Electric Car Conversion Companies: Alternatives To Gas Powered Cars

Maxwell wrote:
"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Bill Daniels" wrote


It's called a "Land Ferry" and it makes a lot of sense. Amtrack runs a
service from the Northeast to Florida. If I could get my motorcycle on a
train for California this winter, I'd do it.

Do some serious checking, and I'll bet you could find a way.

If there is not a regular dedicated vehicle transport system available,
you could make a shipping crate and strap you bike securely in it, and
have a local transporter ship it. If you shipped it by something like
Roadway, it would still probably end up in a Land/Sea type pod, then
loaded on a double stack container train.

Making your own transport crate would probably be the best way for your
bike to arrive in perfect condition, too. ;-)
--


Say what!!!




Reminds me of "World's Fastest Indian"

Morgans wrote:

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote


(Those old roll bars really did work
g) and left me sitting on top right side of the frame as it slide
down the pavement tires first. No injuries other than a bit of chrome off
the left roll
bar...and my nerves. :-))


Been there, done that!

As I recall, I needed a new clutch lever, too. Amazing how much aluminum
can be ground off, during a 5 second slide along the asphalt! g

Or skin...

"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
...
Maxwell wrote:
"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Bill Daniels" wrote


It's called a "Land Ferry" and it makes a lot of sense. Amtrack runs a
service from the Northeast to Florida. If I could get my motorcycle on
a train for California this winter, I'd do it.

Do some serious checking, and I'll bet you could find a way.

If there is not a regular dedicated vehicle transport system available,
you could make a shipping crate and strap you bike securely in it, and
have a local transporter ship it. If you shipped it by something like
Roadway, it would still probably end up in a Land/Sea type pod, then
loaded on a double stack container train.

Making your own transport crate would probably be the best way for your
bike to arrive in perfect condition, too. ;-)
--


Say what!!!




Reminds me of "World's Fastest Indian"

No doubt.

"cavelamb himself" wrote

Or skin...

Oh, I did forget to mention that, didn't I? g

Yes, there was some skin lost. I think I picked up the equivalent weight of
gravel, ect., in exchange, so I *think* I ended up about even. ;-)

It was the only time I ever dropped a bike, in a big way.

First ride of the spring, in the first spring owning a bike, in the first
year I lived in Southern Ohio.

I took off down my favorite curving, fun, winding back-road.

I lined up, and picked the perfect line around the first major curve. About
half way through it, I realized I was about to be in big trouble. You see,
in Northern Ohio, where I grew up, they used straight salt on the roads.
After the snow melted, and it rained a couple times, there was nothing left
on the road but some white stains. In Southern Ohio, they use mainly slag
(burnt coal crunched up a bit larger than sand) with a little salt mixed in
when needed, and there was still a lot on the road, between where the tires
hit the road in the lanes.

My perfect line was about to take me through that pile of slag in the middle
of the lane, and I quickly calculated how the reduced coefficient of
friction would impact my ability to track the corner. The result of the
calculation said I was going to be *significantly* short of successfully
navigating the corner.

I decided the best thing to do was reducing my speed as much as possible
before I hit the road. (so it would hurt less) I straightened up, and
grabbed a boot full of rear brake, and a hand full of front brake, as much
as I thought I could, then backed off at the edge of the road, and tried to
turn. The important word in that sentence was "tried."

I dropped it at probably 35 or 40 MPH when I went down, and slid over the
right side of the lane, and through the shoulder, and into the grass beside
the road. After muttering a few choice words and looking around to see if
anyone saw me, (that is the first thing that all bike riders do when they
drop it, isn't it?) I picked it up, and rode back home to pick the gravel
and slag out of my knee, elbow and shoulder.

I decided to avoid doing that in the future. g

I think many people that fly also like to ride, because of the feeling of
banking through the corners, and the challenge of doing something that not
everyone does, and doing it with as much precision as possible while pushing
the limits a little bit.

I have not owned a bide for about 20 years, although I do get to ride my
son's crotch rocket a few times a year. It isn't the same as a cruiser,
though. I think I like the cruiser better, all things considered. With the
crunch of gas prices now, I may have to think about picking up an older
cruiser that would get me a better mileage per gallon than the 20 my mini
van gets, or the 13 my 3/4 ton van gets.

