded, drink holders in their cars. This was because in Germany when you were in a car you were driving, not eating and drinking.


----------



## crafty2002 (Aug 23, 2006)

OntarioMan said:


> Chevron owns a battery technology - I'm sure that doesn't come as a big surprise to most anyone - and I'd assume that big oil companies own many other companies and many other energy related technologies. The assumption that they've purchased the technology to stifle the production of electric vehicles is the "consipiracy theory" - and I'm sure that only Chevron knows what their plans are for the technology.
> .


If you can't read between the lines on that one, I truely feel sorry for you, as well as about 99.9% of the people in this country. 

Mightybooboo told you everything you need to know but you refuse to open your mine to it. 
booboo, or maybe someone else here, can you help me out here?? These super battery packs that CHEVRON IS STIFLEING REGUARDLESS OF POPULAR BELIEF, Does any one here know the AmpHr's on these things and what volts, lets just say the EV-1 used ????

I was just wondering and doing some thinking. Lord help us now, LOL. 
What I was thinking is I can't see a battery pack putting out more than than a few KWH's before having to be recharged, so I did a fast google search on diesel generators. I realized something very interesting. 

Could we all agree that a car with batteries that gets 100 miles between recharges couldn't be pulling more than lets say 5KW's from the batteries at the most? You have to admit that this is a load coming from a battery pack. 
That is 250 amps for an hour @ 24 volts. I don't really know but I just can't see them pulling any more than that from a battery pack. 
I hope someone can tell me the amps and voltage they used so I will know. 

If I am correct in this thinking, since a car traveling 60 mph would go 90 miles in an hour and a half, and that is close to the average of the better batteries we have heard of so far.

Well, what I am getting at IS IF they are getting that on batteries, a SMALL GENERATOR would do that for them.
I did a search on diesel generators and a 9 HP deisel generator goes like this,, 
sells for $1,299 ( Very small addition to the cost of a new car.)
weighes 395# (counting a heavy duty frame and wheels. Probably would be 350# naked.)
has a 6KW continous out put.
Runs for 24 hours @ full output on 13 gallons of fuel.
Runs 35 hrs @ 50% output.
Is air cooled. (No need for extra weight for cooling)

If I am right about the max. AMPs that the battery pack in an EV-1 puts out, 
the car could run for 24 hours on 13 gallons of diesel fuel if you didn't even plug it in. 
60 MPH X 24 Hrs. = 1,440 miles > 13 gallons = 110.7 MPG. 
I wonder why the rail road companies use a diesel powered generator for engines???? 
Far less wear and tear on the drive train. There really isn't any to speak of. No flywhhel. No clutch. No transmition. I guess they have something that would equal a rear end in a vehicle. :shrug: Not sure about that.
But with an EV you get an easy and steady transition into the speed you desire instead of spilling everyones coffee all over them.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

crafty2002 said:


> If you can't read between the lines on that one, I truely feel sorry for you, as well as about 99.9% of the people in this country.
> 
> Mightybooboo told you everything you need to know but you refuse to open your mine to it.
> booboo, or maybe someone else here, can you help me out here?? These super battery packs that CHEVRON IS STIFLEING REGUARDLESS OF POPULAR BELIEF, Does any one here know the AmpHr's on these things and what volts, lets just say the EV-1 used ????
> ...




If it is that "simple" BUILD IT..

Don't waste your time trying to "convert" the unconvertable (if that is even a word)

Just do it......

But alas it isn't that simple that is why noone has done it yet other then the "big evil oil companies" and their ilk....

Amazing!


----------



## crafty2002 (Aug 23, 2006)

For the life of me, I can't understand how some people can't see past the blinders the govenment and big business has on them. 
They make blinders for horses to keep them in line while plowing and they make blinders so 99.9% of the people believe what they say.

I can't believe how blinded some people really are. Most people see it to a certain point when you point it out to them. They may not see the whole picture but they can see the princlipal of the whole picture is not in focus and they try to look around the blinders and even pull them off, but they are like I am. 
I know what the problem is. I have some good ideas that would work to fix the problem. But I am just a poo boy. I don't have the money to build a car even if I designed it. That doesn't mean the oil companies couldn't do so with the technology they bought and are setting on. 
If that isn't stifled, nothing in the world is. 
And I thought I was hard headed. At least when someone shows me something in black and white so I can understand it, I do so. 
Mightybooboo has said the first thing that isn't true and yet you still have the blinders on. 
How can 99% of a once great nation become so blinded???????


