On 3/6/2012 11:15 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 21:44:41 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

What do you know about nuclear powered planes and cars?

That's a real long shot unless someone comes up with small scale
fusion. Right now they've been working on large scale fusion for
over 50 years and we're not even close yet.


Once we get that flux capacitor thing worked out we will have a fusion
car.

And until then, we will use gas...

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 18:36:58 -0500, BAR wrote:

LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such as
CNG and gasoline.

Wrong.

I buy 33# forklift tanks for just over $14.00. That is about
$2.23/gallon at an 80% fill.

Don't argue with me, argue with the website where I got the information,
asshole.

On 3/6/12 11:25 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 3/6/2012 11:15 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 21:44:41 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

What do you know about nuclear powered planes and cars?

That's a real long shot unless someone comes up with small scale
fusion. Right now they've been working on large scale fusion for
over 50 years and we're not even close yet.


Once we get that flux capacitor thing worked out we will have a fusion
car.

And until then, we will use gas...


D'oh. You're a funny little guy.

In article , says...

On 3/6/2012 11:15 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 21:44:41 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

What do you know about nuclear powered planes and cars?

That's a real long shot unless someone comes up with small scale
fusion. Right now they've been working on large scale fusion for
over 50 years and we're not even close yet.


Once we get that flux capacitor thing worked out we will have a fusion
car.

And until then, we will use gas...

Want to bet?

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

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

In article ,
says...

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

wrote in message ...

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

In article , 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.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 18:36:58 -0500, BAR wrote:

LPG is generally higher priced than other fuel alternatives such as
CNG and gasoline.

Wrong.

I buy 33# forklift tanks for just over $14.00. That is about
$2.23/gallon at an 80% fill.

Don't argue with me, argue with the website where I got the information,
asshole.

Typical.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 08:43:02 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...

On 3/6/2012 11:15 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 21:44:41 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

What do you know about nuclear powered planes and cars?

That's a real long shot unless someone comes up with small scale
fusion. Right now they've been working on large scale fusion for
over 50 years and we're not even close yet.


Once we get that flux capacitor thing worked out we will have a fusion
car.

And until then, we will use gas...

Want to bet?

Oh, he could be right! I still see people using a horse and buggy.
They haven't got past hay to gasoline. Like them, he hasn't bought
into the next fuel, either. Giddy up.

And if you post a website to him, he wants it peer reviewed, blah, blah
blah.....

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?

--
O M G

In article ,
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.

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.

--
O M G