Been fixing up my daughters used Wrangler and thought these were interesting. Don't see any 4 wheel drive, but maybe that's coming.
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/10/04 ... e-vehicle/
https://www.chryslerllc.com/en/innovati ... angler.php
EV Jeeps
Moderator: Available
-
f.Channell
- Posts: 3541
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Valhalla
EV Jeeps
Sans Peur Ne Obliviscaris
www.hinghamkarate.com
www.hinghamkarate.com
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
This appears to be the next step in the evolution of driving. First it was hybrids, where both power plants help out at the same time and all power originates from fossil fuel. Now comes the "plug-in hybrids" where a significant amount of the energy for driving could come from the wall socket in your garage.
Having the gasoline engine gives range. But the shorter range for purely electric use would work for many people in daily commuting. It's possible for some drivers rarely to have to use the gasoline engine.
Four wheel drive vehicles are heavier and require more energy to move. That's why these plug-in hybrids will be pretty simple for some time.
Bill
Having the gasoline engine gives range. But the shorter range for purely electric use would work for many people in daily commuting. It's possible for some drivers rarely to have to use the gasoline engine.
Four wheel drive vehicles are heavier and require more energy to move. That's why these plug-in hybrids will be pretty simple for some time.
Bill
And where does that power in the wall socket come from? Could it be, fossil fuels?This appears to be the next step in the evolution of driving. First it was hybrids, where both power plants help out at the same time and all power originates from fossil fuel. Now comes the "plug-in hybrids" where a significant amount of the energy for driving could come from the wall socket in your garage.
I was dreaming of the past...
-
f.Channell
- Posts: 3541
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Valhalla
Right Mike.
I suppose the only answer would be a garage with some solar panels on it to recharge.
It would be nice though to plug in at work and have the boss fill your tank.
I also can see solar panels on the roof of these jeeps.
But not being able to drop the top would be a bummer.
I wouldn't get one at this point as I like to have range to go skiing etc...
F.
I suppose the only answer would be a garage with some solar panels on it to recharge.
It would be nice though to plug in at work and have the boss fill your tank.
I also can see solar panels on the roof of these jeeps.
But not being able to drop the top would be a bummer.
I wouldn't get one at this point as I like to have range to go skiing etc...
F.
Sans Peur Ne Obliviscaris
www.hinghamkarate.com
www.hinghamkarate.com
-
Dale Houser
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:43 pm
- Location: Oakton, VA
Here's another nice sounding but useless "green" car. BMW's Hydrogen 7.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spi ... 48,00.html
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spi ... 48,00.html
The martial arts begin and end with respect...
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
You missed the point, Mike.MikeK wrote:And where does that power in the wall socket come from? Could it be, fossil fuels?Bill Glasheen wrote:
This appears to be the next step in the evolution of driving. First it was hybrids, where both power plants help out at the same time and all power originates from fossil fuel. Now comes the "plug-in hybrids" where a significant amount of the energy for driving could come from the wall socket in your garage.
No, I don't give a rip about green house gasses, etc. If others want to worry about that, well fine.
There are a number of issues here: availability/flexibility of power source, efficiency, and net pollution.
- With a standard combustion engine, availability means one source of fuel. That would be gasoline or diesel. Period. And most of that would come from countries that don't like us (Middle East, Venezuela, etc.). With the wall socket, you can get that electricity generated by any number of ways. Conventional sources today could be nuclear, fossil fuel, and hydroelectric. Future sources could be wind, solar, etc.
- Arguably it's more efficient to generate power at a single source by whatever means, convert it to electricity, and send it out the electric lines.
- You may be able to generate energy cleaner at a single source rather than have it generated within everyone's internal combustion engine.
- I actually know a martial artist living in North Carolina who installed solar panels on the roof of his home. On the net, he now sells power back to the power company. So conceivably he could be generating some of his own electricity for his car via his solar panels.
Eventually supply and demand will drive us to such technologies. Right now there's a huge business opportunity for the companies and countries that lead the way with energy storage technologies. They'll be an important component of future vehicles.
- Bill
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
I'm not a fan of fuel cell technologies in cars, or any other technology that requires hydrogen to run. The storage issues are IMO too difficult to overcome. I know my friend Rich has always thought that this is GM's future "home run" development. But I don't see it. And right now they're doing their best just to survive.Dale Houser wrote:
Here's another nice sounding but useless "green" car. BMW's Hydrogen 7.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spi ... 48,00.html
Fuel cells may one day work well in homes where one can convert natural gas to hydrogen at the point of use.
Bill
Bravo, Mike
"....and where does that power in the wall socket come from? Could it be, fossil fuels? "
My Uechi brethren, you are the first to be invited to my SAVE THE EARTH scheme, I mean, movement:
Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
With enough funds we can legislate away this useless restriction on free energy. Yes, you may say that Al Gore is the Bernie Madoff of the environmental movement, building a Ponzi scheme to get money from dupes. But let us remember that using American exceptionalism ... forget what Obama the Negative says about our system ... our cause is based on physics, not a physic! [Bow over for this.]