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

So what you are saying is that it is the government that is keeping 1000 mpg cars locked up... 

I'm lost which is it?

The government? 
or big oil?

Don't tell me they are one and the same..

because that means all those liberals who run the House and the Senate are involved and that means they are taking bribes to keep is quiet...

I mean Bush is an idiot, but yet seems to have so much power to keep this down.... One way or the other, it can't be both.....

Of course I must be one of those idiots that can't see past the blinders... 

I want smaller government and I'm a fiscal conservative, yet it seems that those who want larger government are the same one stating a government conspiricy(sp) and are on the left side of the political aisle... 

I'm really confused now!!!


----------



## OntarioMan (Feb 11, 2007)

No doubt, us North Americans are a wasteful bunch - and we do love our big gas guzzling vehicles. 



watcher said:


> You are correct, car makers didn't make 60 mpg small, light, cheap cars in the US because there was no profit in them. The question you should be asking; why was there no profit in them? The answer is because Americans did not, and IMO do not, want to drive such cars. Unless the government forces Americans to buy such cars the odds are when the people get used to the higher gas prices they will start buying big cars again. Just like they did after they got used to the higher gas prices after the 70's. And even then they will expect the auto companies to come up with some car to get around the government rules. I give you minivans and SUVs.
> 
> For the most part Americans spend much more time in their cars than any other people in the world. Therefore they want to be comfortable in them. They see them as more than a way to get from here to there and back. Americans are willing to pay almost as much for a car as they would for a home because they spend so much time in their cars. I saw a show on cars which told about how the German car companies couldn't understand why American drivers wanted, almost demanded, drink holders in their cars. This was because in Germany when you were in a car you were driving, not eating and drinking.


----------



## OntarioMan (Feb 11, 2007)

Read "between the lines" - thats called assumption and is the very foundation of consipiracy theories.

Make no mistake, I like electric cars, alternative energy, energy conservation, and all the "eco-stuff" that makes economic sense - and I'm honestly baffled by the wasteful attitudes/habits of us North Americans - however, I also believe that if there was true profit in and enough demand for an electric vehicle, we'd build it. One thing we like more than our big gas guzzling Hummers is money!

Believe what you like - and "Who Killed the Electric Car" was certainly entertaining and thought provoking - but I'm not so easily convinced, one way or the other.

As I mentioned previously - with the current rapid increase in fuel prices, the next 10 years should be a very interesting time - with lots of opportunities in and around "alternative energies". 



crafty2002 said:


> If you can't read between the lines on that one, I truely feel sorry for you, as well as about 99.9% of the people in this country.
> 
> Mightybooboo told you everything you need to know but you refuse to open your mine to it.
> ...


----------



## MELOC (Sep 26, 2005)

it's not hard to see that even with a market, there is more profitability for those invested in both the auto industry and the oil industry to continue with the status quo. even if making electric autos were highly profitable, the result would be product cannibalization if you look at the big picture as the result would be a decrease in oil profits.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Hard to separate Energy Policy from Politics,its just the way it is.They are related,cant discuss it without politics coming into play.The trick is to discuss the politics without getting into goring either parties cow and making the other sacred.They are ALL run,bought and paid for, by Oils money. 

My belief is King Oil runs the WORLD,hard to find fault with that.World doesnt exist as currently standing without it.

I also think almost ALL our politicians dance to Big Oils fiddle,at least the huge majority do.Its the Golden Rule...He who has the Gold,Rules.Thats pretty much World History,Money Rules.

Oil is the biggest fortune on the planet,to think they dont exercise World control equal to that fortune would be a stretch.

It isnt a Dem/Rep thing at all,they all are soaked in Oil.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

beowoulf90 said:


> So what you are saying is that it is the government that is keeping 1000 mpg cars locked up...
> I'm lost which is it?
> The government?
> or big oil?
> ...


