On Jul 27, 11:56Â pm, Immortalist
yahoo.com> wrote:> On Jul 27, 12:53 am, "Rod Speed"
gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> Immortalist
yahoo.com> wrote>
>>> Rod Speed
gmail.com> wrote>>>> Immortalist
yahoo.com> wrote>>>>> Rod Speed
gmail.com> wrote>>>>>> Immortalist
yahoo.com> wrote>>>>>>> Rod Speed
gmail.com> wrote>>>>>>>> Immortalist
yahoo.com> wrote>>>>>>>>> Rod Speed
gmail.com> wrote>>>>>>>>>> Immortalist
yahoo.com> wrote>>>>>>>>>>> Why not just charge battereis with solar put in racks of 20
>>>>>>>>>>> warehouse charged universal racks electric cars of all kinds
>>>>>>>>>>> switch out the racks 200 miles racks available every 20 miles
>>>>>>>>>>> deposit on a rack 40 seconds to switch out the rack at a "station"
>>>>>>>>>> Not viable. Have you the remotest concept of how much solar would
>>>>>>>>>> be needed at each rack station, and how long it takes to charge the
>>>>>>>>>> rack again and how many cars would be swapping the rack on even
>>>>>>>>>> a single decent interstate ?
>>>>>>>>>> It wouldnt even be viable with nukes for the charging.
>>>>>>>>>> It would make more sense to use nukes to produce hydrogen and use that instead.
>>>>>>>>> Naw, you charge them up outside town, on a large scale,
>>>>>>>>> truck them in just like they do gas with tankers.
>>>>>>>> That wouldnt change a thing viability wise. In fact it would make it much worse.
>>>>>>> One tractor truck load would carry alot of full tanks.
>>>>>> Again, the problem aint with moving the batterys, the problem is
>>>>>> the amount of time it takes to recharge them and return them to
>>>>>> where you put them into cars. That approach of centralised
>>>>>> charging would just make that problem much worse and you would
>>>>>> need a lot more batterys in the process of being recharged.
>>>>> I wouldn't say that it would be centralized, or as centralized as oil refinement.
>>>> There's no point in doing other than recharging them where they
>>>> are swapped if you're going to use the grid to recharge them.
>>> This doesn't eliminate the possibility that gas/battery stations could be smaller,
>
>> They wouldnt even be that.
>
>>> to meet the demands of space in cities
>
>> There are no demands like that with car filling stations.
>
> Part of viability would be to be able to move in and appropriate prior
> infrastructure.
>
>>> and allow swap stations to be in as many places as gas
>>> stations are now, if the racks were just trucked in and out.
>
>> You dont need to truck them in and out, just recharge them at the swap stations.
>
> Possible, if the underground area was appropriated and devoted to
> automatic battery pack moving machinary.
>
>>>> And it wouldnt work anyway, because it takes too long to recharge them.
>>> That position assumes that there is not enough area to produce the needed solar power.
>
>> Corse there isnt. Its a trivial calculation.
>
> Do you have any links to the calculation or do you know of a way to
> explain it in basic language?
>
>>> The company that is getting ready to attempt to power Albuquerque New
>>> Mexico, with 4 square miles of mirrors, claims that it would take a couple
>>> hundred spuare miles in the desert west to power the entire country.
>
>> Pity thats a lie and it wouldnt work with rechargable batterys for cars anyway.
>>>>> Again, we are not both defining "scale of production and distribution"
>>>>> nor "supply and demand" on large scales, the same way.
>>>> I'm not 'defining' anything, just rubbing your nose in the fact that your unviable approach
>>>> would be even less viable if the batterys arent recharged where they are swapped.
>>> I apologise if I made it sound like they could only be trucked in and out.
>
>> I didnt say you did.
>
> Then were you saying that trucking them in and out alone would not be
> viable, by raising the point as supportive evidence for you position?
>
>>> I believe they could be charged where they are swapped in some types of service stations.
>
>> They could be charged in all of those if you're charging them from the grid.
>
> I suppose it might be possible have a days worth of battery packs in
> one station, but some gas stations may be to small, even after
> appropriating the underground storage area for gas.
>
>>> But in others they would be trucked in and out.
>
>> Nope.
>
> Why not?
>
>>> Maybe you should define "viable" so we can have a criterion to work with.
>
>> The definition is that it works. Your scheme wouldnt.
>
> Well I will try and find a definition we can use, if you disagree feel
> free to pick another from the page.
>
> ...an action or proposed action which
> has a feasible, realistic outcome...