Our first step is to name our movement.
More will be coming.
[Would Uechi students halving their breathing prevent CO2 build up???]
My Uechi brethren, you are the first to be invited to my SAVE THE EARTH scheme, I mean, movement:
Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
With enough funds we can legislate away this useless restriction on free energy. Yes, you may say that Al Gore is the Bernie Madoff of the environmental movement, building a Ponzi scheme to get money from dupes. But let us remember that using American exceptionalism ... forget what Obama the Negative says about our system ... our cause is based on physics, not a physic! [Bow over for this.]
Our first step is to name our movement.
More will be coming.
[Would Uechi students halving their breathing prevent CO2 build up???]
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Once again...
I will be amongst the last to jump on the global warming bandwagon. If you don't know that, then you haven't read my forums for very long.
However...
I am a BIG proponent of energy independence. That being the case, I am all about energy source diversification.
To me there is serendipity with the Al Gore "sky is falling" movement. Why? Because if we want to prevent CO2 emissions, the most plentiful and practical source of energy would be...
You got it - nuclear. Look, ma, no CO2 emissions!
We have gone a long, long time without building any nuclear power plants in this country because the environmentalists have convinced us that it is bad, BAD, BAD!!! And now... we have them caught in their own logic. If we want to save the planet, we need to start doing the very thing that allegedly was going to hurt us all.
Just ask Jane Fonda.
Or... We can use our 200-year supply of coal. Or... we can use our 200-year supply of natural gas. We are the Saudi Arabia of those energy resources. Do we need to do a little work to burn coal cleanly? Sure. But we can learn how.
And hey, I'm all for investigating more efficient ways to use solar, wind, river flow, and tidal energy. The more sources the better. Every location on this planet can find some way to use Nature. To me, it's not about a silver bullet; it's all about a massive, diverse, collective effort.
The point is that we have any number of energy sources not acquired from either the Middle East or from Venezuela that we can use. And we can then convert that energy to electricity, which is the most fungible energy asset.
And once we have it cleanly and efficiently converted to electricity from a central source, we can then send it to the plug-in hybrids. And today's plug-in hybrids will be the prequel to tomorrow's 100% electric car. And you can quote me on that.
Just to whet your appetite... This is a 100% electric car - the Tesla - which you can buy TODAY.
It'll do 0-60 in less than 4 seconds, and has a top speed of 125 mph (electronically limited).
Sure, it'll cost you over $100K. But you have to start somewhere.
Ever heard of the White Zombie electric car?
Looks like a piece of junk, doesn't it? Well check out this video.
Worlds fastest street legal ELECTRIC CAR
If we have a massive, national movement to build and mass-produce a next generation battery, then a more practical electric could be had for the price of a GM Saturn. It's only a matter of time.
- Bill
I will be amongst the last to jump on the global warming bandwagon. If you don't know that, then you haven't read my forums for very long.
However...
I am a BIG proponent of energy independence. That being the case, I am all about energy source diversification.
To me there is serendipity with the Al Gore "sky is falling" movement. Why? Because if we want to prevent CO2 emissions, the most plentiful and practical source of energy would be...
You got it - nuclear. Look, ma, no CO2 emissions!
We have gone a long, long time without building any nuclear power plants in this country because the environmentalists have convinced us that it is bad, BAD, BAD!!! And now... we have them caught in their own logic. If we want to save the planet, we need to start doing the very thing that allegedly was going to hurt us all.
Just ask Jane Fonda.
Or... We can use our 200-year supply of coal. Or... we can use our 200-year supply of natural gas. We are the Saudi Arabia of those energy resources. Do we need to do a little work to burn coal cleanly? Sure. But we can learn how.
And hey, I'm all for investigating more efficient ways to use solar, wind, river flow, and tidal energy. The more sources the better. Every location on this planet can find some way to use Nature. To me, it's not about a silver bullet; it's all about a massive, diverse, collective effort.
The point is that we have any number of energy sources not acquired from either the Middle East or from Venezuela that we can use. And we can then convert that energy to electricity, which is the most fungible energy asset.
And once we have it cleanly and efficiently converted to electricity from a central source, we can then send it to the plug-in hybrids. And today's plug-in hybrids will be the prequel to tomorrow's 100% electric car. And you can quote me on that.
Just to whet your appetite... This is a 100% electric car - the Tesla - which you can buy TODAY.
It'll do 0-60 in less than 4 seconds, and has a top speed of 125 mph (electronically limited).
Sure, it'll cost you over $100K. But you have to start somewhere.
Ever heard of the White Zombie electric car?
Looks like a piece of junk, doesn't it? Well check out this video.
Worlds fastest street legal ELECTRIC CAR
If we have a massive, national movement to build and mass-produce a next generation battery, then a more practical electric could be had for the price of a GM Saturn. It's only a matter of time.