Ahhh...but they are! Thats the rub.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

crafty2002 said:


> Does any one here know the AmpHr's on these things and what volts, lets just say the EV-1 used ????


This might help?

Did a google search, Nimh EV95 ,this thread here at Homesteading Today was the first thing up,LOL.

Heres some EV95 stats,the numbers are beyond me....On the Rav4
avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/eva/toyrav98.pdf

ACCELERATION 0-50 mph
At 100% SOC: 12.8 sec
At 50% SOC: 12.9 sec
Max. Power: 57.3 kW
Performance Goal: 13.5 sec at 50% SOC
MAXIMUM SPEED @ 50% SOC
At 1/4 Mile: 63.5 mph
At 1 Mile: 78.8 mph
Performance Goal: 70 mph in one mile
CONSTANT SPEED RANGE @ 45 mph3
Range: 110.9 miles
Energy Used: 23.34 kWh
Average Power: 9.55 kW
Efficiency: 210 Wh/mile
Specific Energy: 50.8 Wh/kg
CONSTANT SPEED RANGE @ 60 mph3
Range: 86.9 miles
Energy Used: 27.47 kWh
Average Power: 18.81 kW
Efficiency: 316 Wh/mile
Specific Energy: 59.6 Wh/kg
DRIVING CYCLE RANGE3,4
Range per SAE J1634: 94.0 miles
Energy Used: 23.01 kWh
Average Power: 6.88 kW
Efficiency: 245 Wh/mile
Specific Energy: 49.9 Wh/kg
Performance Goal: 60 miles

BATTERY
*Manufacturer: Panasonic*
Type: Nickel Metal Hydride
Number of Modules: 24
Weight of Module: 18.75 kg
Weight of Pack(s): 461 kg
Pack Locations: Underbody
Nominal Module Voltage: 12 V
Nominal System Voltage: 288 V
Nominal Capacity (C/3): 95 Ah


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

beowoulf90 said:


> If it is that "simple" BUILD IT..
> Just do it......
> But alas it isn't that simple that is why noone has done it yet other then the "big evil oil companies" and their ilk....
> 
> Amazing!


Its pretty simple for Toyota to build a Camry.Its pretty simple for Exide to build a battery. I bet most of US cant do either.

Now even if I could build a large battery.....NiMh,I cant. *Chevron/Cobasys controls the patent on NiMh battery 10Ah and larger.*

Remember that,the only PROVEN viable battery,now controlled by Chevron and NOT being licensed for large pack electric car usage.

Wouldnt cost them ANYTHING to license Panasonic to build them,in fact they would make money.And the market for them exists,electric car enthusiasts,small battery car makers would LOVE to have the EV95.

But Chevron wont LICENSE it. Why? 

*Why wont an OIL company license Panasonic to manufacture a viable electric car battery?*

Think hard now......


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

mightybooboo said:


> Its pretty simple for Toyota to build a Camry.Its pretty simple for Exide to build a battery. I bet most of US cant do either.
> 
> Now even if I could build a large battery.....NiMh,I cant. *Chevron/Cobasys controls the patent on NiMh battery 10Ah and larger.*
> 
> ...


If it has been proven then some one other then Chevron knows how to build it...

Make a few minor changes and build it.. When they take you to court for a patent violation you just show that you've changed it.... Also if it is such a great idea then you will have sold more then enough to cover your court costs and still make a profit... Or for that matter build it in another country... 

So don't feed me this idea that Chevron won't release it... There are ways around it... But apparently those with the money don't think it is a viable option..... or they would have done it by now... 

How many knock-offs in the electronic market are there? I would guess hundreds......


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

*The patent covers ANY Nimh pack larger than 10AH*. Nimh is dependant on large packs,small packs wont charge or discharge evenly.

Nimh Large Pack is firmly patented.

More of the pesky FACTS surrounding the ONLY proven,reliable electric car battery ever produced.

Now they ARE trying for a battery,as in LI-Ion,as they arent stifled by the NiMh patents.

Nimh,large pack,is lost,cant be made by anyone else.Thats a fact,period.Accept it,like the World has.
Or Panasonic would be building them,as would others.

