What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
181 Comments
- uownedge, on 10/12/2007, -4/+48This is what really gets me about the whole "the environment is in danger!" thing. There ARE better solutions out there, so why aren't these activists and groups pushing more for this sort of thing? I hear way too much "We need to do something!" and not nearly enough "This is what we're going to do about it!".
Back on topic a bit though, this is very cool, and I'd love to have one. Or even have the time/skills/money to convert my own car to a street legal EV. - IcedZ, on 10/12/2007, -18/+55I've heard battery life is ok. But seriously.. all electric vehicles are NOT the answer. Where does most of your power come from? BURNING FOSSIL FUELS.
- 16x9, on 10/12/2007, -31/+67> strictnein wrote: "Who cares? Halo 3 trailer on Xbox Live fools...."
In an effort to keep our species as healthy as possible, please consider having your reproductive organs removed. - bieber, on 10/12/2007, -6/+40Coal, of course, being a fossil fuel...
- fusionnv, on 10/12/2007, -1/+28EV cars can be a solution for short travel or for fleets. I hear everybody bitch and whining that the electric comes from coal and etc blah blah blah. But guess what it doesn't have to be it can be from Hydro, wind, or solar. Even it comes from coal it is better. The reason is that the power plant is more efficient at producing energy than an average car can from gas.
- recursive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+31>"Where does most of your power come from? BURNING FOSSIL FUELS."
>Actually most of our electricity comes from comes from coal, but it is closely followed by natural gas.
Ummm... you might want to check where coal comes from. (Hint: It's a F_____ F___) - tnwake, on 10/12/2007, -8/+33With a gas car, at $50/week for gas and 20,000 miles driven per year (just under 25mpg), after 5 years you would have paid $13,000 for gas... with the EV you would have to fork out TWICE that for new batteries, plus you would have spent money on electricity to charge it. NO THANKS!
- Nameless1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+23Hello? Have you ppl forgotten nuclear fission power plants? Energy from those is dirt cheap and completely clean! If you bury the waste deep enough. Like 2 kilometers, or better yet! Put the waste back into the mine where it was found :)
For the wimpy people, Yes, Chernobyl was a disaster, yes, many people died, however that doesn't mean that we should stop developing nuclear power. Like, we haven't stopped developing guns, now have we? On the contrary we should invest time and resources to nuclear power, in order to make it safer and more plentifull. Fusions plants are the would be panacea. But they are far off into the future, and we need cheap and clean power now! So, go NUKE power! - Mohonri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19You're missing one important fact: Coal-burning plants create more radioactive emissions than equivalent-power nuclear plants. Yep, there's radioactive isotopes in that coal, and they get spewed into the atmosphere. On the other hand, nuclear plants retain their radioactive waste for recovery and disposal.
In addition, a very high percentage (>90%) of all "radioactive material" that is buried is low-level stuff, far below the actual level required to be dangerous. Coffee (really!) is around that same level. And a large (up to 95%) portion of spent nuclear fuel can be recovered. Well, except in the US, where recycling of spent nuclear fuel is prohibited.
Oh, and don't forget that the US Navy has been operating nuclear generators for 50 years without incident. I, for one, would be more than happy to have a nuclear plant nearby, producing cheap power.
Here's more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Power - bloqmon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Sorry to break it to you but these batteries rarely if ever need to be replaced. They are meant to last the lifetime of the vehicle, and according to manufacturers that is around 200,000 miles. Toyota for example has yet to replace a single one of their batteries due to normal wear and tear. Not to mention that the batteries are often covered by warranty for a good 8-10 years. Like some others have said, the newer batteries currently in development will even drop current replacement prices while improving efficiency.
Research before hitting the submit button. - fogster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14"Where does most of your power come from? BURNING FOSSIL FUELS."
This raises a question I'm not sure I've seen addressed: Does, say, a liter (maybe the wrong unit of measure?) of natural gas, converted to electricity and then used to charge a car battery get the car further than a liter of natural gas used to power the car directly?
