Gull to cruise the lake quietly

I nearly had a Tesla shipped in, until I read about how they die completely if you leave them unplugged for a couple of weeks, at which point it takes $40k to replace the batteries. Tesla’s aware the issue is widespread, but instead of fixing the problem, they have added tracking devices to every car so they can find you when it breaks down.

As awesome as the Tesla’s specs are, there are still some hidden costs I’m not comfortable with.

hydrogen can be produced cleanly using a photocatalyst, the simplest such catalyst I’ve seen is merely powdered anatese and lye. The ingredients are common and the method is simple, we could all make our own hydrogen out of sunlight and water.

The problem is, hydrogen is tricky to store safely, it has a habit of exploding most inconveniently during accidents.

johnboy said :

Why you’d want difficult, dangerous hydrogen when methanol fuel cells will work just as well is beyond me.

The only advantage I see to hydrogen is the production of it, on site, using electricity. Methanol fuel cells, while perhaps better then using methanol in a internal combustion engine, is still limited by the need to produce methanol, ship and store it.

tommo said :

RadioVK said :

tommo said :

RadioVK said :

I won’t be really impressed untill it runs on a hydrogen fuel cell.

You’re wasting your time on battery/hybrid technology. Hydrogen fuel cell technology is the future.

Right, except for the few miracles required before anyone invests in the mass production of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.
Of course the car and fuel industries like the idea of hydrogen fuel cells because it still requires you to go a service station and fill up.
I agree that the whole hybrid thing is a waste of time (being only a half-assed step in the right direction).

There is the Honda Clarity trial currently running in Califonia (I think). It’s relatively small scale at the moment, but as a proof of concept, it’s a big step.

I’m aware of this and will admit it’s not a bad effort. It is indeed running in select parts of California where hydrogen refueling is available. However mass production is at least 6 years away which is optimistic given the investment that needs to be made in hydrogen refueling stations and the reduction in vehicle cost required before the public would consider such an alternative.
In comparison a Tesla Roadster (whilst not as practical) or even the Tesla Model S is much cheaper with similar mileage and is more powerful.
The Ford Focus Electric is similar to the Clarity in terms of practicality and has similar power but less mileage. Again it is much cheaper though.
However the best thing about these is you are not dependent on any fuel, no need to go to a servo, no dependance on fuel empires, you can charge at home. Now imagine if just a fraction of the the half trillion that may be needed to put up hydrogen refueling infrastructure in the US alone was instead invested in battery technologies and battery recycling/reuse.

The Tesla Model S looks fantastic. I’d love to drive one.

RadioVK said :

tommo said :

RadioVK said :

I won’t be really impressed untill it runs on a hydrogen fuel cell.

You’re wasting your time on battery/hybrid technology. Hydrogen fuel cell technology is the future.

Right, except for the few miracles required before anyone invests in the mass production of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.
Of course the car and fuel industries like the idea of hydrogen fuel cells because it still requires you to go a service station and fill up.
I agree that the whole hybrid thing is a waste of time (being only a half-assed step in the right direction).

There is the Honda Clarity trial currently running in Califonia (I think). It’s relatively small scale at the moment, but as a proof of concept, it’s a big step.

I’m aware of this and will admit it’s not a bad effort. It is indeed running in select parts of California where hydrogen refueling is available. However mass production is at least 6 years away which is optimistic given the investment that needs to be made in hydrogen refueling stations and the reduction in vehicle cost required before the public would consider such an alternative.
In comparison a Tesla Roadster (whilst not as practical) or even the Tesla Model S is much cheaper with similar mileage and is more powerful.
The Ford Focus Electric is similar to the Clarity in terms of practicality and has similar power but less mileage. Again it is much cheaper though.
However the best thing about these is you are not dependent on any fuel, no need to go to a servo, no dependance on fuel empires, you can charge at home. Now imagine if just a fraction of the the half trillion that may be needed to put up hydrogen refueling infrastructure in the US alone was instead invested in battery technologies and battery recycling/reuse.

tommo said :

Of course the car and fuel industries like the idea of hydrogen fuel cells because it still requires you to go a service station and fill up.

Hydrogen fuel cell are just a way of converting electricity (which stored in batteries has a low energy density) into something (hydrogen) which has a high energy density. Which overcomes one of the problems of poor range in EVs, at the cost of, as you say, having to go to a station and fill up (and having to put that station infrastructure in everywhere).

tommo said :

RadioVK said :

I won’t be really impressed untill it runs on a hydrogen fuel cell.

You’re wasting your time on battery/hybrid technology. Hydrogen fuel cell technology is the future.

Right, except for the few miracles required before anyone invests in the mass production of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.
Of course the car and fuel industries like the idea of hydrogen fuel cells because it still requires you to go a service station and fill up.
I agree that the whole hybrid thing is a waste of time (being only a half-assed step in the right direction).

There is the Honda Clarity trial currently running in Califonia (I think). It’s relatively small scale at the moment, but as a proof of concept, it’s a big step.

RadioVK said :

I won’t be really impressed untill it runs on a hydrogen fuel cell.

You’re wasting your time on battery/hybrid technology. Hydrogen fuel cell technology is the future.

Right, except for the few miracles required before anyone invests in the mass production of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.
Of course the car and fuel industries like the idea of hydrogen fuel cells because it still requires you to go a service station and fill up.
I agree that the whole hybrid thing is a waste of time (being only a half-assed step in the right direction).

I won’t be really impressed untill it runs on a hydrogen fuel cell.

You’re wasting your time on battery/hybrid technology. Hydrogen fuel cell technology is the future.

Keijidosha said :

The vessel is powered by ActewAGL’s Green Choice energy to align with the owners’ low carbon footprint business philosophy.

In light of recent information this stagement is likely to raise eyebrows.

Well assuming ACTEW choose to provide it from green sources its all OK 🙂

HenryBG said :

So…instead of burning a bit of diesel, they now burn coal – suffer transmission loss – charge up some batteries, more wastage, convert power into mechanical energy, thus suffering a 3rd slice of efficiency loss, and then have to replace the batteries every year or two because they don’t have anything near the durability of a solid old diesel engine?

Has anybody done any figures on how much extra power is used when you use these kinds of battery powered rubbish?

Actually, electric motors are relatively efficient. In the context of electric vehicles vs diesel vehicles the electric variety has on board efficiency of 80% compared to the 20% for diesel engines.
Quality batteries if well maintained should also last at least 5 years. There are reports of Toyota RAV4 EV’s reaching 160,000km and having very little decrease in the range on each charge.
Sure we should also factor the efficiency of power production from coal but we should also take into account the extraction and refinement process for diesel fuel is more costly than for coal.
Taking all factors into account I think referring to it as ‘battery powered rubbish’ is a little hasty.

This provides me with the ideal opportunity for trying very slow waterskiing.

I assume.

So…instead of burning a bit of diesel, they now burn coal – suffer transmission loss – charge up some batteries, more wastage, convert power into mechanical energy, thus suffering a 3rd slice of efficiency loss, and then have to replace the batteries every year or two because they don’t have anything near the durability of a solid old diesel engine?

Has anybody done any figures on how much extra power is used when you use these kinds of battery powered rubbish?

Another victim of ACTEW’s second biggest scam.

The vessel is powered by ActewAGL’s Green Choice energy to align with the owners’ low carbon footprint business philosophy.

In light of recent information this stagement is likely to raise eyebrows.