So dont feed you Chevron wont release the licensing???? Thats what they have DONE! Going to deny that? That is what has happened,deny away,its FACT.Chevron owns NiMh patent above 10AH.Period.Done deal.Fact.

And again....

*Why wont an OIL company release the licensing to the TECHNOLOGY of the ONLY proven battery for electric vehicles?*

Panasonic wants it and built it until Chevron got the patent and shut em down.The patent owned by Ovonics,paid for with US taxpayer dollars,bought that part of the company by GM,who sold it to Chevron.

Let me answer that question for you.... *BECAUSE IT IS A THREAT TO THE OIL COMPANY and the HIGH PROFIT MODEL OF THE VEHICLE MANUFACTURERS OF 100 year old technology..*

That is the only reason.Chevron has stated as much,that they will never allow such a battery for a pure BEV to exist,that they wont make that mistake again.

Which is a lesson they learned and why they are deep into the the LI-Ion manufacturers too,obviously they dont intend to RELEASE an electric car battery,as EV95 has Clearly proven.

At least clear to anyone who wants to think and draw obvious conclusions.

*When an OIL company buys the patent from the automaker, owns the electric car battery technology and wont release the licensing,it is being shelved. *Its that simple.

And QUITE beneficial to both Oil and Auto too.

Cant have a simple battery car thats highly reliable,with many fewer parts.Oh,thats been proven BTW by the utility SCE out here too.The actual *FACTUAL* numbers on its reliability as a vehicle are on the net if youre interested.

But a highly reliable,simple car,with far fewer parts,independent of oil,WHY would the automakers or big OIL find that a problem,hmmmmm.....??

SURELY they wouldnt put the kibosh on such a vehicle,not with their huge political clout.

Yep,the battery hasnt been shelved (even though *FACTUALLY* we KNOW it has,they cant be built per now Chevrons PATENT),move along...nothing to see here...Take your Red or Blue pill.

And that Folks is what happened to EV95 and electric vehicles that actually worked.Like the *FACTUALLY* proven highly reliable Electric trucks driven by Southern California Edison.The FACTS are out there. SCE published their entire results on the Electric fleet.HIGHLY RELIABLE vehicles.

Deny away. Goebbels would be proud at how effective the Propaganda has been concerning electric vehicles and viability.Even to this day the MSM wont report the TRUTH on what they DID do,real world,10 YEARS ago!

BooBoo <----"The FACTS are out there,only takes an open mind and to seek them out,Long live the Internet!"


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

So How many people worked for the automaker?

They must all be dead or paid som serious hush money..... 

I love all these conspiricy(sp) theories.. 

I mean seriously the "IPhone" was out 3 months before all the other companies had similar phones...

If they were so profitable they would be built...... but at $80,000 they can't sell enough to be profitable even with all the "oil" products used to build it..... There isn't many of us who can afford that kind of outlay of money for a vehicle. 


But then it isn't about "the people" it's about the government gaining control of the people... with the help of those who see conspiricy(sp) in any big company....

You can show me the "facts" all day long from the web, I can show you that live still exists on mars from the web.... 

I really can't wait till they do build it, but till it is profitable and reliable it isn't going to happen on a large scale...

I know you are just going to tell me I'm a deny-er Ok, fine.... I just don't "read between the lines" to find conspiricies(sp)


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

No conspiracy,Im not talking car here.We are talking EV95.The BATTERY,not the cars.They arent the issue here,the battery EV95 IS. Where is EV95?

SHELVED.Fact.

Im talking electric car battery.

And your right ,its NOT a conspiracy,its fact.

The battery licensing has been shelved and the patent for it is shelved.

These are Facts.

1-Is NOT being Licensed
2-Is not being built (though Panasonic did and wanted to cont. building under license,DENIED!)
3-Is owned by Oil company
4-Is only proven tech for electric car battery
5-Had good range and long life

What part of those facts are wrong?

And building an electric car super battery is not the same as making a phone,nor is 'phone' patented,unlike large pack Nimh.You keep missing that point.*ITS PATENTED*.They cant make a large pack,hence why they are going Li-Ion.

So why do you INSIST they can (when Panasonic cant,FACT),the REALITY is no you cant.Or they would.Wouldnt they? Panasonic found them profitable.