I had always said that it was a fool's chase, trying to come out money ahead
by driving a motorcycle, once you consider the cost of the bike and
insurance, ect, but I think gas at 3 bucks a gallon may make that equation
come out a little more favorably.

I think the electric car chase may be a fool's chase, too, at least for a
lot of people, after purchase cost and depreciation are figured in, and
especially so if it is necessary to keep another large vehicle for working.
--
Jim in NC

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:25:55 -0500, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Roger (K8RI)" wrote

(Those old roll bars really did work
g) and left me sitting on top right side of the frame as it slide
down the pavement tires first. No injuries other than a bit of chrome off
the left roll
bar...and my nerves. :-))

Been there, done that!

As I recall, I needed a new clutch lever, too. Amazing how much aluminum
can be ground off, during a 5 second slide along the asphalt! g


Clutch lever? I said that Harley was "Old":-)) Not one of those
modern ones.

Roger (K8RI)

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote

Clutch lever? I said that Harley was "Old":-)) Not one of those
modern ones.

OK, I give up.

So old that it didn't have a transmission? g

How did you work the clutch? I'm not familiar with "old as dirt" Harleys.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"Roger (K8RI)" wrote

Clutch lever? I said that Harley was "Old":-)) Not one of those
modern ones.

OK, I give up.

So old that it didn't have a transmission? g

How did you work the clutch? I'm not familiar with "old as dirt" Harleys.

Foot operated clutch and a tank shifter. I never had a tank shifter,
but did ride a panhead with a jockey shift (hand shift behind the seat).

Charles

On Nov 26, 10:19 pm, Ted Striker wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:12:51 -0500, "Roger (K8RI)" wrote:

Blah blah blah, now why is it your entire dissertation is all about the negatives of
driving an electric car. The obvious is that you worry if electric car use becomes more
widespread, you might have to pay more for your electricity. Too bad. I live in an area
where the cost is 7cents a kwh, and is generated by a nuke plant. So goes your coal
fired worries. And why do you think anyone else is so concerned about which fuel makes a
certian amount of polution. You think whether or not it makes you happy or not is going
to have any bearing on the decision to use an electric car? I'm going to get one anyway,
strain the power grid charging it up, don't care how much the power company polutes
making the juice to charge it up either. Not everyone is so big picture minded about the
whole affair as you are. I would love to be able to get around my local area and never
pull into the gas station and pay the current price of gas.







Before we jump from the frying pan into the fire how about some
analysis on rather an electric car is really efficient. Somehow I
can't believe it is more efficient and less poluting to generate the
electricity, transmit it long distances, store it and convert it back
to energy to drive a car than use direct conversion of gasoline to
energy. That doesn't even consider the long term enviromental impact
of dealing with the chemicals and heavy metals used in batteries.

Electric cars are more efficient than the regular variety, but... and
it's a big but. The all electrics are short range and not practical
for most of us, but for those with short drives they do have
sufficient range. So far, they are Expensive compared to regular cars.
Very expensive. Although they are efficient. The motors are more
like 95% which is great and even taking into account all the losses in
power generation and transmission they are more efficient than the gas
powered car, BUT (there's another one of those buts) even with that
increased efficiency they probably create considerably more pollution
than gas powered cars as most electricity is generated by coal fired
plants. Those plants release a lot of particulates, sulphur, CO2, and
Mercury through tall stacks that send the results to cities and states
down wind. In the end that power to power the electric car is more
polluting than the gas powered cars, or more so than most of them.
OTOH if most of the cars in our major cities were electric we'd see a
marked increase of air quality in those cities. OTOH if those cars
were small hybrids we'd also see an increase in the air quality.

Then there is the problem of getting electricity to the end user as
well as cost. Simply stated; we currently do not have the grid
capacity even in off hours to handle a substantial number of all
electric cars. So what happens if a lot of people go for the electric
car and we are short on grid capacity. Distributed power generation
using solar, wind, or what ever can help in many geographic areas, but
without more grid capacity those too are limited. Real time metering
and control of demand is on its way. Some areas already have it, but
with a continuing high demand you can expect to see rates get much
higher. Her in Michigan they run about 10 cents per KWh with all
charges while in California they peak around 38 cents. At 38 cents
per KWh it would be difficult to save money over the cost of running
an efficient hybrid.