On one hand, you'd think that using it directly in the car is more efficient, since you're not converting it between forms. On the other hand, I bet there are great economies of scale (and just general concern on squeezing out as much energy as possible) when produced in power plants. This would be the real test of whether electric was the way to go. - Wolfghost, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16danielwsmithee...
Both coal and natural gas are fossil fuels. - AstroPHX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13@tnwake
It's not just about the cost, but about getting the oil monkey off the U.S.'s back. Alternatives to oil will always appear more expensive up front because of the lack of infrastructure, but over time, being independet of the Middle East is good for everyone except the Middle East and those in the oil business.
@monolith
"Imagine if everyone where[sic]" recycling. - FreakTrap, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Ok buddy, every car isn't going to be converted over-night, and no one is saying they will...
"And no one really wants a nuke plant in their back yard."
Actually, I live in Tarpon Springs Florida, [North of Tampa] and there is a nuclear power plant not very far from me in Crystal River. Do I mind? no. Do my neighbors mind? no.
The fact is, that no-one is getting one in there back yard, they very well could be 'the way of the future,' and you need to stop being so childish.
Oh wait, this is digg: you probably are a child.... - rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13A couple years ago in Discover magazine, they did an article that demonstrated how different kinds of oil can be made from chicken guts, and other nonusable garbage, and how it could be refined into gasoline. The plant was located right next door to a Foster Frams location. If this process could be miniaturized, we could all have one in our garages and make our own fuel. NO OIL COMPANIES. NO GAS STATIONS. NO DEPENDENCY ON FOREIGN OIL. NO MORE DRILLING. Everyone would be happy, right? We just need garbage DELIVERED to our house instead of taken away!
- sandwichpants, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I want a Nuke plant in my back yard, but it's too small, and I don't think the government would let me do it.
But I wouldn't mind the government replacing some of the conventional fuel plants with nuke plants, near to me or far away, especially them there new fangled pebble bed reactors. Nor do I mind Nasa or some other fairly reliable space agency launching the nuclear waste into space.
But, I supposed I can't say that my feelings represent that of the general public.
Anyway, even if I did have aboundant, cheap, nuclear power, I wouldn't want an electric vehicle. Batteries just don't seem to make that much sense to me. - syberghost, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Popular Mechanics did a thing this month about what it takes to go from coast to coast with the various alternate fuel vehicles you can actually purchase.
For full electrics (I.E. you plug it into the wall), it takes one ton of coal. That's the worst possible choice. - inajeep, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9tnwake, Your not gonna get cheaper anything if no one buys it initially. What will happen is that oil will keep going up or run out eventually. An effective plan of staged transition should help everyone. However, if oil prices start coming down because of it then you will get people using more oil. So start by putting the city's public transportation and inner city traffic on battery/electric. Invest more into Hyrdo and solar and possibly nuclear electric plants and get away from coal. Hybrid cars will be a stop gap until Hydrogen works.
- monolith, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16@dongiaconia, are you encouraging theft? That's stupid, hows that going to help the 'Environment'? And yes, batteries do suck, imagine if everyone where trying to toss out old ones?
- dongiaconia, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16The reasonable cost for the extended warranty to cover the battery (as well as the car) invalidates your first argument... And as for the other, who says you have to plug it into *your* power line? :)
- Jeffrey903, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10If you drive 75,000 miles on gas with a car getting 25MPG, you pay about $9,000 for gas (at $3/gallon).
If you drive 75,000 miles with this RAV4 EV (on 1 set of batteries), you spend $26,000 for the batteries + $3/111miles = $28,027 total. That doesn't even include the price of the original car (neither does the $9,000 for gas, but this is still much more expensive).
Even though this is environment friendly and eliminates the need for foreign oil (for the few people who actually have this car), it's still really expensive. - Brennan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Plus, a powerplant is much more efficient at making power then the engine in your car.