And no,you cant just steal the patent,build it elsewhere and sell it anywhere. That gets you sued,and gets the sellers sued.

*So anyway,what isnt fact in my 5 points?*


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

If and when you address 1-5,we can talk about why a HANDBUILT super EXTREME HIGH TECH car costs 80,000 and why Joe blow can build a basic one for 10,000.

Must be the 70,000 dollar Nimh batteries and electric motor,eh?

Then we can talk WHY,if no demand for electric car batteries why are companies around the world spending 100's of millions trying to build one?Looks lke some serious demand to me,companies going nutso trying to build it.For a no demand product,hmmmm...doesnt quite add up.....

And if its so easy to just change a few things on the Nimh large pack battery,why arent they, and are instead spending such huge sums to develop one COMPLETELY different from the PROVEN,RELIABLE EV95?

Hmmm.... could a patent be standing in their way? Sounds like poor business sense,world wide,to develop something different if its so easy to overcome Chevrons NiMh patent.


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

Number 6 - It's not safe

The NMIH battery has an internal flaw that is yet to be worked out. Just do a little search on the exploding ones in laptops. The problem is worse with larger battery packs. Can you imagine the liability problems if that happens in a car. I don't blame Cobasys (the Chevron Subsidarary) in not liscensing of manufacturing it *YET*. They are working on it but will not release it until they are done. Do you really want them to end up like Firestone and the Exploder (Explorer)? Do you remember the Pinto? How many of them actually had the tanks explode? Yet they turned into a nightmare for Ford. If Cobasys released this how many of them do you think would have to explode before a suit was filed?

Guess we will find out in 2014 when the patent runs out.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Now why would this HANDBUILT EV1,with HANDBUILT components and electronics cost 80,000 dollars?I would think it would be cheap to Build HANDBUILT knockoffs of this SUPER CAR. Heck,other HANDBUILT SUPER CARS are cheap,eh?

Just makes no sense that the HANDBUILT SUPER CAR is expensive.
------------------------------------------------------

click to enlarge



The EV1 is a full-featured car. This car was designed with your three prime concerns in mind: Safety, comfort and style. The EV1 features air bags, traction control and an anti-lock braking system (ABS).

What's amazing about the electric car is what went into it. And what didn't.
The EV1 has no engine because it doesn't need one. No tailpipe because it has no exhaust. It has no valves. No pistons. No timing belts. No crankshaft.

What does the EV1 have? Some remarkable electronics and a revolutionary new propulsion system. The most aerodynamic body shape of any production car, ever. One of the lightest, stiffest structures for a car its size. Super-low-rolling resistance 50 psi Michelin tires with wheels that weigh only 8.5 pounds. In addition to these innovations, the electric car also has an intelligent braking system that can regenerate energy and send it back to the batteries, a heat pump like the one used in some homes, and seven sophisticated on-board computers that control everything from the interior temperature to charging the battery pack.

Charging toward the future.
Forget the gas station. Drivers of the EV1 have a 220-volt MagneCharge" inductive charging system installed in their homes. Charging the EV1 is as simple as inserting the charge paddle in the charge port at the front of the car before turning in for the night. While you are sleeping, the master computer in the car informs the charger how much energy is needed. When charging is complete, the charger display shows that the car is fully charged.


Should you ever need an extra charge on the road in the lead-acid EV1, there is a portable charger in the trunk, which plugs into an ordinary 110-volt outlet.

The EV1 also offers most of the standards you've come to expect: Power windows, power door locks and power dual outside mirrors, air conditioning, cruise control, remote trunk and hood releases, and a premium AM/FM stereo with cassette and CD player. This vehicle also offers programmable climate control , an electric windshield defogger/deicer, as well as a rear window defogger, and center-mounted instrumentation.

The EV1 does not require a conventional key to unlock the door. A five-digit personal identification code is entered on the exterior keypad to allow access. No key is needed to start the car, either. The same five-digit code is entered on the keypad on the center console to activate the car.

The EV1 has a sporty look all its own, and was produced in three colors, Bright Red, Light Adriatic Blue Metallic and Medium Green Pearl.


