What is Digg?65 Comments
- michaelpinto, on 10/23/2009, -0/+43Clark is hitting a truth that we need to embrace as Americans: When you fill up your car with oil, those funds go to places where people fund the folks who are shooting at our guys in Iraq and Afghanistan. We aren't going to stop using oil overnight, but we owe to those folks putting their lives on the line to everything that we can.
- MacBookForMe, on 10/23/2009, -0/+35A pretty smart & strategic word from one general...
- WordsnCollision, on 10/23/2009, -0/+28"reduce", "dependence", "foreign"... seems like a no-brainer to me.
- twiztidsinz, on 10/23/2009, -1/+14Yes.. because clearly a random digger is more trustworthy than a retired General...
- digitalArtform, on 10/23/2009, -0/+8From a windswept corner of Hokkaido, Japan's northernmost island, Japan Steel Works Ltd. controls the fate of the global nuclear-energy renaissance.
There stands the only plant in the world, a survivor of Allied bombing in World War II, capable of producing the central part of a nuclear reactor's containment vessel in a single piece, reducing the risk of a radiation leak.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&am ... - copypastry, on 10/23/2009, -0/+8I've always liked Clark. He's a pragmatic + down to earth general.
- DangerCollie, on 10/23/2009, -0/+8Glad someone with a brain finally stood up and mentioned foreign oil in the context of a strategic mission. Funny when the price isn't $4.00/gallon how it just sort of drops off the radar screen as a concern.
The Saudis and oil companies spend huge amounts of money trying to insure our energy policy doesn't change. - Sean42, on 10/23/2009, -0/+8Gen Clark is a smart guy and a patriot with good ideas.
Energy independence is the single most significant way to stop funding the people that hate us. Period. - kaosethema, on 10/23/2009, -1/+7transportation and medicine
two industries that put us ahead of everyone else when led by pioneers
and then held us back when led by oligarchs - digitalArtform, on 10/23/2009, -2/+8Don't worry. Nobody is listening to him.
We've already transferred our workforce and manufacturing to foreign hands. You will be pleased to know that we are at their mercy. - AmnesiacJack, on 10/23/2009, -1/+6Going Nuclear as our primary power source in the USA would solve a lot of problems (IMO at least).
Gets rid of the need for coal power.
Can boost our electrical grid to the levels needed to sustain an EV market.
Is technology that is available and proven to work.
Creates jobs that stay in the country. - ScreenRant, on 10/23/2009, -8/+12I agree. Too bad that we're not allowed to use nuclear or coal to create the electricity needed to power those vehicles because it's, you know, bad.
- DOCNM, on 10/23/2009, -0/+3I had no idea. Fascinating.
Thanks. - grumpyrain, on 10/23/2009, -0/+3^ Actually EVs are the key to substantially increasing non base load renewables. The problem with most renewables is that they are not reliable enough to use at higher than about 20% of the mix. Otherwise on overcast, windless days your capacity to produce power suffers.
But imagine 5 million EVs in a large city, where at any time at least 60% are plugged into the grid. That is 3 million EVs worth of energy that can be used as a massive distributed capacitor. On sunny and high wind days where your plants are all approaching capacity, you can actually store the energy that would be unused. On dull still days, you can buy back from the distributed EVs previous capacity.
Of course there is a lot of infrastructure that would have to be in place to track all this, but the potential is quite exciting. - Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+3I don't care what his stake is. HE IS RIGHT.
- BluesFan, on 10/24/2009, -0/+3The Tesla model s is coming out in 2 years, expensive but the closest thing to a regular looking car as you can get.
http://www.ridelust.com/wp-content/uploads/tesla_m ...
The 15 inch LCD looks awesome as well.
http://peakoilgarage.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/t ... - Solkre, on 10/23/2009, -0/+3Screw that, I'll look forward to the day when I can use my EV to watch angry Hitler videos!
- Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+3Its called FUD its called BS its called totall freaking bull *****.
you want EV's ? here is how to do it for ZERO tax payer dollars.
FIRST order of business. RECIND the Chevron NIMH patent
SECOND order of business
MANDATE that car makers start using the NIMH tech to put UNDER $15,000 cars (ABSOLUTELY DOABLE see my MANY posts on the subject I break it down to the dollar) on the road within 6 months (ALSO very doable with OFF THE SHELF PARTS)
There your EV problem is solved.
alas GM killed them Chevron buried them and our Government Helped (search 60 minutes miles per gallon for the 60 minutes interview with the tax man about the $100,000 hummer tax) - warrickneff, on 10/23/2009, -2/+5I love the idea of EVs, but Clark needs to make sure that this doesn't get taken out of context.
We can see directly which countries the United States gets it's oil from here:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_ ...
Iraq has only been around 5% of the total imports that the U.S has been getting for the last few years. Canada exports about 4 or 5 times that much to the U.S every year.
