What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Ready. Set. Shop view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com Black Friday Sale starting 11/25 3PM PST. No Lines, No Crowds, Click and Save.
50 Comments
- Lucas123, on 10/27/2009, -6/+28Makes the best sense of all. If you're using coal-fired power plants to create energy for green technology, it kinda of defeats much of the purpose.
- f0dder, on 10/27/2009, -0/+19Like any good design. It's easier to replace a coal fired plant or cap the pollution at the single point. It's easier to ease towards a solution than forever bitch about it.
- firesphotons, on 10/27/2009, -7/+21It's simply amazing the cool ***** you can make when your country isn't focused on the next good way to kill more people.
- regeya, on 10/27/2009, -0/+12No perpetual motion for you! Not Yours.
- coachmcguirk, on 10/27/2009, -0/+10I can think of nothing greener than teleportation.
Except maybe walking. - sleestakslayer, on 10/27/2009, -0/+8Neat idea, but the turbine will cause drag and make the car less efficient, so there likely would be no net gain.
- zip000, on 10/27/2009, -1/+8Of course, the US military has funded research that has made its way into all sorts of products that have been very useful...the internet for one example.
I'm no fan of the military, but they do conduct a lot of research that the public eventually gets in on, and it isn't all about killing people and blowing things up. - armack5, on 10/27/2009, -1/+7a coal plant is way more efficient than your cars gas engine. this means it releases less carbon per watt than a gas generator. you are right in that this is not carbon neutral, but it is way better than running all gas powered cars. thats why pug-in hybrids, or all electric vehicles, even if they are being plugged into a coal power plant are still a big step in the right direction.
- idmonster, on 10/27/2009, -3/+9Because they can't: "Japan's military is restricted by the Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, which renounces Japan's right to declare war or use military force as a means of settling international disputes. Japan's military is governed by the Ministry of Defense, and primarily consists of the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF), the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) and the Japan Air Self-Defense Force (JASDF). The forces have been recently used in peacekeeping operations and the deployment of Japanese non-combatant troops to Iraq marked the first overseas use of its military since World War II." -wikipedia
- NightC, on 10/27/2009, -0/+5Why don't they just put the panels on top of the car...
- Barackalypse, on 10/27/2009, -1/+6"Toyota's solar charging station will consist of solar cells capable of generating 100/200V of electricity."
Another alternate energy article quoting an absolutely useless measurement. How many kilowatts of panels are there? I'm guessing you'll get about 1 kW worth of panels (they run around $4 a watt these days and figure $600 worth of electronics and connectors). Then multiply that by anywhere from 4 to 6 (the average hours of peak solar isolation per day) to get your power generation then take about 10% off of that for battery charging losses. So on average you might get 5kW per day, which might be enough to partially recharge your car assuming you don't drive very far each day. - askantik, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3Speaking of Nissan (in the article), I'm excited to see the Leaf. I'm confused though. On Wikipedia, it says it could be available in NA and Japan by autumn '10, but then it says it will be built in Tennessee in 2012. Wtf. I think it looks cooler than either the Prius or Insight. Looks somewhat like a Versa.
Also, a home inspection for the special quick charge feature is part of buying the car. The best part, though, is that Nissan has said the cost will be "comparable to a similiarly sized ICE car." Now, of course, "comparable" is open to interpretation, but that sounds pretty sweet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Leaf
http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf-electric-car/#/car/i ... - SystemicThought, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3...
I don't see the point. These cars charge by being plugged in to an outlet (with an adapter, depending on the car) from the normal electrical grid. How would a "solar charging station" be any more green than just producing solar energy to go into the power grid that would charge the car? - alpha19, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3Walking destroys the ground. Teleportation doesn't.
- cplusplus, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3never?
- minorthreat, on 10/27/2009, -1/+4My first thought of this went something like this.. Solar charging station? I didn't know they had solar cars now. Then I thought how "ungreen" a gas station would be if instead of pumps, they had massive 1500 watt lights shining down onto the cars solar cells.