- Bill
Even if you want to stick your head in the sand with regards CO2/global warming, there's plenty not to like about fossil fuel pollution. Just check out Beijing, LA, or industrial revolution-era London. Smog is a serious health issue in cities, and air pollution is a cancer risk factor. Acid rain affects agriculture (which ultimately hits you in the wallet). There's also the energy independence issue that seems to most impress Bill. Runoff from roadways gets into the water supply either making it less healthy, or more expensive. So before you fire up that coal fireplace just to spite us accursed, dirty hippies, remember that there are plenty of non-ecological reasons to want reduced emissions.
Anyhow, I thought I'd expand on some of the advantages of electric cars that Bill mentioned.
While right now a lot of electricity in the U.S comes from fossil fuels, it doesn't have to. Switching to electric cars now may or may not reduce overall fossil fuel use today (I don't really know, to be honest), but as we switch to alternative energies (nuclear, wind, solar) for home use, we'd be converting to alternative energies in cars at the same time.
If we once make the push to adopt electric cars, then we'll have a more unified system of energy production and use. That means that any advances in production efficiency automatically result in the equivalent of better fuel efficiency too. Car companies will still want to work on range, but handing over the problem of efficient energy production to the people who have a direct self-interest (power companies) makes a certain sense.
As Bill said there are economies of scale and advantages to a big, monolithic energy generator. Those advantages might outweigh line losses. And there are other examples. Carbon-sequestration is possible at a coal plant, but not really possible (or at least much harder or inconvenient) in a moving car. If you hate the idea of carbon-sequestration, then just think about filtering the carcinogens out.
There's also a regulatory issue. Cars have emissions standards, but it's a lot harder to track and enforce the rules on a 62 million cars than it is to enforce it on 10,000 power plants.
Anyhow, I thought I'd expand on some of the advantages of electric cars that Bill mentioned.
While right now a lot of electricity in the U.S comes from fossil fuels, it doesn't have to. Switching to electric cars now may or may not reduce overall fossil fuel use today (I don't really know, to be honest), but as we switch to alternative energies (nuclear, wind, solar) for home use, we'd be converting to alternative energies in cars at the same time.
If we once make the push to adopt electric cars, then we'll have a more unified system of energy production and use. That means that any advances in production efficiency automatically result in the equivalent of better fuel efficiency too. Car companies will still want to work on range, but handing over the problem of efficient energy production to the people who have a direct self-interest (power companies) makes a certain sense.
As Bill said there are economies of scale and advantages to a big, monolithic energy generator. Those advantages might outweigh line losses. And there are other examples. Carbon-sequestration is possible at a coal plant, but not really possible (or at least much harder or inconvenient) in a moving car. If you hate the idea of carbon-sequestration, then just think about filtering the carcinogens out.
There's also a regulatory issue. Cars have emissions standards, but it's a lot harder to track and enforce the rules on a 62 million cars than it is to enforce it on 10,000 power plants.
-
f.Channell
- Posts: 3541
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Valhalla
Why the obsession with speed Bill?
I think Neil Young has the idea with his electric 1959 Lincoln.
http://wot.motortrend.com/6254241/green ... index.html
Just find a cinnamon girl and cruise the boulevard looking for sugar mountain.
F.
I think Neil Young has the idea with his electric 1959 Lincoln.
http://wot.motortrend.com/6254241/green ... index.html
Just find a cinnamon girl and cruise the boulevard looking for sugar mountain.
F.
Sans Peur Ne Obliviscaris
www.hinghamkarate.com
www.hinghamkarate.com
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
Why not?f.Channell wrote:
Why the obsession with speed Bill?
- Lt. Pete "Maverick" Mitchell in the movie Top GunI feel the need . . . the need for speed!
"Flagship" vehicles break perceptions. Toyota hybrids did little to excite the Average Joe. In fact, they have given hybrids the reputation of the driving choice of granola eaters.
The White Zombie is a whole other animal. When you optimize for speed/power and see the possibilities, then anything more practical is obviously achievable. And the wannabe consumer can actually get excited about purchasing something that could be environmentally friendly. Nothing wrong with that!
- Bill
-
f.Channell
- Posts: 3541
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Valhalla
I think the technology Mr Young is pursuing is a lot more applicable.
I see a lot more 5.000 lb vehicles driving around than sports cars going mach 10. The technology Neil is working on can push around a Suburban.
But hey Bill if you offer me a ride in your 100,000 electric sports car you know I'll buy the coffee! And we know race technology gave us disc brakes and lots of other advancement. Nascar needs to go electric, then we'll get the technology going.
F.
I see a lot more 5.000 lb vehicles driving around than sports cars going mach 10. The technology Neil is working on can push around a Suburban.
But hey Bill if you offer me a ride in your 100,000 electric sports car you know I'll buy the coffee! And we know race technology gave us disc brakes and lots of other advancement. Nascar needs to go electric, then we'll get the technology going.
F.
Sans Peur Ne Obliviscaris
www.hinghamkarate.com
www.hinghamkarate.com
