Trejbal: Electric cars
The return of the electric car
Christian Trejbal
Trejbal is a Roanoke Times editorial writer. He is based out of the New River Valley.
As gasoline flirts with $3 per gallon and forecasts warn the cost at the pump could hit $4 this summer, I have been ruminating on electric alternatives again.
Before I moved across the country a few years ago, I sold my fuel-efficient car that my sister had dubbed “The Red Baron.” When I arrived in Southwest Virginia, I considered buying a hybrid Prius but settled instead on a regular Honda Civic that gets more than 35 miles to the gallon. My sister has not named it yet.
I should be due for a new car in five more years or so. Until then, I can dream.
January 9, 2011 - 8:52 AM
It will be interesting to see how electric (and other non-gasoline fueled) cars evolve over time. Another consideration, of course, is an evolution of the infrastructure required to support them.
get in line to buy an electric car so you can plug it into the coal burning electricity to get 100 miles of driving pleasure. Whatta bargain.
You’re right, Morgan. We should outlaw dirty coal and mandate clean, renewable energy sources. I like your thinking on this.
It’s kind of funny how people rush to buy electric cars to be “Green” and save non-renewable resources(oil), and then they drive it home and plug it into their home which is powered by electricity generated by burning coal. HMMMMMM. . .
Yes Christian, but the problem is you want to mandate something that doesn’t exist, at least not in sufficient quantities to allow the middle class to afford it. In the meantime, do a way with fossil fuels prematurely and everyone, including you and your electric car, are back to walking and reading by candlelight.
The future is nuclear. It is long term, sustainable, doesn’t emit carbon gases and actually exists. Why the “green” crowd isn’t willing to even consider it is beyond me.
You paint with too broad a brush, Chuck. The “green” crowd, if there even is such a thing, is diverse in its views. I support nuclear energy, for example, especially once we find something to do with the waste, like dump it all under a mountain in Nevada. Another supporter is the guy who came up with the Gaia concept. Methods that don’t produce waste are preferable, but nuclear is a far better option than burning fossil fuels.
On burning coal and gas, though, only the most extreme would call for a ban immediately, and perhaps my hyperbole was not clear. We’re stuck with fossil fuels for a while, but we need to be working far harder and investing more to replace them. We also need to start limiting how much greenhouse gas we emit.
#5 This is the problem with the stereotypes you generally spout, Chuck. I consider my self fairly green, but I absolutely think we should be going more and more nuclear. There are a handful of radical weirdos out there who think we should stop using everything, but they are not anywhere close to the majority of “greens” that you want people to believe they are.
The point of so-called “green” cars is not that they’re better only for the environment. A car that can be powered with something other than oil serves to make us less dependent on mid-east oil – it will take a while for us to make a complete break from them, but non-gas-powered cars are a start.
Unless we decide it’s in our interests to be constantly engaged in the mid east to ensure a continued supply.
@2…Morgan
At least someone is trying to find some solutions.
If you can’t be part of a solution…then don’t become part of the problem.
Electric cars use of electricity even though it comes from fossil fuels is much more efficient and cleaner than fossil fueled autos. The conservative Wall Street Journal has even reported it as such.
9 I think there are definite solutions. Look at Honda Insight that got 70 mpg, off the market. Solar is very expensive, electric is run off of coal. Dont tell me they’re trying to ‘find some solutions’…they arent using them. Thanks for the simple lecture but it wasnt necessary.
How much research have you done lately on solar?
You might be surprised at how the costs are coming down. You might remember when the initial personal computers were first introduced and their costs. As more and more were produced and as efficiencies in production increased, their costs came down.
As with any new research and development, the intial costs are going to be extremely high. If you’ve ever looked at the initial research and development of a new aircraft (talk to Boeing and Airbus) you’ll see the same thing.
Just because you can’t run down to Wal-Mart or K-Mart today and pick it up for coupons doesn’t mean that the research and development shouldn’t continue.
By the way, electric isn’t just run off of coal.
One other point and it comes strictly from the financial side of the issue. The oil and gas exploration, retrieval and refining industry has billions of dollars invested in physical plant, property and equipment.
To have something come up in a relatively short period of time that could render those billions invested in that industry obsolete and worthless would indeed bankrupt a relatively large segment of the global economy.
Shareholders wouldn’t be too happy to see something like that happen. Consequently, the changeover will never come about rapidly but only as the balance sheets of the multinational companies can absorb it.
Whatever happened to this guy
Doug Pelmear :
http://www.kmbc.com/r/16768626/detail.html
Why has nothing like this been seen since?
http://greensboring.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=7749
Could our patent laws, and the protectionism it has afforded to businesses that scoop up such research and delay or prevent such innovation from becoming a marketable product be holding America hostage to the oil industry?
I mean, not even an after market device for improved mileage has been seen in decades.
It is still way too expensive for the normal happy homeowner to go out and change the whole house to solar, I would love to be able to do it myself because I do believe in solar power, it just isnt convenient at this time. I would LOVE to stick it to aep.
I never said research should not continue, I am belittling the so called research to date, it is shoddy at best, not in our best interest and not forthcoming with anything real in the last 40 plus years. I think they can do way better than what they show us.
@16…Morgan
See comment 13.
Where would the electric and the hybrid autos be without government subsidies?
Where would wind and solar be without government subsidies?
As yet the demand is not there. Those concepts cannot compete in a free market. The nanny state will take away individual free choice and mandate a lower standard of living that is more costly.
No more Edison light bulbs, toilets that don’t flush, refrigerators that don’t freeze, thermostats with governors, salt free foods, no more happy meals with toys, no more transfats, shower heads with low flow, no more ethanol free gas, no more large SUVs, no more large pickups, no more utilizing our natural resources,…no more free choice.