On top of this are the batteries needed. Enough lead acid batteries to
give a reasonable range (just from the suburbs into town to shop)
would be expensive, very heavy, take up a lot of space, and are a
hazard on the roads due to transporting sulphuric acid. How long will
one heavy duty, deep cycle marine battery run a starter? Now kick
that up to moving the car and it's going to take a lot of batteries.

Even good high capacity battery packs such as Nickel Metal Hydride
(which also makes a good Hydrogen sponge) is expensive and no light
weight. Typical MiMH packs used in hybrids today run on the order of
$4,000 plus and they are sufficient only when used in conjunction with
a small gas engine. It's possible, but doubtful two packs ($8,000)
would manage 40 miles even in city driving.

Then there is the new Lithium family of batteries. They are powerful,
compact and lighter weight with reasonable life, but they are *really*
expensive.

BUT (had to say it again) the new technology batteries present a
disposal and/or recycling problem in addition to all the pollution
from the coal fired power plants.. They are not environmental friendly
but they haven't been around long enough to really see how this is
going to fly.

Also as soon as the technology becomes widespread the price of
electricity will raise enough for the all electric car to lose any
cost advantage. First in and First out (FIFO to borrow a computer
term) could save a lot if they weren't so expensive to implement.
Unfortunately when they drive up the price it will be a higher price
we all have to pay just to turn on the lights.

The side effects of many going to all electric would probably have a
greater effect on the cost of living then using a lot of corn to make
alcohol will on the food chain.

Hydrogen takes even more energy to produce.

All-in-all there is no one technology that can have much more than a
small effect as far as helping the economy and environment. Like the
energy efficient home that uses a mix of active and passive solar
energy along with the power mains/natural gas and even uses the gray
water instead of dumping it down the sewer, we are going to have to
combine technologies along with learning how to conserve. Currently
the best answer by far is the hybrid and learning how to conserve.

Roger (K8RI)

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

How lucky you are to have that .07 cent a kwh price but that is not
the case for everyone nor is the generation by nuclear power.
Instead, I pay a bit over .13 cents per kwh plus a distribution charge
that brings the cost to well over double yours. (And it could be
worse) The plant that generate that power are largely coal fired and
polute out the kazoo. On the other hand, your nuclear power plant us
generating polution that will last thousands of years and we have yet
to come up with an effective means of dealing with it. Instead, the
polution is building up in "temporary" storage with nowhere to put it
once the limits of that storage are reached. So by all means, get
your electric car and enjoy the hell out of it but don't be so foolish
as to believe it is the answer for everyone or that it comes without
its own set of problems that will have future consequences.

"BobR" wrote in message
...
On Nov 26, 10:19 pm, Ted Striker wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:12:51 -0500, "Roger (K8RI)"
wrote:

Blah blah blah, now why is it your entire dissertation is all about the
negatives of
driving an electric car. The obvious is that you worry if electric car
use becomes more
widespread, you might have to pay more for your electricity. Too bad. I
live in an area
where the cost is 7cents a kwh, and is generated by a nuke plant. So goes
your coal
fired worries. And why do you think anyone else is so concerned about
which fuel makes a
certian amount of polution. You think whether or not it makes you happy
or not is going
to have any bearing on the decision to use an electric car? I'm going to
get one anyway,
strain the power grid charging it up, don't care how much the power
company polutes
making the juice to charge it up either. Not everyone is so big picture
minded about the
whole affair as you are. I would love to be able to get around my local
area and never
pull into the gas station and pay the current price of gas.







Before we jump from the frying pan into the fire how about some
analysis on rather an electric car is really efficient. Somehow I
can't believe it is more efficient and less poluting to generate the
electricity, transmit it long distances, store it and convert it back
to energy to drive a car than use direct conversion of gasoline to
energy. That doesn't even consider the long term enviromental impact
of dealing with the chemicals and heavy metals used in batteries.

Electric cars are more efficient than the regular variety, but... and
it's a big but. The all electrics are short range and not practical
for most of us, but for those with short drives they do have
sufficient range. So far, they are Expensive compared to regular cars.
Very expensive. Although they are efficient. The motors are more
like 95% which is great and even taking into account all the losses in
power generation and transmission they are more efficient than the gas
powered car, BUT (there's another one of those buts) even with that
increased efficiency they probably create considerably more pollution
than gas powered cars as most electricity is generated by coal fired
plants. Those plants release a lot of particulates, sulphur, CO2, and
Mercury through tall stacks that send the results to cities and states
down wind. In the end that power to power the electric car is more
polluting than the gas powered cars, or more so than most of them.
OTOH if most of the cars in our major cities were electric we'd see a
marked increase of air quality in those cities. OTOH if those cars
were small hybrids we'd also see an increase in the air quality.