General Motors EV1 - GEN II.
The second generation GM EV1 is a purpose-built electric vehicle with software upgrades, refined ride and handling, improvements in fit and finish, and new plush upholstery, with two battery technologies: An advanced, high-capacity lead acid, and an optional Nickel Metal Hydride.

Propulsion.
The Gen II is powered by a 137 horsepower, 3-phase AC induction motor and uses a single speed dual reduction gear set with a ratio of 10.946:1. The Gen II propulsion system has an improved drive unit, battery pack, power electronics, 6.6 kW charger, and heating and thermal control module.

Batteries.
26 valve-regulated high-capacity lead-acid (PbA) batteries are the new standard for the EV1 battery pack. These advanced batteries are an improvement over the pack available with the first generation EV1 and offer greater range and longer life. And an optional nickel-metal hydride (NiMH) battery pack. This technology nearly doubles the range over the first generation battery and offers improved battery life as well.

Range.
The EV1 with the high-capacity lead-acid pack has an estimated real world driving range of 55 to 95 miles, depending on terrain, driving habits and temperature. The range with the NiMH pack is even greater. Again, depending on terrain, driving habits, temperature and humidity, estimated real world driving range will vary from 75 to 130 miles.

Charging.
The EV1 can be charged safely in all weather conditions with inductive charging. Using a 220-volt charger, charging from 0 to 100% for the new lead-acid pack takes up to 5.5 to 6 hours. Charging for the nickel-metal hydride pack, which stores more energy, is 6 to 8 hours.

Blended Re-generative Braking.
Braking is accomplished by using a blended combination of front hydraulic disk, and rear electrically-applied drum brakes and the electric propulsion motor. During braking, the electric motor generates electricity (re-generative) which is then used to partially recharge the battery pack.

Aluminum Structure.
The structure weighs 290 pounds and is less than 10% of the total vehicle weight. The 162 pieces are bonded together into a unit using aerospace adhesive, spot welds and rivets.

Composite Body Panels.
The exterior body panels are dent and corrosion resistant. They are made out of composites and are created using two forming processes known as Sheet Molding Compound (SMC) and Reinforced Reaction Injection Molding (RRIM).

Aerodynamics.
The EV1 is the most aerodynamic production vehicle on the road today. It has a 0.19 drag coefficient. It's shaped like a tear drop when viewed from above. In fact, the rear wheels are 9 inches closer together than the front wheels, which allows the tear drop shape. The EV1 is the world's most energy-efficient vehicle platform.

Specifications.
The EV1 has an electronically-regulated top speed of 80 miles per hour. It comes with traction control, cruise control, anti-lock brakes, airbags*, power windows, power door locks and power outside mirrors, AM/FM CD/cassette, tire inflation monitor system and numerous other features.

(source: General Motors Corporation).


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

wy_white_wolf said:


> Number 6 - It's not safe
> 
> The NMIH battery has an internal flaw that is yet to be worked out. Just do a little search on the exploding ones in laptops. The problem is worse with larger battery packs. Can you imagine the liability problems if that happens in a car. I don't blame Cobasys (the Chevron Subsidarary) in not liscensing of manufacturing it *YET*. They are working on it but will not release it until they are done. Do you really want them to end up like Firestone and the Exploder (Explorer)? Do you remember the Pinto? How many of them actually had the tanks explode? Yet they turned into a nightmare for Ford. If Cobasys released this how many of them do you think would have to explode before a suit was filed?
> 
> Guess we will find out in 2014 when the patent runs out.


*There has NEVER been a catastrophic failure of EV95 unless you have a source I dont*.And EV95 is far advanced over a poorly designed NiMh laptop someone tossed out. 

No more a connection than comparing a Kia to a Rolls,both are cars,the similarity ends there.

Of course there are many people killed in accidents and flames from petrol,I guess batteries are held to a higher standard?Or electric cars?

ALL vehicles have dangers in driving and ALL have death inducing accidents.


----------



## wy_white_wolf (Oct 14, 2004)

> Now why would this HANDBUILT EV1,with HANDBUILT components and electronics cost 80,000 dollars?I would think it would be cheap to Build HANDBUILT knockoffs of this SUPER CAR. Heck,other HANDBUILT SUPER CARS are cheap,eh?


Maybe you should ask Tesla.