I realize that reducing dependence on other countries can usually only be a good thing, but don't get too out of hand saying "fund the folks who are shooting at our guys" because 95% of them aren't. - Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+2While solar as a replacement for home power is NOT here yet (as you no doubt are alluding too you still need POWER when cloudy or at night or high amp demand)
but to offset something SMALLER solar does work.
a grid tie in allows the power you generate to be USED by the grid. so when the panels are at there peak output MID DAY the grid now has to supply LESS POWER since you are feeding power into it via your panels.
the utilities in 47 states BUY BACK this power from you at cost avoided rates.
if if you generate 30000 watts you pay 30000 watts less on your electric bill. so if you use 200,000 watts and generate 30,000 watts you only pay for 170,000 watts of power.
a $1000 solar panel from nano solar WILL generate MORE POWER each month on average in all 48 states (Obviously Hawaii as well but likely NOT in alaska unless you really upped the size of the array) but this will generate more power each month THAN YOU WILL USE to charge an EV.
now you are ZERO demand on the grid (as some like to think you will be incorrectly)
now you are 100% pollution free
and 100% FREE OF COST (the only really important factor to me being clean is a nice bonus nothing more) ie you drive for FREE now.
Once you have STORAGE capacity YES you could charge your car off solar alone. your solar panels would recharge your storage banks and that storage bank would recharge your car. We are not that far along yet but we are getting closer.
as for RUNNING a car off solar. RUNNING a car off solar implies you never plug the car in ie JUST solar panels. NO this would not work. you would need a rather massive solar array (because now its not just watts but its x watts in x time to recharge)
NO this is not possible. DIRECTLY on the car you just don't have enough surface area. MAYBE if you could make something the size of a 40ft RV but with the mass a drag of a metro then MAYBE you could run pure solar but thats not possible so NO.
as for CHARGE directly from a solar array. this IS possible but not FEASIBLE. you would need at least a $10,000 array (at nano solars 90cents a watt pricing) and if it was not bright and sunny when you plugged in ......
no the only feasible solution is to sell the E you generate from morning to night back to the utility in enough "quantity" to offset what you use charging the car. ie ZERO SUM. - Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+2Clearly you don't again I guess you think tinker bell puts the gasoline into your fuel tank.
this is just numbers for maths sake but lets say it takes 8000watts to drive your car 100 miles as an EV and it takes 10,000watts of power to put 5 gallons of gas in your 20mpg car to go 100miles. (not I am including ALL power used that would no longer NEED to be used in an EV environment from signs to pumps to gas stations to refining ETC.. ETC.. ETC..
well lets see it takes MORE WATTS to put 5 gallons into your tank than it does to charge my car to drive the same 100 miles.
what do you know this means overall grid demand GOES DOWN. wow what a concept.
is the math simple enough for you? - InactiveUser, on 10/23/2009, -0/+2I think that works for any nation and any single individual. Energy independence is achievable now for the first time and in the future more so. Embrace it - Disconnect from the grid and take responsibility for your own energy needs. More jobs - More businesses - more technology - less shareholders mooching off the system.
- Wargala, on 10/23/2009, -1/+3Personally I like the compressed air car.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztFDqcu8oJ4&fea ...
You can get your electricity to power the compressor from anywhere, including solar panels on the roof of your house, you don't have toxic chemicals of batteries, and the tanks are carbon fiber, so in the event of a crash, you don't have an explosion or a torpedo on your hands, you just have an air leak. - EddiePotato, on 10/23/2009, -1/+3It's not about the capacity to generate, it's about the fuel needed to generate. Sure, a lot of generators are idle in the wee hours right now, but as nighttime electrical demand goes up, so will the need for generator fuel.
- TheMachine1, on 10/23/2009, -1/+3Maybe not there is extra electrical generating capacity at night when many people would likely be recharging.
- Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+2Your clueless. OVERALL electrical demand will GO DOWN not UP when we switch to electric cars.
Let me ask you something.
First understand the average MPG in the us right now is 20mpg
so lets use 100 miles as the figure.
it takes about $2 in electricity to go 100miles in a decent nimh powered electric car ($1 in a two seater like the EV1)
it takes 5 gallons of gasoline to go 100 miles in a IC car.
NOW ask your self this. HOW does that 5 gallons of fuel get from where it came from to your CAR's fuel tank.
Tinker Bell?
NO with ELECTRICITY. powering the pumps. powering the stations. powering the signs the bill boards the advertising on radio tv the refineries etc.. etc.. etc.. etc..
While I can not show you math there is SO MUCH power being used to move that 5 gallons around I can say VERY confidently that it takes MORE ELECTRICITY to put that 5 gallons into your fuel tank than it does to "charge" up an EV to go 100 miles.
