Printable View
I am interested in forum members opinions with regard to if they would be supportive of government funding of research, developement and sales of coal powered personal transportation vehicles within the USA. The US seems to have abundant coal reserves. (at least the info I have seen would indicate this but I am always open to new info)
Totally against it. Removing mountain tops and destroying the environment for coal is antiquated. Much cleaner technology is available. :twocents:
Turn coal states into hemp producing states and revive their economies with clean agriculture and clean environment. :thumbsup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Blast
I would be interested to see a car powered by burning tires.
i totaly agree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by gypski
goal powered cars:D sounds like something from some cheap comedy from 50s:D
Or one of those old black and white features about what the future will be like, such as a coal powered flying car and robots will be made by 1975Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter007
:S2:Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLocks
:postgood: :jointsmile:Quote:
Originally Posted by RedLocks
I am a little disappointed that out of more than 80 views only 2 members have posted their opinions. I did not make this thread as a joke.
Perhaps it will help if I point out that there are a very small number of coal powered cars currently available for sale in the USA at this time. I too am disappointed that the predictions of flying cars made decades ago are not even close but coal powered cars are here today. I have yet to make up my mind whether this is a good or a bad thing.
I hope this encourages some of you to actually leave your opinion regarding government funding for these cars.
thank you,
Max Blast
First fact: 45% of the nation's electricity comes from coal-powered generating plants. (Interestingly, an environmentalist website places it at 57% â?? but they're using figures from ten years ago. Maybe they should update their "facts.")
Second fact: On average, 7.2 percent of the electricity generated at any power plant is lost between source and destination.
Other companies know this issue as "line losses." When electricity passes through conductors over a long distance, it generates heat and some of the electricity is dissipated. Put together 1,000 feet of household extension cords, for example, and the power from wall plug to lamp will weaken so much that it will no longer light a 100-watt bulb.
Large power plants sometimes are significant polluters and unwelcome neighbors, so they typically locate far from the urban centers that consume most of the power. That means power sometimes has to move hundreds of miles to its final destination, and that means line losses.
Third fact: Only about 40 percent of the thermal energy in coal can be converted to electricity in the first place â?? i.e., 60 percent is wasted.
So here's what we've got so far. The electric car runs on batteries, which are recharged at electrical outlets, which deliver electricity from power plants. 45% of that power, nationwide, comes from coal ("bad, bad! dirty, dirty!"); 19% from nuclear plants (which produce radioactive waste that we still have not figured out a way to dispose of long-term); 6% comes from hydroelectric dams ("bad! bad! let the rivers run free!"); and 24 % comes from natural-gas plants â?? which I happen to like very much, because the stuff burns amazingly clean, and we have lots of it, but environmentalists condemn because the carbon dioxide given off supposedly causes global climate change. Basically, for an environmentalist, there is no acceptable way to generate electricity â?? and yet, they keep promoting these electric cars. Go figure. (Oh, but they, unlike us evil conservative hicks, are "facts-and-science-based.")
As long as we're laying facts and science on the environmentalists, how about this one:
Fourth fact: A typical 500 MW coal-powered electric plant annually produces 10,000 tons of sulfur dioxide (the main cause of acid rain) and 10,500 tons of nitrogen oxides, which cause smog and acid rain. Coal-burning also produces smaller amounts of mercury and other problematic elements, including radioactive ones. Oops. In all the hyped-up, ballyhooed hullabaloo about "man-caused global warming," folks seem to have forgotten about bad ol'-fashioned air pollution â?? the real thing, which causes massive deaths in places like China, India and Mexico City, but which has been dramatically reduced in our own country because of advanced coal-burning technologies.
So, next time a U.S. president or his lackeys try to shove an electric car down your throat, hit 'em back with some facts.
draft_lens14832221module129525761photo_1_128828803 1Energy_Sources_July_2010.png
Dexter, thanks for being one of those who left an opinion (based on facts presented) on this thread.
Not to nitpick just to further inform, I found today on DOE.GOV that more than half of the electricity in the USA comes from coal powered generating plants. Of course that does not mean that they are correct but just another source of information.
I sincerely hope others will leave their opinion of government funding for coal powered cars with or without supporting facts.
thanks again,
Max Blast
im sorry that i didnt take this to seriously on the first place but heres some facts..goal can never get clean as bio ethanol...