$109,000 base price and it has about half the features of the EV1 and they don't have to go through all the testing that GM does. Your exempt from that little regulation if you build less than 2000 units a year.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Tesla is building HANDBUILT electric carbon fiber EXOTICA-CARS

Whats a Ferrari running now a days?


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Of course this MAN built this electric for cheap. He did it.Lets say he used a Nissan mini truck,could purchase NEW for 14000 base vehicle,sell tons of parts,and convert for 10,000.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6RswTmhGKo&feature=related[/ame]

That makes a 20,000 dollar electric.Meets safety laws right up to engine/batteries.

Of course he doesnt have the *60,000* EV95 to bring the price up to 80 grand.Nor does he have handbuilt aluminum frame,composite body panels,HEAT PUMP airconditioning,titanium framing,fiberglass reinforced dash,7 computers,regen braking,electric ABS brakes,electric power steering,etc etc etc.Yep,he isnt making a HIGH TECH SHOWCASE of bleeding edge technology is he? 

Then again isnt EV95 actually producible at around 7-10,000 in factory production?So the bean counters say.

Anyhow,I SEE an easy 20,000 electric vehicle if manufactured by Nissan for example.Though I DONT see Nissan producing a lead acid cell vehicle.Not the best answer at all if you want to sell them with all the lead acid shortcomings.

Maybe thats why Nissan is full speed ahead on pure Li-Ion vehicles.And no,I doubt 20,000 dollar price too if Li-Ion.But it will be marketable,they want to move into electric big time and see it as the future of automotive transition from 100 year old Dino Tech.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

mightybooboo said:


> Tesla is building HANDBUILT electric carbon fiber EXOTICA-CARS
> 
> Whats a Ferrari running now a days?


Who knows and who cares, I can't afford a Ferrari either and don't expect to ever afford or run a Ferrari... 

Since you seem to have all the facts, why aren't you building it? There is a reason why they aren't releasing it and it's not that they are trying to hide it away to keep you suckling the oil wells...... 

So do you also hate "big water" companies also... I mean where in the world do they get off charging us $2 for a $.05 bottle of water... and all the enviromental damage from those oil produced plastic bottles...


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

Yep,Im going to tool up and build Camry knockoffs.That'll work.Bet it costs me waaaay over 80,000 to do it.

Or why dont I build an EV95 battery? Nobody else can,I should be able.

*BTW,going to comment on the 5 points?* Or is that just a conspiracy? 

The 5 points remain FACTS.

Also,what about that bug the man built? Wheres the 'it costs 80 G to build an electric'?

Guess thats vaporware conspiracy too?


----------



## fishhead (Jul 19, 2006)

It makes wonder how long it would take for Chevron to claim the $300 Million taxpayer dollars for the battery prize if McCain gets in AND it's true that Chevron is already sitting on a suitable battery.

Has anyone looked at the Rocky Mt Institutes hybrid that is supposed to outperform existing gas burners. I listened to an NPR program with Amory Lovins. He said that they have patented the vehicle and offered it FREE to any car company that will build it.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

A Lithium Polymer battery manufacturing video.Pretty labor intensive.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqywKcJ0J2M&feature=related[/ame]


A commercial Lead Acid battery manufacturer.A BIT more automated assembly line....

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJP30myFOiw[/ame]


AMAZING what an assembly line does to speed things up,pretty cool video.Click on 'Watch in High Quality',it even loads faster

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq7N21TEMKA&feature=related[/ame]


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

mightybooboo said:


> These are Facts.
> 
> 1-Is NOT being Licensed
> 2-Is not being built (though Panasonic did and wanted to cont. building under license,DENIED!)
> ...


1. Neither is the blind 98 yo who drove all her life. it proves nothing.. yes it is a fact, but what it has to do with why it's not being built is beyond me.

2. obviously! (sp) but why was Pansonic denied? because it's a fire hazard and not ready for production, or is it because they lied about how good it actually is? In plain english "We don't know why?"

3. And that proves what? Singer used to own Greyhound, what does that prove... Yellow Corporation owns Yellow Freight and Roadway plus other companies... I guess they are locking down the transportation industry..