- SoCalDissident, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Just cause a solution doesn't work for you doesn't mean it works for others. This mentality that any alternative is no good because it isn't applicable to ALL solutions is silly. The future may not be one type of vehicle, it may be electrics, diesel hybrids, and *gasp* some regular old IC gas powered cars.
I'm not a big fan of EV-only vehicles, yet, but they have the potential (har har) to become much better with improvements in battery, capacitor, and "other" electricy storage solutions (flywheels?). So, I'll digg it. - jriskin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Batteries:
I'm not exactly sure how many miles my dad has on his EV RAV4, but he's never changed the batteries and it doesn't appear like he will have to until the car is at LEAST 10+ years old. I believe blogmon is correct in that its going to be a long time before they have to replace them.
Range:
On the range issue, I think what most people forget is that 99% of the time 160miles/day is PLENTY of range. Yes, sales reps, people who drive for a living, etc... will need more range. And occasionally for the trips to other cities you will too. But wouldn't it make sense for most families to have all electrics and ONE gas car.
Polution:
As far as the power plant issue, its a separate one, yes some are more polluting that others, but that can be solved by more nuclear, wind, solar, etc... As far as the used battery problem, we currently have a fairly good system for recycling Lead-Acid, and by the time the NiMH batteries start to need to be replaced we'll just have to figure that out as well, and BY THEN LiPoly batteries and other more environmentally friendly batteries will likely be much more common.
Political/Economic:
Finally, the economic and political benefits for our country to being more energy independent is a huge issue that I think needs to be taken in to consideration. - fartingbob, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Maybe not everyone needs a car that can go double the speed limit. Just maybe theres some people who dont really need to go above 80mph....
- norris, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12Batteries aren't that expensive. These prices are definitely inflated. Even Li-Ions can be had for a decent price these days (250usd/200ah if you know where to look).
If you live in a big city, maybe it's time to consider buying a car for commuting and renting a car or flying (it's probably cheaper these days) for travel. - dw09577, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9by the way, calcars.org and edrivesystems.com will convert your prius into a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle for 100 mpg. at a cost of $10,000.
Oh, and also, the current cost of a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is $500K, not $1M like it used to be....but that's not much different to my checking account... :-( This does beg the question why we're pursuing it though...instead of just allowing a normal supply structure for EV's and being done with it.
Oh wait, that leaves no product to shill in the oil cartel's distribution model... :-( - Mohonri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6You're exactly right. The reason none of the energy companies are building nuclear plants is that they can't. Regulations and red tape are so bad that it's not worth it, at least in the US. If it were easier to do, I would probably be paying a 60% less for electricity, because it would be so much cheaper to produce.
- gwax, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Except that you're going to have to replace the batteries in your hybrid someday too and they'll be almost as expensive.
- dw09577, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6small utility vehicle? :-)
- kremvax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6An interesting benefit of an electric car is, it can be powered by Wind, Nuclear, etc. just as easily as it can be powered by coal. It's not tied to a single source, and the infrastructure for refueling is in (pretty much) every home in America.
- Diggs, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9I wouldn't call a RAV4 an SUV...
- dw09577, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8It should be noted that the replacement batteries are only that expensive because of no underlying Electric Vehicle supply infrastructure. If there was more interest in EV's, and the manufacturers showed some interest in supporting this tech, the price would come down tremendously.
Just use common sense: 24 batteries at $26K. Even with labor, there's no way a NiMH 12-volt battery costs $1,086. It's supply/demand that's making it expensive, not physical cost. If the EV's were allowed to be developed into something past (what amounts to) their live-prototype phase, it makes total sense.
