On 3/9/12 8:01 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/9/2012 5:33 PM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com,
says...

On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,

says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,

says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,

wrote:

In ,

says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/




Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it
pays to
look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything
to do
with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the
technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000
toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your
electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that
does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't
afford to
buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average
income of
a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric
car got
30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They
say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd
probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100
years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm



The initiation of mass production of internal combustion
engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable
in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of
the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to
rise. In
1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car
sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the
Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison
should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the
same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of
misinformation,
but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your
assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because
of all
of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which
a lot
of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the
same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and
cars
in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to
follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting
could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent
lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives
such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more
than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This
is one
of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel
vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology
is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up
with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not
ready
for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost
effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be
precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs,
cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get
one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.

Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50

Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or
$3.00
per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks
are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without
control of density, is pretty lame.

In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice
what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities.

----------------------------
I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined
tank, but
every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill.

It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different
things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For
one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the
ability to
produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what
LPG does.

What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion?

Here's some numbers for you
Propane 91690 btu/gal
Gasoline 120000 btu/gal
Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh



Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer?

The fact that gasoline has 1/3 more energy than propane per gallon has
him baffled.

No it doesn't. Some folks are not happy unless they are fighting... I
saw a lot of that with young drunk couples when I was a kid.


And it became your model for being the "tween-ager" you are now.

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 20:15:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, Oscar wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,
says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,
wrote:

In ,
says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/


Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to
look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average income of
a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got
30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100 years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm

The initiation of mass production of internal combustion engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and affordable
in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In 1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation, but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because of all
of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which a lot
of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and cars
in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting
could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives
such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This is one
of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not ready
for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.


-----------------------------
You seemed to be Math challenged. $3 a gallon is not $3 a pound. Around
here the tank exchange is about $18 and they are not full fill.

If you noted, I posted that it wasn't clear to me whether you meant
$3/# or $3/gal.

As for MY math: if you are paying $18/fill and a gallon costs $3, you
are accomplishing the impossible. You are getting a 25# (6 gal.) fill
in a 20# (4.7 gal.) tank!

My guess is you are paying closer to $4/gal. Prices in CA appear to be
from under $3 to almost $10 per gallon.

http://www.altfuelprices.com/


-----------------------------------------
You seem to be IQ challenged. An exchange tank is the $18. You are paying
for the convenience. Go to the fill station with your tank(s) and they
hook it up to the pump and you pay by the gallon. And I have not ever seen
it sold by the pound in the tanks I have used. Even in Europe where you
pull up to the pump and fill your own LPG vehicle it is sold by the gallon.
Maybe the pumps are calibrated for temperature also, but the price x times
the number on the gallon meter. Locally the propane prices are some of the
highest around, so I normally wait until I have a couple tanks empty and
stop by a flying J when I go camping and have the boat to haul the extra
tanks.

In article ,
says...

In article m,
says...

On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,

says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,

says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,
wrote:

In ,

says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/



Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to
look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do
with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that
does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to
buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average
income of
a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got
30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd
probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100
years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm


The initiation of mass production of internal combustion
engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable
in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In
1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car
sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison
should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the
same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation,
but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your
assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because
of all
of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which
a lot
of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the
same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and
cars
in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to
follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting
could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives
such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more
than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This
is one
of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not
ready
for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be
precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.

Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50

Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00
per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks
are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without
control of density, is pretty lame.

In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice
what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities.

----------------------------
I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but
every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill.

It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different
things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For
one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to
produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what
LPG does.

What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion?

Here's some numbers for you
Propane 91690 btu/gal
Gasoline 120000 btu/gal
Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh



Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer?

The fact that gasoline has 1/3 more energy than propane per gallon has
him baffled.

If you "plug in the prices" you find that LPG is indeed cheaper. Prove
me wrong.

In article , says...

On 3/9/2012 5:33 PM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com,
says...

On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,

says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,

says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,
wrote:

In ,

says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/



Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to
look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do
with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that
does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to
buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average
income of
a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got
30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd
probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100
years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm


The initiation of mass production of internal combustion
engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable
in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In
1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car
sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison
should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the
same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation,
but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your
assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because
of all
of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which
a lot
of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the
same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and
cars
in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to
follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting
could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives
such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more
than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This
is one
of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not
ready
for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be
precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.

Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50

Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00
per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks
are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without
control of density, is pretty lame.

In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice
what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities.

----------------------------
I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but
every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill.

It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different
things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For
one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to
produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what
LPG does.

What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion?

Here's some numbers for you
Propane 91690 btu/gal
Gasoline 120000 btu/gal
Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh



Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer?

The fact that gasoline has 1/3 more energy than propane per gallon has
him baffled.