- altgeeky1, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3>Battery charging will never be fast enough to be viable.
Yeah, and 640K ought to be enough for everybody.
Charging speed is not the problem.
We already have fast batteries that 80% charge in 2 hours.
You'll be able to charge while at the mall, hotel, or work.
What we need is high-capacity - so you can have enough charge to drive 14 hours straight. Then when you park overnight, it really doesn't matter if it took 2 hours to charge, or 8. You're done driving for the day so it doesn't matter. - lead2thehead, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2That violates the laws of thermodynamics.
- anarcurt, on 10/27/2009, -1/+3Battery charging will never be fast enough to be viable. Battery replacement is the only option. They are already developing a technology that will allow you to pull into a car wash type garage that will pull out the old battery and replace it with a freshly charged one. That way the empty battery gets charged without you having to wait. The process is quicker than a standard fill up. There would need to be some kind of regulation to prevent you from getting a bum battery but otherwise it maintains the current convienence while allowing for a less harmful source of power.
- zip000, on 10/27/2009, -1/+3Work on your reading comprehension!
I'm not going to diagram that sentence for you, but I'll simplify it:
"They do a lot of research that isn't about death and destruction."
That research may aim to improve their ability to kill and destroy, but the research itself isn't always directly about those activities. Hell, I hate being put in a position to defend the military-industrial complex! - cha5e, on 10/28/2009, -0/+2Walking burns calories. You need to eat to replenish them. Your food was probably grown 1,000 miles away or more, and brought to you on a truck or boat. Someone actually published a study claiming that driving somewhere actually has a lower carbon footprint than walking there now (assuming the subject is in the US and eats an average diet). I'm not sure that I believe said study, but it's still kinda sad.
- jerrolds, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2Why didnt i think of that?!
- amish4play, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2The added weight would probably reduce any gains, making it useless.
- altgeeky1, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2>Where would be the best place on the car for the turbine?
At the top of a 600 foot mast, because treetop-level wind turbines suck at power generation. - altgeeky1, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2They can, but it won't provide much fuel. It would offer a trickle that might not even overtake normal battery loss.
Covering your HOUSE's roof would be enough charger to charge your car, though... - cha5e, on 10/28/2009, -0/+2...plus it would increase the car's weight somewhat, increasing the amount of electricity needed to move the car.
- SystemicThought, on 10/27/2009, -1/+2I wonder if we could make a machine that you plug into the wall that runs a motor that creates electricity through friction and sends power back into the outlet.
- armack5, on 10/27/2009, -1/+2Fail
- Halleys5th, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Thank you.
- xero69, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1By the time teleportation comes around we'll all be so fat we'll have no choice but to use it.
/s - cha5e, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1I've been thinking about a plug-in car, but I live 55 miles from work, so most won't make it home and back. I've been wondering whether my employer would let me plug in at work, perhaps for a modest ($3/week or so) pay cut. But this might just be the perfect solution - I'm sure they'd let me keep one of these on the sunny side of the office building.
(and before anyone suggests I just move closer to work: my wife's job and mine are 65 miles apart. We choose to live 10 miles from hers and 55 miles from mine. Her job doesn't exist in the city I work in, and my job pays $20-40k less in the city she works in because it's a college town that's flooded with undergrads in my field who will work for nothing) - altgeeky1, on 10/27/2009, -1/+2The Japanese consider energy conservation to be a cornerstone of patriotism.
The fact that they have such a progressive view suggests they have no Conservatives.. - firesphotons, on 10/27/2009, -3/+4quote: it isn't all about killing people and blowing things up.
Yes it is, do we occasionally get a side--ler benefit? Of course! However the initial goal is debauchery, firepower and global swagger. The cost of having the best guns is having the predictable effects. - cha5e, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1Say your camel can carry 1,000,000 straws. You put 9,999,998 straws on its back. Can I add 3 more? It would only be a very small percentage of the total, you know.
