It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tenn. professor cruises cross-country on 2.15 gallons of gas

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


When I see a hybrid Tractor-Trailer, then I'll get my hopes up. Until then, these hybrid commuter cars are just test beds that only the rich can afford to buy.




posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


While the news report I saw on it was a bit over-the-top... the guest expert hit the nail on the head with a single point he made: A six-figure electric sports car is not going to be the average family's escape from rising gas prices.

Something in the $20-30K range is what it would take. And even then - a huge amount of your prospective buyers are young adults attending college and living in apartments; where plugging your car in at the end of the day is not as straight-forward as people who own a garage or a home with outdoor outlets.

Later, they would have to target the small auto market - the $16-20K range that your Corolla, Focus, Taurus, Civic, and Cruze occupy (and are quite popular among young adults and families).

Hitting that price point is going to be pretty difficult. The problem is that the people who can most afford the cost of gas (older families with established careers and higher incomes) are also the variety who typically support developing markets and absorb development and tooling costs. They can afford convenience and performance (gasoline) - and electric cars tend to appear gimicky in their current form.

The younger generations, who would best benefit from the reduced transportation costs, will have difficulty swallowing the cost of practical electric vehicles (which would be considered first-generation), and it is debatable whether the vehicle is actually cost-effective.

This creates a chicken-and-egg problem for the concept of the electric car and/or hybrid car technologies.

Honestly, I just don't think the technologies that comprise the product are mature enough to satisfy the demands the market will place upon it.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


That is the problem, the technology doesn't match the ambitions of the greenies.

So the only way to make it work is to subsidize it heavily.

It's basically the opposite of free market economics.

When and if the oil does start to run out, private industry will come up with an alternative, they always have.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


This is true... although from a national security standpoint, I do have to be a tad concerned. It will take a few years to get the infrastructure up and running to exploit our own reserves.

I don't think the solution should be to subsidize private companies (on "either side") - but I do wonder if some kind of tax credit or deduction would be appropriate to help a "get over the hump" of tooling and development costs.

Of course - that would be once there are realistic vehicles on the market. A lot of these hybrids and electric cars are a passing gesture to the goal. However, when they do arise - I would be willing to hear the national defense argument for a tax-credit based (or even a voucher-type) of deduction to expedite the uptake and development of that market. I don't know if it would be agreeable - but I consider it a more valid argument for government intervention than many of the other arguments being cast about.

Although that is thinking within our current system. Ideally, only state revenues would be taxed by the federal government (the basis of that revenue to be determined by each state). That sends the idea of deductions, credits, etc out the window (unless states have a system for it and want to implement such a thing - but I'm thinking on a national level).



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
I'll bet in 6 months we learn he's lying about the whole deal and used 60 gallons of gas. My thought is that they don't count gas blended with additives as gas or something silly like that. I also find it hilariously sad that USA Today had to put "the sun" in parentheses in case "solar" wasn't descriptive enough or most readers happen to be morons.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMike
I'll bet in 6 months we learn he's lying about the whole deal and used 60 gallons of gas. My thought is that they don't count gas blended with additives as gas or something silly like that. I also find it hilariously sad that USA Today had to put "the sun" in parentheses in case "solar" wasn't descriptive enough or most readers happen to be morons.


They used ethanol blended with a little gasoline. If they had a car running on straight alcohol, they wouldn't have used any gas but then the scam would have been more obvious.



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Star and flag, relevant and real, unlike most threads!



posted on Mar, 10 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by TruthSeekerMike
I'll bet in 6 months we learn he's lying about the whole deal and used 60 gallons of gas. My thought is that they don't count gas blended with additives as gas or something silly like that. I also find it hilariously sad that USA Today had to put "the sun" in parentheses in case "solar" wasn't descriptive enough or most readers happen to be morons.


They used ethanol blended with a little gasoline. If they had a car running on straight alcohol, they wouldn't have used any gas but then the scam would have been more obvious.


The poor sap who ends up buying one of these cars will be in a for a nice big repair bill when he has to replace every seal in the fuel system.

The 15% etanol blend we are being forced to use eats away at the seals, can't imagine what high percentages do. I've had to rebuild the carbs in at least half of my gas powered tools, all from ethanol. Same with my buddies Ducatti, it ate away the plastic gas tank on the bikes they shipped to America. The bikes that went to the rest of the world are fine, but they had to make steel tanks to fix the American bikes. My wifes old Dodge caravan had a $2,000 repair bill when a station mistakenly put E-85 in the regular tank, and that was a FFV so it should have been fine.