No it doesn't. Some folks are not happy unless they are fighting... I
saw a lot of that with young drunk couples when I was a kid.

Show me where I'm wrong. Per energy unit, propane is cheaper.

In article , says...

On 3/9/2012 5:30 PM, BAR wrote:
In web.com,
says...

On 3/8/2012 11:15 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote in message ...

On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,
says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,
wrote:

In ,
says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/



Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average income of a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got 30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100 years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm


The initiation of mass production of internal combustion engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In 1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation, but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because of
all of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which a
lot of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and
cars in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This is
one of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not
ready for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.


-----------------------------
You seemed to be Math challenged. $3 a gallon is not $3 a pound. Around
here the tank exchange is about $18 and they are not full fill.

Where is the benefit of tank exchange when propane stations seem to be
everywhere?

When you need to grill a steak at 2:30 AM and you have no gas you can
trade your tank in for a "full" one at your local 24 hour convenience
store. Or, you can swap tanks with your neighbor and hope he is asleep.

Are you arguing with someone who can't see the benefit of trucking in
filled tanks as opposed to running a filling station? LOL!!!

If you want to get ripped off by getting 15# for a 20# price, be my
guest!

On 3/10/2012 9:58 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says...

On 3/9/2012 5:33 PM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com,
says...

On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,

says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,

says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,
wrote:

In ,

says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/



Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to
look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do
with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that
does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to
buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average
income of
a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got
30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd
probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100
years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm


The initiation of mass production of internal combustion
engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable
in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In
1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car
sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison
should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the
same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation,
but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your
assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because
of all
of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which
a lot
of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the
same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and
cars
in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to
follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting
could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives
such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more
than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This
is one
of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not
ready
for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be
precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.

Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50

Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00
per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks
are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without
control of density, is pretty lame.

In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice
what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities.

----------------------------
I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but
every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill.

It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different
things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For
one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to
produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what
LPG does.

What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion?

Here's some numbers for you
Propane 91690 btu/gal
Gasoline 120000 btu/gal
Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh



Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer?

The fact that gasoline has 1/3 more energy than propane per gallon has
him baffled.

No it doesn't. Some folks are not happy unless they are fighting... I
saw a lot of that with young drunk couples when I was a kid.

Show me where I'm wrong. Per energy unit, propane is cheaper.

You could persuade me if you proved your point.

--
O M G

On 3/10/2012 9:58 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

In aweb.com,
says...

On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,

says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,

says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,
wrote:

In ,

says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/



Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to
look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do
with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that
does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to
buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average
income of
a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got
30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd
probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100
years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm


The initiation of mass production of internal combustion
engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable
in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In
1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car
sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison
should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the
same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation,
but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your
assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because
of all
of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which
a lot
of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the
same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and
cars
in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to
follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting
could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives
such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more
than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This
is one
of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not
ready
for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be
precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.

Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50

Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00
per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks
are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without
control of density, is pretty lame.

In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice
what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities.

----------------------------
I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but
every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill.

It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different
things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For
one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability to
produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what
LPG does.

What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion?

Here's some numbers for you
Propane 91690 btu/gal
Gasoline 120000 btu/gal
Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh



Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer?

The fact that gasoline has 1/3 more energy than propane per gallon has
him baffled.

If you "plug in the prices" you find that LPG is indeed cheaper. Prove
me wrong.

How much cheaper?

--
O M G

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 20:17:49 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, Oscar wrote:

On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,

says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,

says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,
wrote:

In ,
says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/


Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to
look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do
with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that does
not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford to
buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average income
of
a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car got
30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd
probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100 years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm

The initiation of mass production of internal combustion engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable
in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In
1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison
should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of misinformation,
but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your
assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because of
all
of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which a lot
of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and cars
in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting
could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives
such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more
than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This is
one
of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not ready
for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.

Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50

Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00
per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks
are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without
control of density, is pretty lame.

In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice
what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities.

----------------------------
I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank, but
every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill.

I've always thought that was a bit of crooked sleight of hand because
I've never known what an LPG "gallon" was.

If the "gallon" was established at a relatively low temperature, then
in warmer temperatures, a pound would ring up more gallons (dollars)
that at a lower temperature.

Gasoline (and other liquid fuels) are purchased by stations at a
particular API specific gravity and an ASTM chart is used to charge
for MASS not volume. 1000 gallons of gasoline bought at lower
temperatures will sell as more than 1000 gallons at higher
temperatures, since the motorist buys by volume, not weight. The
station realizes a blue sky profit.

I've never seen the chart for LPG.