TOTAL electrical demand will go DOWN NOT UP.
NOT ONLY that but an electric car makes a very small solar panel a VERY SMART investment. for $2700 you could make your car ZERO pollution and ZERO load on the grid.
I could easily see an incentive to "add" $2700 to the purchase price and you get the tie in and solar array with the car on your home's roof.
THERE IS NO DOWNSIDE TO EV's for the consumer. ONLY to corporations and government which is why we don't have them. - Nerys, on 10/26/2009, -0/+2Well since I am not using nuclear power here in levittown you don't provide me with jack *****.
its called context you moron. when I say consumes 10,000 watts (takes 10,000 watts) CLEARLY watt hours is the unit being referred to.
I think you have your head up the ass of too many atoms. Come down to earth for a while.
all I know is that JUST THE MONEY I SAVE IN FUEL will more than 100% pay for an electric car if an affordable one was made.
all I know is we would be that much closer to complete energy independance with EV's only our planes trains and military would need fuel and our DOMESTIC oil supply is more than enough for THOSE uses.
all I know is the advances in battery tech and solar panels that would be INEVITABLE with a switch to EV's would render our power grid obsolete and render us virtually IMMUNE to any for of "grid" attack simply because there would BE NO GRID LEFT. it would be million of little independent "grids"
Look what happened when Cali passed CARB initially. in TWO FREAKING YEARS an auto maker with the resources and cash to throw money and man power at the problems SOLVED the electric car problems. SOLVED THEM COMPLETELY in 2 stinking years.
We went from unusable short live heavy 40mile range LEAD acid powered cars to 100-160+ mile range NIMH powered cars with batteries that would last 3 times longer than your likely to even HAVE the car and a power plant that will OUTLIVE YOUR CHILDREN.
in 2 freaking years.
HELL just imagine the TRICKLE down impact battery tech improvement would have on every field on the planet.
its a ***** no brainer Mr smashed too many atoms Jackadd9.
If you don't see it your either STUPID or you have more to gain with the status quo. - Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+2Just go LED then. it takes a lot of DIY right now but I have almost half my house converted to LED.
the kitchen and all the bathrooms are all LED now and they are BRIGHTER and WHITER than with CFL's and use about 1/3 the power of the CFL's they replaced. (1/4 the power in the kitchen)
I actually had to REMOVE a few led's as my family complained it was too bright!
sadly the wonderful 1.5 watt bulbs I was getting at sam's club for $5 a pop are no longer available. bastards.
2 of the bedrooms are now 100% led as well.
The problem with solar is storage. Once they have long life cheap batteries IE think super caps that I can bury in the foundation and feed from and send the solar too THEN solar will be practical.
Generation is already cheaper than your utility. Nano Solar is selling (not the consumers yet) solar panels at 90cents a watt. Cheaper than coal. the problem for the end user is storage. - Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+2they did not hate us until we started ***** WITH THEM.
and our soldiers pay the freaking price for this meddling. Makes me sick. - Sean42, on 10/23/2009, -0/+2read up on him before you make uninformed comments.
- Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+2I use all electric power tools.
I use an electric lawnmower and chain saw
THE ONLY thing I use "gas" or "oil" in is my car
the ONLY reason I do not have an electric car is because GM Chevron and our Lovely US Government arranged it that way ON PURPOSE. NO not some stupid conspiracy just planning and intent.
Once I have an electric car I will be 0% oil. Coal may be dirty as hell but its DOMESTIC and I can offset that with my own power generation (solar wind etc..)
eventually I will "CUT" the grid line into my home once super capacitors allow me to effectively and affordably store my own energy.
making each home and neighborhood an independant power source unto itself will also render terrorists threats MOOT regarding the power grid because there will BE NO power grid to attack. - Nerys, on 10/25/2009, -0/+2irrelevant. $1700 for a grid tie in.
$1000 for a solar panel from Nano Solar
your car is now 100% pollution free 100% Free to drive and uses ZERO electricity (over all) from the grid.
screw nuclear screw coal screw whatever. I want electric because its CHEAPER and it makes me INDEPENDENT of my government and my utilities. - DrNemo, on 10/23/2009, -4/+5Because "our guys" have anything to do in foreign countries which happen to have oil? They wouldn't be shooting at us if we weren't bombing them and shooting at them in the first place.
- hasahugedig, on 10/23/2009, -5/+6give this guy a Noble Peace Prize!
- fooljoe, on 10/25/2009, -1/+2I can show you the math:
A gallon of gasoline contains 35kwh of energy. 8kwh are used just to refine and transport that gallon from the oil well to your local filling station.
The average car goes 20 miles on that gallon of gas; the average EV goes 4 miles per kwh, or 32 MILES DRIVEN ON JUST THE ENERGY REQUIRED TO REFINE A GALLON OF GASOLINE.