All mocking aside...yes, it would be nice to lower carbon from some other sources, but frankly a) they don't make corks big enough to plug volcanoes, and b) while vegetarianism reduces one's carbon footprint a helluva lot it's just not popular (I say this as a vegetarian myself). - dumptaker, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1Yeah, but who wants to wait for 2 hours in Bakersfield to charge their car while they are road-tripping from LA to Vegas?
- TheRealMisterd, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1I read that if you have a big stereo system and you point your sub-woofers towards the back you get better gas mileage.
/sarcasm - hereticoftruth, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1I can't wait until my RV can go 800+ miles on only one charge!
- dumass4u, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1ahhh cee senior.
- altgeeky1, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1You also need to consider, the market share of drivers who typically drive MORE than 14 hours a day is something between 1 and 3%. Capacity will continue to grow, and negate the charging time issue. It'll take large capacitors to provide instant charging.
- gkiltz, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1Toyota sells a lot of cars in the desert anyway.
- nightengale379, on 10/27/2009, -1/+1Maybe better if larger turbine placed on 600 foot mast in parking lot for multiple cars modified to capture low velocity thermals off blacktop in low winds. Now this project has grown out of the individual car scope!
- altgeeky1, on 10/27/2009, -1/+1Someone FOISTED an EV on you (or someone you know)??
- nightengale379, on 10/28/2009, -0/+0Clearification, put the 600 foot mast on the parking lot NOT the car.
- stubear, on 10/28/2009, -1/+1EV technology is being foisted upon us despite there being far better green, renewable fuels available in a way that works similarly to our existing infrastructure. These other technologies will likely not see the light of day and befall the same fate EV tech did in the '70s. Hopefully it will only be another 30-40 years before they are revived and replace EVs instead of the 100+ it's taken to supplant gas combustion engines.
- stubear, on 10/27/2009, -1/+1"A variety of charging station options is needed to address the potential range limitations of electric vehicles, and a significant network of charging stations will need to be deployed to make electric vehicles viable for longer distance travel. Virtually all major car manufacturers are planning to launch electric or plug-in hybrid cars starting next year."
Why didn't these same idiots figure this out BEFORE foisting EVs on the world? - nightengale379, on 10/27/2009, -3/+0How about adding a small wind turbine to attach to outside of car to supplement charging. While you are parked outside during work or at home it can take in both solar and wind energy. Not sure how much it would help since wind velocity on a car in a parking lot must be low. Where would be the best place on the car for the turbine?
- paulmer2003, on 10/27/2009, -5/+1Uh, it's efficiency in terms of release of carbon/watt is immaterial (and probably incorrect).
Greenhouse gas emissions from passenger vehicles are a very small percentage of total greenhouse gas emissions. Coal powered plants produce a very LARGE percentage of total emissions.
That said, petrol engines comparatively are inefficient. For every 14.7 of fuel/air mixture they take in, only 10-20 percent results in power. Diesel engines are higher. But really, who cares - the fact is that passenger vehicles produce very little of the total emissions as I said earlier.
People just like to blame cars as it's easier. We all see cars, right out side. Wherever we go. It's much easier to blame them than the major sources of greenhouse gasses. - Halleys5th, on 10/27/2009, -5/+1Do the solar panels provide all the power?
If so, how many cars can one station charge in a day?
---------------------------------------------
Greenhouse Bullcrap
http://home.austarnet.com.au/yours/Greenhouse_Bull ...
What makes a society free?
http://principlesofafreesociety.com - firesphotons, on 10/27/2009, -4/+0Quote 1: it isn't all about killing people and blowing things up.
Quote 2: That research may aim to improve their ability to kill and destroy,
Yeah I was so far off, let's cut pieces to pieces....Hey but take a shot at my ability to comprehend if it makes you feel taller I'll give you a foothold.. - dumass4u, on 10/27/2009, -8/+2I wonder if its possible to build a little mini wind turbine into the front of the car . . . so that when you go faster it powers the turbines and creates energy? And if you were parked facing the wind it would create (obviously less) energy as well.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is