My experience fooling around with an eBike is that the life of a lithium
battery is expressed in number of charges.... sort of.
"Sort of" because I am still not clear whether 10 total
discharges/charges has the same effect on battery life as 20 half
But the idea is still that shelf/calendar life is pretty much
irrelevant: instead it's the amount of energy you run through the
there is no such thing as a Highly Secure Area for nuke waste. the waste
will have to be stored for tens of thousands of years and we can't even
read with certainty writings that are 5 thousand years old. "Oh look
daddy, that yellow sign is inviting us in to play with those old rocks"
but I'll play the game: users of electric cars should be charged less
because they make more oil available at lower costs for those that
insist on petro cars
On Thursday, December 11, 2014 1:27:25 PM UTC-5, Malcom Mal Reynolds wrote:
That's right, because you libs and tree huggers forced a halt in
contruction when it was half built, after billions had already been
spent on it. Instead of all that nuclear waste being secured
hundreds of feet inside a remote mountain with highly armed security, it's
sitting in water pools that are beyond capacity at your local nuclear
power plant, guarded by Barney Fife.
I see. So, on the one hand, you libs are telling us that for sure the
whole planet will be wrecked within just a few more decades due to CO2,
with catastrophic, irreversible consequences that will kill millions .
But we shouldn't use nuclear power, which is a quick, sure way to reduce CO2,
because 5,000 years from now, some of the waste at Yucca Mountain *might*
escape. Makes as much sense as most of the rest of the screwed up
the CPUC doesn't set rates, the power companies do. the CPUC has been
successful in lowering energy consumption to the point that with a
population larger than Texas it uses less electricity and no one is
being sent to the poor house
no, the libs have reduced energy consumption and therefore improved the
financial ability of the "poor"
rates might be lower, but bills aren't. you poor conservatives who feel
you have to have 150 incandescent bulbs can have them and one day your
CO2 rich power plant will run out of coal
On Thursday, December 11, 2014 1:36:43 PM UTC-5, Malcom Mal Reynolds wrote:
"PG&E typically changes its electric rates two to three times a year and it
s natural gas rates every month to reflect changing revenues needs. Wheneve
r PG&E needs to make significant rate changes, it makes a proposal to the C
alifornia Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). PG&E's proposal is then revie
wed in a public hearing process along with many stakeholder groups represen
ting consumer, business, low-income, environmental, and agricultural intere
sts among others. After this considerable review process, the CPUC then mak
es a decision on what is just and reasonable for customers to pay in rates
after which PG&E reflects any change in rates as soon as possible."
And more importantly, it's the govt that has imposed all kinds of
mandates on utilities. For example, govt tells them that they must
get X% of their energy supply from "green" sources. If you believe in
moonbeams, as you libs usually do, then that doesn't matter. To the
rest of us, in the real world, we know it drives up the cost of energy.
Baloney. Everyone is paying more for the energy they are actually
using. At 32c a kwh your usage would have to go down by a factor of
2.5 to be in the range of average rates. You think the poor have
magically cut their energy usage by a factor of 2.5? That anyone,
other than you moonbeam folks that spend $50K for a solar system have?
Good grief, you libs lie.
Rates are lower, idiot. I'm paying 13c a kwh, not the jacked up lib
rate of 32c in CA.
When the Prius first came out, I googled up cost of battery replacement
and only found one reference saying $7,000 Australian. I think battery
warranty may be 100,000 mi or 10 years now. I'm driving an 11 year old
Subaru in perfect condition but repair like that would mean forced trade in.
I heard just a couple of days ago that many first-generation Toyota
Priuses are still running on their original (NiMH) batteries. How many
years is that? Seventeen, I think. And even if they don't last *that*
long, the batteries are guaranteed for eight years or 100,000 miles.
On Thursday, December 11, 2014 10:00:51 AM UTC-5, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
8 yrs, 100K isn't very reassuring. That's cool for spark plugs that cost
$50, not for a battery that can cost two orders of magnitude more. And
you would think used car buyers are going to factor an expensive battery
replacement into the price.
In some cases, the car doesn't even have to be old. Tesla cars, if the
battery ever goes to zero, it's bricked and you need a new one. New ones
No one ever seems to take that into account when
they purchase one.
Had a customer with a number of them. Unloaded
them when he found out how much the batteries
cost to replace.
And what is this crap about them being non-polluting?
Where do they think they get the electricity to charge
them? And what about the toxic mess from the manufacture
and disposal of the batteries, not to mention the toxic
mess all over the road in a crash.
Here in Manitoba we have a publicly owned power utility (Manitoba Hydro)
that provides both electricity and natural gas to Manitobans. I pay
6.83 cents per KWH, so you'd think electric vehicles would be popular
here, but they're not.
Electric vehicles are only feasible to use in the summer here because of
all of the need for heat in the vehicle during the winter. Gasoline
powered cars have interior heaters that use the heat from the engine to
warm the inside of the car to keep the front windshield free of fog. An
electric car doesn't have excess heat that could be used to warm up the
inside of the car to keep the front and rear windshields free of fog.
That would require electric heaters which would severely reducing the
range of the car.
The bottom line is that electric cars would work well in cities with
warm climates year round. As soon as you start expecting electric cars
to work well in cold climates, the range of the car drops substantially.
OK on the heat pump for cars. I have not looked at the electric cars as I
don't think they would work for my driving. When I was working, the range
of the cars was about 50 miles and I lived about 20 miles from work. I just
did not like the narrow ammount of left over milage as I might want to go
somewhere after work. Also my son lived just out of range for the car.
I thought if the electric cars had air conditioning they might be able to
use a heat pump system for heat as the motor would not have the wasted heat
like a gas powered car. I just did not know if they would heat one quick
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
and you actually think that Barney Fife won't be the guard guarding
these Highly Secure Areas...as I recall the conservative mantra is that
business can do it best, so why isn't business finishing Yucca Mountain?
but if they do, you can bet they will pay the lowest possible wages to
if it makes so much sense, let the businesses that benefit from the
Nukes build their own nuclear waste repository. if nukes are so safe,
why would the industry need a special law to limit their liability?
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.