Nerys is absolutely correct, not only does the grid already have plenty of excess off-peak capacity to charge millions of EVs, but every petroleum-powered car switched to an EV actually SAVES electricity.
And not only that, but as Nerys mentioned, when you own an EV you soon realize that it makes perfect sense to put the money you previously wasted on gas into a roof-mounted photovoltaic system. Most of today's EV drivers do this and actually produce more energy than they consume with both their EVs and residential needs combined.
Of course not everyone would be able to do this but it's just another of a huge laundry list of reasons why EVs make so much sense. And why we need them NOW, not more BS news about the latest concept EV, or more excuses from GM about why we don't have the Volt yet (or the EV1, for that matter.) - Suricou, on 10/24/2009, -0/+1Oil is a rather inelastic demand. The sudden loss of even 5% of production would result in a significent price rise. For evidence, see this graph:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3203/2727791531_de0 ...
You can clearly see the impact of regional crises. Iranian revolution, the golf war, 2003 Iraq invasion.
The graph is a little outdated - it's come down quite a lot since it ended, due to the increasing stability of Iraq and repair of oil production capability. - ScreenRant, on 10/25/2009, -0/+1"grid tie in"? As in "plug it in"? Where does that power come from? And do you think you can run a car on a solar panel?
- Sean42, on 10/23/2009, -0/+1@ jerrdalton. spoken like a true small-minded nut. And your comment history is pathetic. All hail the mighty faux-news corporation and their foreign-born leader who tries to influence politics in this country.
- inactive, on 10/24/2009, -0/+1*Noble* Peace Prize?
- Suricou, on 10/24/2009, -0/+1Idiot or not, it is untidy to dismis an argument purely due to the speaker. Argue against what he says, not who says it.
The only time it is appropriate to dismiss an argument on the basis of the speaker is when the argument is beyond your own comprehension and so you are forced to rely on the judgement of a claimed expert who may not be trustworthy. but in this case, I think the argument is simple enough to address directly. - eocarroll, on 10/23/2009, -4/+5"Clark also compared the current status of electric vehicles to the early stages of development for personal computers, cellular telephones and the Internet."
I look forward to the day when I can use my electric vehicle to anonymously compare someone to Hitler. - Countess666, on 10/24/2009, -0/+1the average daily drive for Americans is 30 miles. easily within the (future) range of this car which is around 80km
- Suricou, on 10/24/2009, -0/+1Now try working out what it would cost if you went with all those energy-saving solutions, but kept on grid power :>
My house does use too much energy, but the last time I tried to fix that it lead to the 'lightbulb wars' - a long argument over the use of CFLs, due to one family member's insistance that they were unacceptably ugly and looked like 'pallic symbols.' It is incredibly annoying to other people if you keep turning off the lights in empty rooms, because they will expect the light to be on and waiting when they return half an hour later. - InactiveUser, on 10/24/2009, -0/+1Solar and battery storage will drop by 50% in the next 5 years and more and more after that.
To think if one company could produce a battery capable of storing the equivalent energy of hydrocarbons that company can then just about corner the energy market dollar for dollar. This is why Google and others are investing billions in R&D.
As for your situation - You house is possibly using too much energy. I can keep this one running on $15k worth of Solar and golf cart batteries - about 9kj a day. Its an old 1930's home that has been super insulated ($6k worth) and the heating is Solar sub floor hydronic with heat pump booster. That kit alone saved me 40% of my energy costs.
It works out to be about 30% cheaper than grid power over the life of the kit including the insulation work. When carbon taxes kick in - more so. It is achievable - you just need to tailer some appliances and usage times. - Countess666, on 10/24/2009, -0/+1edit : its actually 140km range in the city,
the 80km range is at its top speed of 110km/h
so not a option for city to city driving but inside the city it should be very useful and cheap to run. a perfect 2de car. - lostinseganet, on 10/23/2009, -0/+1I remember reading that trade with the Saudis is decreasing, and increasing with Russia. Perhaps that is the way out? They would probably sell to china through...
- fooljoe, on 10/25/2009, -0/+1meh, that's just called putting your money where your mouth is. whether or not he's got his personal interest riding on it, his message is absolutely correct; good for him if he wants to make some bucks while he's at it.
- bluesman3535, on 10/23/2009, -1/+2Nice sentiment. Now extract Big Oil from politics, price fixing monopolies, arms deals with Saudis and other barbarians, every car on the road, apartment building furnaces, factories, bike chains, lawn mowers,etc and it makes sense we'll eventually not bow to the oil barons. Is Clark on record in opposing Saudi arms deals, empowering them militarily? Maybe he's just writing another book for the suckers.
- Suricou, on 10/24/2009, -0/+1It suffers from an energy density issue though. There isn't much. Very short range.
-
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