>
>
http://www.google.com/search?q=define%%3Aviable
>
> If by "works" you mean "feasible, realistic outcome" which part of my
> "scheme" is not "feasible and realistic"? Remember you use of
> "feasible" and "realistic" must be applicable to other uses and not
> stipulated with special conditions solely for this argument.
>
>>>>> I am talking about on a competitive level with existing energy production methods.
>>>> You're talking about an approach that just plain wont work, because it takes
>>>> too long to recharge the batterys. In spades if you plan to do that using solar.
>>> Doesn't it take a couple of hours to charge 20 or
>>> 40 batteries with the right amperage and current?
>
>> Wrong with batterys that are the entire power source of the car.
>
> Ya, isn't that about 20 yellow tops like they use in golf carts? I
> think they use 6 of them, I use two myself for extra power in my
> vehicle. Most auto stores can cook one of these to 98%% in one hour,
> though it will get hot. These are used in wheelchairs also.
>
>
http://www.optimabatteries.com/optima_products/yellowtop.php
>
>>> At many auto stores they can completely charge one battery in about an hour, but it gets hot.
>
>> Wrong again. They certainly cant do that with the batterys in electric vehicles.
>
> They would need 20 dedicated cookers for one hours to charge a pack.
> But I don't know much more about the charging abilities. I suppose
> places that make these batteries have massive simualtanious charging
> abilities.
>
>>> When you say "[plain] won't work" it sounds like you
>>> have some pretty solid evidence to back that up with.
>
>> Yep, have a look at the charge times of electric vehicles some time.
>
> Well there are probably regulations that won't allow home owners to
> run chargers that can cook the battery up. Probably the auto shops
> need a certification or liscense to use them.
>
>>> Its like your saying certainly without a doubt it won't work now or ever.
>
>> Thats what I am saying with an interstate full of cars swapping the batterys every 200 miles.
>
> Does it just seem unrealistic or are you imaginng a complete
> replacement of the gas/fuel scheme as it exists? There is alot of gas
> out there along the roads, so obviously there would have to be alot of
> anything that eventually replaces it. Remember, before the automobile,
> horse and buggy days, the idea of having gas wherever people normally
> then rode their bio-vehicle [horses] would seem absurd.
>
>>> I am curious about that, considering you strong and emotional looking language.
>
>> Its not strong or emotional looking, its just the fact.
>
> Is the fact based upon current technology and infrastructure alone, or
> I mean how would these "facts" be used against possibilities in the
> near and far future? Are you asserting something about how long this
> situation will persist? Is it the number of batteries required or the
> distribution and charging that will never allow the schene to become
> real?
>
>>>>> I suppose you are all hung up on the unstated
>>>>> assumptions about how we get from here to there?
>>>> Nope, Â just rubbing your nose in the fact that your unviable approach would
>>>> be even less viable if the batterys arent recharged where they are swapped.
>>> Now you are swtitching from "not viable at all" to "less viable"
>
>> Nope. I'm saying that charging from the mains isnt viable, and that
>> centralised charging stations are even less viable, essentially because
>> that just adds to the time it takes to recharge the battery with the
>> transport time to the central charging station and back.
>
> Here is where I suppose I would wander off from the oil refining and
> electric generation metaphor and move it over to farming. Many areas
> would farm the solar heat and then distribute it. But I admit I am
> making this up as I go along. But as to your point of "just adds
> time", I think that any one of the schemes could be made to work but
> some would be more expensive. I suppose a bunch of styles would be
> experimented with and competition would settle the issue as to what is
> most efficient for us then.
>
>> And that solar charging is even less viable again, because the sun doesnt
>> shine long enough strong enough so that adds to the charging time even more.
>
>>> I can accept that language for logic sake.
>
>> Nothing to accept.
>
> This is where storing heated water in giant themoses wold be more
> viable. Maybe even solar panels for the day and heated water during
> the day used to run steam engines spinning generators at night. Why
> not just bypass solar panels and batteries and just boil water with
> mirrors?
They aleady tried that some time ago. But it also why digital,
lasers,
holograms, nanotech, A.I. satellites, PV Cells, fiber optics, DVD,
and robots were invented,
Since the only thing the idiots know less about than batteries is
mirrors,
>>> Upon reading my statement of "all hung up" I am sorry, I should have
>>> said "dogmatic about how the issue of how to get from here to there.
>
>> Still just plain wrong. Nothing dogmatic about the facts.
>
> Well I mean that it just sounded dogmatic since your ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