What are biofuels and how do they work? Return to top
Bioethanol is an alcohol which is made from plants (biomass). Sugar cane, sugarbeet and cereals (wheat and barley) are the most common sources of the fuel. The production first uses enzyme amylases to convert a feedstock crop into fermentable sugars. Yeast is then added to the 'mash' to ferment the sugars to alcohol and carbon dioxide, the liquid fraction being distilled to produce ethanol.
Being a liquid at room temperature, bioethanol can be handled in a similar way to conventional petrol. Bioethanol can be used in spark-ignition engines with little or no modification as a low percentage alcohol-petrol blend ('E10' is 10% ethanol) or as pure alcohol fuel in modified vehicles.
To convert a conventional spark-ignition engine vehicle to run on pure bioethanol requires adjustment of the ignition timing, and the fitting of a larger fuel tank due to the fuel's low energy density. As alcohol fuels degrade certain types of rubber and metals, some engine components may also need to be replaced. Pure bioethanol is difficult to vaporise at low temperatures, so it is usually blended with a small amount of petrol to improve ignition (E85 is a common high percentage blend). Several manufacturers now offer 'Flex-Fuel Vehicles' or 'FFVs', which are able to run on any percentage of bioethanol blend up to E85 (see below).
Biodiesel is commercially produced by the 'esterification' of energy crops such as oil seed rape or from waste vegetable and animal oils (from the food industry). The oils are first filtered to remove water and contaminants and are then mixed with an alcohol (usually methanol) and a catalyst. This breaks up the oil molecules before they separated and purified.
Low percentage biodiesel blends (B5) can be used in place of mineral diesel without any engine modification in many diesel engines (a 'B5' blend is 5% biodiesel mixed with 95% mineral diesel). While some diesel cars will also run on higher percentage biodiesel blends, their use can degrade rubber products (such as fuel pipes) and clog fuel injectors in certain conditions. To reduce the risk of these problems, users of ester-based biodiesels should ensure the fuel's compliance with EN14214.
Important notice: use of biodiesel blends over 5% usually invalidates a vehicle's warranty, so you should check with your vehicle manufacturer/supplier before using biodiesel at more than 5% concentration.
How do I refuel a biofuel car? Return to top
Both biodiesel and bioethanol are liquid at room temperature, and so can be dispensed from fuel pumps in the same way as conventional liquid fuels. It is likely that you have already driven on ethanol as it is routinely added to petrol (as a 5% blend) to improve octane ratings and as an oxygenate additive (to reduce carbon monoxide emissions).
Commercially produced higher percentage blends are still relatively new to the UK, and the distribution of biofuel pumps (at standard fuel stations) is therefore not as established as conventional mineral fuels. Of the two fuels, biodiesel is more widely available across the UK â?? the website Biodiesel Filling Stations provides a list of UK biodiesel outlets (for all higher percentage blends). While bioethanol stations are far fewer in number, a small network is being established by the supermarket chain Morrisons.
Are biofuel powered cars better for the environment? Return to top
The great promise of biofuel is its potential to be 'carbon-neutral' with all the carbon dioxide emitted during use of the fuel being balanced by the absorption from the atmosphere during the fuel crop's growth. However, in practice the process of growing the crop requires the input of fossil fuels for fertilisers, harvesting, processing and fuel distribution.
Taking into account carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide emissions (associated with agriculture) for oil seed rape sourced biodiesel and sugar cane bioethanol, studies show that lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced by around 60% and 90% respectively. This means a 5% biofuel blend would result in a carbon reduction of around 2.5% (biodiesel) and 4% (bioethanol). Much greater emission reductions are possible for biodiesels if waste oils are used, as the sources material would otherwise be thrown away.
Regarding regulated emissions, tests show that biodiesel particulate emissions are lower than from mineral diesel. Its low sulphur content also increases efficiency of exhaust control systems, reducing carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions. For high percentage bioethanol fuels, tailpipe carbon monoxide, particulates and hydrocarbons are generally reduced â?? however, some unregulated emissions such as aldehydes are actually increased.
What are the costs of owning a biofuel car? Return to top
Car purchase costs are unaffected by using low percentage biofuel blends as no engine modifications are required. Indeed, standard petrol and diesel fuels often contain up to 5% biofuel as part of their specification. The only caveat is that, as already mentioned, use of biodiesel blends over 5% can invalidate a vehicle's warranty, so you need to check with your vehicle manufacturer/supplier before using biofuels at more than 5% concentration.