Then there is the problem of getting electricity to the end user as
well as cost. Simply stated; we currently do not have the grid
capacity even in off hours to handle a substantial number of all
electric cars. So what happens if a lot of people go for the electric
car and we are short on grid capacity. Distributed power generation
using solar, wind, or what ever can help in many geographic areas, but
without more grid capacity those too are limited. Real time metering
and control of demand is on its way. Some areas already have it, but
with a continuing high demand you can expect to see rates get much
higher. Her in Michigan they run about 10 cents per KWh with all
charges while in California they peak around 38 cents. At 38 cents
per KWh it would be difficult to save money over the cost of running
an efficient hybrid.

On top of this are the batteries needed. Enough lead acid batteries to
give a reasonable range (just from the suburbs into town to shop)
would be expensive, very heavy, take up a lot of space, and are a
hazard on the roads due to transporting sulphuric acid. How long will
one heavy duty, deep cycle marine battery run a starter? Now kick
that up to moving the car and it's going to take a lot of batteries.

Even good high capacity battery packs such as Nickel Metal Hydride
(which also makes a good Hydrogen sponge) is expensive and no light
weight. Typical MiMH packs used in hybrids today run on the order of
$4,000 plus and they are sufficient only when used in conjunction with
a small gas engine. It's possible, but doubtful two packs ($8,000)
would manage 40 miles even in city driving.

Then there is the new Lithium family of batteries. They are powerful,
compact and lighter weight with reasonable life, but they are *really*
expensive.

BUT (had to say it again) the new technology batteries present a
disposal and/or recycling problem in addition to all the pollution
from the coal fired power plants.. They are not environmental friendly
but they haven't been around long enough to really see how this is
going to fly.

Also as soon as the technology becomes widespread the price of
electricity will raise enough for the all electric car to lose any
cost advantage. First in and First out (FIFO to borrow a computer
term) could save a lot if they weren't so expensive to implement.
Unfortunately when they drive up the price it will be a higher price
we all have to pay just to turn on the lights.

The side effects of many going to all electric would probably have a
greater effect on the cost of living then using a lot of corn to make
alcohol will on the food chain.

Hydrogen takes even more energy to produce.

All-in-all there is no one technology that can have much more than a
small effect as far as helping the economy and environment. Like the
energy efficient home that uses a mix of active and passive solar
energy along with the power mains/natural gas and even uses the gray
water instead of dumping it down the sewer, we are going to have to
combine technologies along with learning how to conserve. Currently
the best answer by far is the hybrid and learning how to conserve.

Roger (K8RI)

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

How lucky you are to have that .07 cent a kwh price but that is not
the case for everyone nor is the generation by nuclear power.
Instead, I pay a bit over .13 cents per kwh plus a distribution charge
that brings the cost to well over double yours. (And it could be
worse) The plant that generate that power are largely coal fired and
polute out the kazoo. On the other hand, your nuclear power plant us
generating polution that will last thousands of years and we have yet
to come up with an effective means of dealing with it. Instead, the
polution is building up in "temporary" storage with nowhere to put it
once the limits of that storage are reached. So by all means, get
your electric car and enjoy the hell out of it but don't be so foolish
as to believe it is the answer for everyone or that it comes without
its own set of problems that will have future consequences.

Everything has unintended consequences.

However, in the case of nuclear power, there is a strong possibility that
much of the "waste" could be used to very good use--producing less intense
heat for many purposes other than superheated steam. At least in theory,
that could drastically reduce the need for other fuels for a lot of simple
heating purposes and could also reduce the need for electricity for many
simple heating purposes. In other words, some of those future consequences
could be beneficial. There would still be waste and it would still need to
be safeguarded; but there could be less of it and there could be far less
waste of other resources.

Peter

How did you work the clutch? I'm not familiar with "old as dirt"
Harleys.

Foot operated clutch and a tank shifter. I never had a tank shifter, but
did ride a panhead with a jockey shift (hand shift behind the seat).

I suspected that, but didn't know that Harleys had done that in the past.
--
Jim in NC