-------------------------------------------
I bet there is less than 2% change in liquid density in all normal
temperatures we see. And a gallon is a measured liquid quantity. May be a
percent or two difference depending on temperature, but that is the gallon
you're buying. When the truck pulls up to the home tank, he is not selling
600 pounds of LPG, he is selling 500 gallons or so of product. Nothing on
the truck measures the weight change.

"BAR" wrote in message ...

In article m,
says...

On 3/9/2012 9:45 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 3/9/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In articleAuqdncSDOsD2GcTSnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@earthlink .com,
says...

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In web.com,

says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,

says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,
wrote:

In ,

says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/



Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to
look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to
do
with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the technology
tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000 toward
gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your electric
car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but that
does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't afford
to
buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla. Average
income of
a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an electric car
got
30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from? They say
no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but you'd
probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows, and no
gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100
years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm


The initiation of mass production of internal combustion
engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable
in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of the
less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to rise. In
1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline car
sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like the
Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe Edison
should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on the
same
fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of
misinformation,
but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your
assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible because
of all
of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program, which
a lot
of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on the
same
path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50 years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light trucks and
cars
in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to
follow. It
will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees Fahrenheit, starting
could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14 percent
lower
than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives
such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in the US, more
than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these stations,
however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis. This
is one
of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel
vehicles,
which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near 0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology is
just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come up
with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are not
ready
for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost effective
to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to be
precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs, cheaper
is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered. (This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff really
costs? And what the markup is.

Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50

Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or $3.00
per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon. Tanks
are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product, without
control of density, is pretty lame.

In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about twice
what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger quantities.

----------------------------
I have never bought by the pound. The tank is a weight defined tank,
but
every pump has a gallon meter to charge you when you purchase a fill.

It doesn't matter in this case. We are talking about two different
things with two different theoretical amounts of energy produced. For
one to be "cheaper" than the other, it would have to have the ability
to
produce X amount of energy for less cost than the other. That is what
LPG does.

What on God's green earth led you to that conclusion?

Here's some numbers for you
Propane 91690 btu/gal
Gasoline 120000 btu/gal
Plug in your own price at the pump numbers and do the math. Sheeeesh



Are you having trouble doing the math iBoaterer?

The fact that gasoline has 1/3 more energy than propane per gallon has
him baffled.


--------------------------------------
Is there an efficiency difference in the burn of LPG and gasoline in a car?

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

In article m,
says...

On 3/8/2012 3:54 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:23:07 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 12:07 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:03:20 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 10:29 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:04:11 -0500, wrote:

On 3/8/2012 8:49 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:53:44 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 14:25:15 -0500, wrote:

On 3/7/2012 1:33 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In
web.com,

says...

On 3/7/2012 8:46 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,

says...

In ,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 18:57:23 -0500,
wrote:

In
,
says...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:00:39 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message
...

On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500,

wrote:

In ,

says...

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...lectric-lemon/


Told you, and you laughed...snerk
Sometimes it pays to look
at the
world with an open mind...

Has nothing to do with the technology and
everything to do with
the
sales.

It has everything to do with the COST of the
technology tho.

Basically the problem is battery cost vs price.
These things are rich man's toys. If saving money is
your
objective,
buy a Cruze and put the left over $20,000-30,000
toward gas.

I understand the government will subsidize your
electric car
purchase
to make that price delta look more attractive but
that does not
reduce
the cost, it only transfers it to people who can't
afford to buy
one.


-----------------------------------
Very true. Look at the subsidy for a Tesla.
Average income of a
Tesla
buyer? $250k. As to technology. In 1919 an
electric car got 30
miles to
the charge. What does a Volt get? 30 miles. Not a
lot of
technology
improvement in nearly a 100 years. Still down to
battery
technology. Plus
where is the power to charge going to come from?
They say no
pollution.
What about that coal or oil fired generating plant?

Actually they had a range of about 100 miles, but
you'd probably
bitch
about the 20 mph top speed, the eisenglass windows,
and no gasoline
backup.

It appears that the same problems they were having 100
years ago
with
electric vehicles are the same problems they have
today.

http://inventors.about.com/od/estart...c-Vehicles.htm

The initiation of mass production of internal
combustion engine
vehicles
by Henry Ford made these vehicles widely available and
affordable in
the
$500 to $1,000 price range. By contrast, the price of
the less
efficiently produced electric vehicles continued to
rise. In 1912,
an
electric roadster sold for $1,750, while a gasoline
car sold for
$650.

I'm waiting on the fuel cell. You people talk like
the Wright
Brothers
were idiots for not building the 747, first. Maybe
Edison should
have
invented the halogen bulb, first.

You will notice that the Wright brothers plane runs on
the same fuel
that today's 747 runs on.

I don't know where you came up with that gem of
misinformation, but
it
is demonstrably totally wrong. (Like the rest of your
assertions.)