4. Refer to #2 If it has been proven then there are others out there that can do it again... but you keep telling me it is patented, so there is no way to prove this is a fact..

5. Refer to #2 and #4 You can't prove that since "they" are the only ones to have it.....

Do I have to continue or are you going to drink more of the "alternative power is the savior of the world" koolaid... regardless of the facts.


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

beowoulf90 said:


> 1. Neither is the blind 98 yo who drove all her life. it proves nothing.. yes it is a fact, but what it has to do with why it's not being built is beyond me.
> 
> 2. obviously! (sp) but why was Pansonic denied? because it's a fire hazard and not ready for production, or is it because they lied about how good it actually is? In plain english "We don't know why?"
> 
> ...


Your Knowledge of EV95 is lacking,as is your knowledge of what vehicles they were used in,in fact in the entire EV95 history.Im willing to bet you knew nothing of SCE and their fleet of vehicles powered by EV95's.

If you dont wish to learn about the subject and wish to remain uninformed more power to you.But at least attack them factually and quit pretending they were vapor ware and never performed when the truth is they did.And Very well,thank you very much.

So those are the FACTS.

A little Blurb about EV95's,not the technical reports,but a release on the project....
---------------------------------
http://www.edison.com/pressroom/pr.asp?bu=&id=3611&year=2002

Utility's EV Fleet Is First Anywhere to Log 8.5 Million Miles
LOS ANGELES, Calif., Nov. 7, 2002-*The odometer on one of Southern California Edison's (SCE) electric vehicles (EVs) rolled over to 100,000 miles today-the farthest any plug-in EV anywhere has traveled in real-world driving applications.*

Coincidentally, the EV milestone was reached as the Coalition for Clean Air held a celebration at Union Station marking "30 years of clean-air progress."

SCE and Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A, Inc., tracked the performance and reliability of five RAV-4 EVs until *they each reached the 100,000-mile mark using their original nickel-metal-hydride battery packs*. Two of the five vehicles are expected to achieve that milestone in early 2003.

SCE's 275 EVs are used primarily by the utility's meter readers, service managers, field representatives, service planners and mail handlers, and for security patrols and carpools. *In 12-plus years of operation, SCE's fleet of EVs has logged nearly 8.5 million miles, *eliminating more than 1,000 tons of air pollutants, preventing the emission of 4,500 tons of tailpipe carbon dioxide emissions, *avoiding the need for 1,700 oil changes, saving 421,500 gallons of gasoline, and reducing fuel costs by nearly $250,000.*


----------



## mightybooboo (Feb 10, 2004)

OK,you win.

EV95 didnt work.

Alternate Energy doesnt work.

Oil companies have no vested interests in keeping competitors out of the game.

To waste any further time with you on this is futile.

For those of you who have gleaned anything useful about EV95,the PROVEN,RELIABLE electric car battery,you are Welcome.

Me? Im off to take a petroleum shower ( I must stay Oil soaked), then take my Red pill,I take the Blue pill on odd numbered days,but I always get my pill in.

BooBoo <----- "It'll NEVER work" 

"NEVER,EVER,ALTERNATE ENERGY DOESNT WORK,CANT WORK,ISNT WORKING NOW,AND WILL NEVER NEVER EVER WORK"


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

LOL, now you are funny.... I never said it wouldn't work... I'm actually one of the ones who hopes it works.... but to rely on THEIR word that it words so well is just nuts....

I don't want to have to pay, BIG OIL, BIG ELECTRIC companies my hard earned cash... I also don want to have to bow down to the GOVERNMENT and pay them for trying to be the "God send" of the world... BIG GOVERNMENT is just as bad as BIG OIL, BIG ELECTRIC if not worse...
All I said was if it worked that well it would be in production....

Why did it take almost 40 years till microwaves first came into the home.... They were first used in the 1940's... Because it took a while till they could refine them to a point of not being a hazard...and to get them down to size...

But of course I'm just a crazy old man and know nothing of what goes on in the world.

Oh and when you are done whinning try looking at the reality of it all and "Do it yourself"

It would be a great money making opportunity for whom ever produces this technology for the masses... Well at least to those who make $150,000 a year or more... you know the type those who use more power in a month then the average family does in a year...


Have a perfectly horrible day...


----------