Beam me up Scotty, there is no intelligent life here!
@18…John R
I can still buy incandescent light bulbs, a flushing toilet, a fridge that freezes, digital and regular thermostats, food with salt (it’s called a salt shaker), annoying and stupid happy meals with toys, lard, any kind of shower head known to man, regular gas, an SUV that you could live in (it’s called a Suburban or an Expedition), a very large pickup (made by Ford, Chevy, Toyota, Nissan and GMC) and I can fish, hunt, trap, grow food and a host of other things.
As for government subsidies…they helped pave the way for an interstate highway system that allows you to go from point A to point B; they allowed companies to harness the energy of nuclear fusion and fision for purposes other than blowing the world to kingdom come; assisted aerospace technology development with the space program.
The “nanny” state as you put it hasn’t caused me to change my standard of living one iota. I have more choices than I can ever imagine.
You really need to remove your blinders.
John R wrote :”Where would the electric and the hybrid autos be without government subsidies?Where would wind and solar be without government subsidies?”
——————————————-
Subsidies? Those ain’t no subsidies, These are Subsidies:
From Reuters
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6103RM20100201
“It also said ending the subsidies would not have much of a financial impact on energy companies, as $36.5 billion represents about 1 percent of expected domestic oil and gas revenues over the coming decade.
While the Obama administration slammed the oil and gas industry in its budget, renewable energy got a funding boost.
Research and development for solar energy was given $302 million, up 22 percent; wind energy received $123 million, a 53 percent increase, and geothermal energy was given $55 million, up 25 percent.”
—————————————
So the billions used to subsidiez your gasoline/diesel systems dwarf anything in the alternative energy sector.
Intelligent life? Not in this United States!
Take away the government tax advantage for purchasing an electric car and how many would sell?
Even so, there is no demand for an electric car. The govenment is the biggest purchaser for these cars.
#19 Will
It is just a matter of time! Your choices are dwendling daily due to nanny state regulation.
John R wrote “Take away the government tax advantage for purchasing an electric car and how many would sell?Even so, there is no demand for an electric car. The govenment is the biggest purchaser for these cars.”
————————————————–
There was no demand for Gasoline cars at the turn of the century- The horse was sufficent for travel- it was only when it became cheaper and quicker to drive a car that demand increased.
The same is true of electric cars- as oil prices rise, gas prices rise, demand for electric cars will increase.
Only a fool would argue that it would be better to wait for a crisis such as happened in the middle east back in the 1970′s for there to be a switchover to electric cars.
Demand for oil is increasing in China, India and many third world countriesdriving prices up, and straining available resouces.
The electric car is coming, will ye, or nil ye.
And the government can either get behind it, or suffer the consequences when the crisis strikes.
@22…John R
I don’t know what part of the country you live in but I can tell you without any hesitation that the numbers of choices that I have regarding my purchases have gone up exponentially in my 54 years.
Your negative feelings toward anything government must leave you with a bitter taste constantly.
I would challenge you to sit down and do a simple T-chart of all the things you can get versus the things you believe you can’t get. I would bet a nice adult beverage (I like Jack and ginger for betting purposes) that the list of things you can get is much much larger than the list of things you can’t. I would also wager that the list of things you can get has grown over your life time.
#24 Will
My choices are not necessarily your choices obviously. I do resent govenment bureaucrats making regulations that limit my choices as should we all.
Believe me, I do not feel bitterness especially since last Nov. and I am rather ecstatic about the next 2 years, being a conservative political junkie.
It is the liberals that seem to me to be so bitter and defensive as exemplified by the way you seemed to have taken my #18 post above so literally. I had tried to make a valid point in a light hearted fashion, not a statement of absolute fact.
It is the liberals that should lighten up!
John R, I am sure you are a very responsible person and would not dream of buying anything, disposing of anything or behaving in any way detrimental to the environment, the people around (or coming after) you, or anything remotely troublesome in your choices for purchase,use or disposal. However, do you consider that there might be unscrupulous businesses that put melamine in dog food or coat plastic jewelry with toxic chemicals or make plastic that leeches out a toxin or an engine that pollutes or a machine that will cut off your fingers or electrocute you? What about those who dump batteries and old tires where they like? What about those that pour poisons down a drain or into a stream? I wish that the world were such that no one had to look over what anyone else was doing but for the good of man, the protection of children and fools not so savvy, someone has to. It is bad when the government research, ratings and incentives punish those who do wrong, but why do you really think it would be better without those actions to inform and protect us?
@25…John R
What’s wrong John…the heat get a little too close to you?
I read your post several times before responding to it. You named off a list of things that you perceived the “nanny” state as having taken away from you. I merely pointed out the error of your post.
I think your retort is actually kinda funny. When actually brought to bear…you say Oh I was just making a light hearted joke.. that’s why I bet you a Jack and ginger that I would win a bet with you.
I’m type A and generally take things pretty literal. I’m pretty light hearted too…so I’ll have my Jack with two fingers in a double old fashioned.
I don’t recycle. I learned at an early age to keep my fingers away from buzz saws. I avoid all Chicom and Mex items. My parents taught me at an early age not to eat the paint off the walls. I like gas guzzlers and Edison bulbs. I hate big government and paying taxes. Seat belts are uncomfortable and I resent warning signs on mattresses, SUV sun visors, lawn mowers, tobacco and alchohol products. I smoke premium cigars, drink single malt scotch whiskey and collect guns and belong to private clubs and the NRA. I have voted for every GOP presidential candidate since Barry Goldwater and read the WSJ daily.
I am a very responsible conservative. So what is the point?