The response you'll type to this will be possible
because of all of
the money spent 50+ years ago on the space program,
which a lot of
people said was idiotic and useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet

Things change and the gas station as we know it is on
the same path
as
the blacksmith at the end of the 19th century.

The fueling station will not change for another 50
years.

You will soon be proven wrong. Look for LPG light
trucks and cars in
the next model year or so, with road tractors soon to
follow. It will
be a small leap to add electrical power.

http://www.extraordinaryroadtrip.org/research-
library/technology/liqufied-petroleum/ad-draw.asp

The drawbacks of LPG include:

In cold conditions, below 32 degrees
Fahrenheit, starting could
be a
problem because of the low vapor pressure of propane at
low
temperatures.
One gallon of LPG contains less energy than a
gallon of
gasoline.
The driving range of a propane vehicle is about 14
percent lower than
a
comparable gasoline-powered vehicle.
LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel
alternatives such
as
CNG and gasoline.
There are over 4,000 LPG refueling sites in
the US, more than
all of
the other alternative fuels combined. Most of these
stations, however,
are not readily available to consumers on a 24/7 basis.
This is one of
the reasons why most on-road applications are bi-fuel
vehicles, which
burn LPG and gasoline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Energy_density.svg

You will notice that the Lion battery is way down near
0,0.

The Lion battery's days are numbered. Better technology
is just
around
the corner.

They are working on the heat problem. They haven't come
up with
anything
better, NiMh isn't any better. The plastic batteries are
not ready for
prime time. And the ceramic batteries are not cost
effective to
manufacture.

LPG is NOT higher priced than gasoline.

By what measure?

Cost.

Cost per gallon? Cost per pound? Engineers are supposed to
be precise
and un ambiguous. So far you ain't doin so good.

Does it matter? Considering the current respective costs,
cheaper is
cheaper.

At this time it is cheaper per gallon.

At this time it is cheaper per pound.

At this time it is cheaper in cost per distance covered.

At this time it is cheaper in BTU consumed.

It is cheaper to use as a fuel.
----------------------------------------
Cost per MPG? LPG is about $3+ around here.

$3 ? It costs $60 to fill a 20# grill tank? Holy crap! I can
get one
filled, retail, for a little over $14.00, including tax.

I buy 33# for about the same price including tax, delivered.
(This
company won't do consumer tanks.) Who knows what the stuff
really
costs? And what the markup is.

Realize that $3 per gallon at 4 1/2 gallons equals $13.50

Maybe we need clarification on whether it is $3.00 per gallon or
$3.00
per pound. Normally, one purchases LPG per pound, not gallon.
Tanks
are size by pound, not gallon. Buying a gallon of product,
without
control of density, is pretty lame.

In any case, when buying small quantities, you are paying about
twice
what the product can be bought for (retail) in larger
quantities.

Storage tanks are sized in cubic feet.
Propane id dispensed by the gallon from the tank.
Usually, but not always, larger packages of something are sold at
lower
per unit prices than smaller packages.

Sure looks like these storage tanks are being sold size by the
gallon.
http://www.storagetankspropane.com/inventory.php

Stationary propane is dispensed from the tank by molecule, metered
by
the gallon, and charged by the pound. Check with your local
distributor, better yet, just watch them fill a tank. If it
doesn't
have an over-pressure shutoff, they will fill the tank by weight.
Otherwise, they just pump until it won't take any more.

Yep, agreed. Where I buy mine, they do just exactly that. By the
way, if
you go to someplace where you exchange your 20# empty for a
"filled"
one, you are getting ripped off. They fill those to 18# claiming
it's
for safety. I go to Ace where I get a real 20# refill.




Look up OPD. then go discuss what you find with your nitwit friend.
I'll
leave you two to jerk each other off.

What part of "According to statements appearing on the two companies?
websites, in 2008 both reduced the amount of propane in their ?full?
tanks sold consumers ..." didn't you get?

OPDs have been required since 2002, so it has nothing to do with
short
fills.

A 20# LPG tank is made to HOLD 20#, that is why it has a tare weight
stamped on it. There is a void space in excess of the 20# amount to
account for the 80% fill. OPDs became necessary because people were
filling 20# tanks IN EXCESS of 20#.

Wow, I see old Oscar is getting all shook up!

Your task was to show that lpg is cheaper to use than gasoline. You
haven't proved your point. I guess I was expecting too much of you.

I don't think he understands the concept.

Sure I do, it's very easy to see that LPG is cheaper per energy unit
than gasoline.


---------------------------------
You get 30% or less mileage per gallon. If a lot of cars started burning
LPG I bet you would see the price go up at least $0.50 a gallon in state and
federal motor fuel taxes. Add in those costs and what is the cost per mile
for fuel?