By the way, take a look at some other energy technologies currently in development without a similar infrastructure. There was an article on Digg somewhere that listed the cost of a hydrigen vehicle at somewhere above $1M. And everyone is behind this?? Craziness - just use existing electric system, and allow the EV's to have a cost-reducing support structure... - fogster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm willing to bet that costs will come WAY down as these take off. Remember when cell phones were gigantic, cost thousands of dollars, and only the filthy rich had them? Back then, they were 'impractical' for most uses too. And yet they've become incredibly popular. As more and more people buy something from a fledgling industry, it'll come way down in price.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7all of my elec comes from a dam
maybe we should only allow people like me who get elec from nuclear or dams to drive these cars.. doesnt mean it wont help.. if only cities like mine did it, cities like yours would still have a much lower gas price.
and for the people complaining about coal.. at least there would be one point of polution emission rather than a million little points and maybe we can use various filters and scrubbers to limit the polution.. so there are some positives. - thirdtenor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@syberghost
It's called Fischer-Tropsch synthesis (FTS), the turkey guts thing - weirdone, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7raise the price of gas to $6/gal and people will start trying to get the oil monkey off america's back. $3 seems high, but really it isn't that bad at all especially when you look at the alternatives.
If people cared about our oil woes, they would stop driving 8mpg SUVs. - dw09577, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Google the patent dispute between Cobasys (sp?) and Panasonic. The technology is out there and ready to go - but dig deep enough and you'll find that Texaco (parent company of Cobasys) ultimately controls the patent for the NiMH battery, and has litigated anyone that produces one strong enough to power a vehicle. They only allow people to make NiMH batteries powerful enough for hybrids, althoguh the technology can go much higher.
Guess why... :- - klang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The price for gasoline most places in Europe, is above $6 /gallon .. not many SUV's here, lots of small, energy efficient cars.
- ImOscar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Given a Rav4 getting 24 mpg and the Rav4 EV getting "166 mpg" you save ~$10,700 in fuel costs per 100,000 miles driven. Yes the regular Rav4 is still cheaper, but with rising oil costs and wider adoption on the horizon there's a decent chance the EV will be a more environmental and economical choice in 5-10 years.
Also it'd be interesting to see a maintainence and insurance cost comparison. - lilrabbit129, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I think me meant that by driving 75,000 miles you would have had to replace the battery pack once (@ 50k), so yes the price of the batteries does come into play.
- mrWoot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Read more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV
- bossm4n, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"How much SMUG does this vehicle produce? Reading the article it appears to be a lot."
digg for the Southpark reference in the comment section. - Xiol, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Already at $7/gal in the UK.
We're not seeing a massive change over here, so don't expect one over there. You'll just have to live with it.
In a few years they'll be no more oil, then we won't have to worry about prices. - tnwake, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I didn't see any warranty mentioned that covers the battery. As for #2, I know I could plug it in other places, but most weekend during the summer I drive 120 miles to the lake, spend about 5 or 6 hours with no plug anywhere in sight and then would need to turn around and drive 120 miles back home. Not to mention if I wanted to go to Florida I'd have to stop every 100 miles to charge it. It would be nice as a commute car if the batteries were cheaper, but that's about it. Definitely not practical as your only car.
- xocomil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@sandwichpants
It might not even be necessary to launch that spent fuel into space. Used fuel rods can be "recycled" to reclaim unused Uranium(235) and enriched Plutonium. By removing these two components and using them as fuel, you can greatly reduce the risk involved in storing spent fuel rods. France and a couple other European countries have pioneered recycling nuclear waste. If the US could get over the stigma of nuclear energy, I think we could really make some great advances in power production... - dialector, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5It doesn't matter if other sources are more expensive. The bottom line is that soon we will not be able to get enough gas. I remember the rationing in the seventies. Its coming back people!
- Neumahn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Electricity has the advatnage of being able to be produced by renewable methods such as solar, hydroelectric and wind. This is not the case with gasoline.
- tylerman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Discover mag article http://www.tylerman.net/gallery/Discover-mag-april-2006/Cover_april_2006
anything into oil
back on topic - I still think this is a step in the right direction I digg - seanmc303, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11Well considering that we have a president and vice president that have absolutely no stake in big oil, and are determined to quell our dependence on foreign oil, I'm sure we will be seeing many of these on the road very soon ;)
-
Show 51 - 100 of 183 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is