While petrol cars can be modified to use high percentage bioethanol, which costs several hundred pounds, most bioethanol cars are Flex-Fuel designed to operate on any percentage of bioethanol up to 85% (E85). Where available, these tend to be similarly priced to conventional (petrol) models.
Due to economies of scale, forecourt prices of biofuel blends tend to be higher than those of conventional mineral fuels, depending on the strength of the blend. Another drawback is that both biodiesel and bioethanol have lower energy content than petrol or diesel, so more fuel by volume is required per mile. The result is that using commercially produced high percentage biofuels can increase fuel costs pert mile.
One option to cut fuel costs is to make your own biodiesel using waste cooking oil, a multi-gallon drum and some basic kitchen utensils. Several organisations, such as Bio-Power (UK) have been set up to advise DIYers on how best to source and mix the ingredients - and how to stay legal by paying the correct fuel tax. Once materials and labour costs are factored in, per litre costs typically come in at around 65p per litre.
Where can I buy biofuels and biofuel cars? Return to top
Ford, Volvo and Saab are the leading proponents of Flex-Fuel Vehicles â?? between them they offer several models that are able to run on any percentage of bioethanol blend up to E85. These include the Volvo C30, V70 and S40, Ford Focus and Mondeo models and Saab's 9-3 and 9-5.
Biodiesel is the most widely available biofuel in the UK â?? the website Biodiesel Filling Stations provides a list of UK biodiesel outlets (for all higher percentage blends). While bioethanol stations are far fewer in number, a small network is being established by the supermarket chain Morrisons.
fck sry i copy pasted a wrong page...
i wanted da bring out 50 facts
bioethanol-v-diesel-v-petrol-v-electricyty..but i closed the windows..
ill come back herer tomarra and update this cos i gonna make some research in work..its accually quit interesting:thumbsup:
Did any one know the power companies charge their customers for the electricity lost in transmission? things like that used to be a business expense that was absorbed by the company and not passed on to the customer. My how times have changed with deregulation that was supposed to make electricity cheaper. :twocents: Coal is bad, bad, bad, :D
i think that theres no accual way charging for that..unless they they checked how many Kw they produced and for how many of them they got payd off..(betveen sectors)Quote:
Originally Posted by gypski
haaa..good exsample of power lost..you stand under high voltage cable with T5..hold it from 1 side and stick other side 2 the ground//and voila...it lights..
its not bright,but it lights..:jointsmile:
My opinion be the use of a compound that does nothing good when burned but pollute our air and land and promote growth of masses within human tissue be a bad thing. Coal be left in the ground by mother nature as a form of filter rather then a form of fuel. Not clean and just not right to use.
BWD
sry max but what more i read and compare the facts il see that goal is out dated...compare to todays technology..
if you wanna take a wee look then heres most of the information about bioethanol and plenty of facts..WARRNING-its long reading:thumbsup:
http://juwel.fz-juelich.de:8080/dspa...mp_rev0607.pdf
and dont think that i wanna start arquing with you ova that but this is what i belive..:thumbsup:
The power companies call it intangible charges. You know what intangible means. Can't be proved. Go figure and they get paid. :S2: Suckers :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter007
sry yeah,i didnt express myself right.Quote:
Originally Posted by gypski
ah they are suckers allright..and its mot like they wouldnt have money to move around..imagen the world now,if somebody would come out tomara with genius idea how do get 100% clean power and its easy and cheap....you know what would happen?HE WOULD GET KILT STRIGHT AWAY...
cos that would mean that few years time we wouldnt need oil diesel petrol goal nothing like it...US wouldnt let it happen ABSOLUTLY NO WAY..
Tesla already developed a localized, I think kind of wireless electrical distribution system. And it was killed, Tesla ruined financially. :thumbsup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter007
Dexter, I have seen nothing in any of your posts that I would or even could argue with. I am sorry if I said anything to give that impression. I am really gratified to see a forum member doing such thorough research in support of their posts. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexter007
regards,
Max Blast
sry mate my head was a bit of a mess,in some reason i was thinking for a sec that your thread was called WHY COAL GARS ARE BETTER BLA BLA BLA,,sry i was accually reading that from somewhere else..and i only realised that like next day:wtf: sry bout that..Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Blast
so is here anithyng else what you wanna add here?