This is another example of knee jerk environmentalists not looking at the big picture before acting. The industry knew this stuff ate at the seals, but the pressure to find a use for all the subsidized ethanol that was piling up was too strong.

So now we're stuck with gas that you have to drain after every use, and even then the primers crumble away in a year just from exposure to it. Think of all the spilled fuel from these seals going out, and the environmental cost to remanufacture and ship all the replacement parts. Not to mention the gas used to run stuff back and forth from the repair shop.

It's madness, but nobody wants to listen to reason, they just keep subsidizing more failed alternative energies hoping one will actually work.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


and yet in brazil , it works fine , even on 70s bugs.....strange world

1.
Yes ethanol is corrosive, but not very much. Gasoline is corrosive too. Ethanol is biodegradable in water. So it has a tendency to contain and attract water. It is not the corrosive properties of ethanol that can cause damage to your vehicle; it is the water which can rust a vehicle’s fuel system from the inside out. Today’s vehicles (since mid 1980s) have fuel systems which are made to withstand corrosive motor fuels and rust from water. Also today’s distilling processes are superior to way back when. We now have better techniques for drying out ethanol or reducing the water content.

2. If I put E85 in my gas tank, it will eat it away.

If your car was built in the old days, it was had a lead coated, steel tank. The water in ethanol would cause the tank to rust from the inside out. The government mandated that all gas in the USA contain 10% ethanol to help reduce tail pipe emissions. In the 1980s, automakers made vehicles with fuel systems to be ethanol and rust tolerant. Gas tanks began to contain polymers and Teflon which are extremely durable.

3. If I put E85 ethanol in my non-Flex Fuel vehicle, it will ruin it.

One tank won’t hurt. Some dealers are spreading rumors and charging $300-$3000 for one tank of accidental E85 use. This use may cause misfiring and a rough ride. Your check engine light will come on. If you should accidentally or on purpose put E85 in your vehicle, drain the tank, put in regular gas and all will be well. If you use E85 without a conversion kit or non-Flex Fuel capable vehicle for an extended period, you can damage your engine.

4. Ethanol will burn up my engine.

Ethanol has a lower ignition point than gas. Ethanol has about 115 octane and E85 has 105 octane. It burns cooler and will extend engine life by preventing the burning of engine valves and prevent the build-up of olefins in fuel injectors, keeping the fuel system cleaner.

5. Ethanol will ruin gaskets, seals, rings and more.

Running 100% ethanol or alcohol in an engine can cause damage to cork products.

The rubber neoprene used in the last 20 + years is resistant to the drying effect that ethanol may have.

Today's vehicles are built to withstand the corrosive effects of water in ethanol and gasoline. Any vehicle built since 1985 will have no ethanol related issues. Older vehicles that used more steel in the fuel systems or cork gaskets may have issues from long term exposure to water.

Vehicles in Brazil have been using ethanol for 30 years and they are completely free from using any foreign oil.

6. E85 will eat my rubber fuel lines.

This is another myth from the old days. Rubber technology has significantly advanced so the concerns of a 20 year old car or newer having issues like this are extremely rare. Plus the 15% gas will help keep lines lubricated.

7. E85 will destroy my fuel pump.

E85 won’t destroy your fuel pump. If you convert a high mileage vehicle to Flex Fuel, the E85 will cause the sediment in the gas tank to dissolve and then get sucked up by the fuel pump. It is believed that this sediment may shorten the life of the pump of your higher mileage vehicle (100,000+). We have had no reports from customers with damaged fuel pumps.

www.change2e85.com...

edit on 11-3-2012 by gambon because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-3-2012 by gambon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by FelixFelicis
 


This is dumb, they cheated by using Ethanol 95. a.k.a really expensive gas

More of this falsified or tainted reporting by the media. no one would be able to afford to modify a car to be able to do this, nor would they be able to afford or haul around all the E 95 gas. What a pile.



posted on Mar, 11 2012 @ 08:53 AM
link   
And it can be yours for the low, low price of $150,000.

OK, I don't know what it actually cost, but the prices of these technology demonstrators always seems to be ridiculous. I'll be impressed when they can bring the cost down to a level comparable with that of a typical vehicle sitting on my local dealer's lot. As it stands, when I can buy the biggest gas guzzling hog of a truck on the dealer's lot for $35,000 AND 25,000 gallons of gasoline for the thing for the same price as one of these solar-electric, ethanol, nuclear, wind, runs-on-camel-farts or WTF cars, I think I know which one I'm going to choose.

That's the reason this stuff never makes mass production, folks. Its not some great conspiracy, its just at this point, its too damn expensive. The only way it could sell is if the government subsidized the hell out of it.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join