Will gas cars die?

[dogtowner]

Natural gas is a viable short term alternative to ME oil. So is diesel made from coal. So is anything into oil.

We don't have to depend on the Middle East for our energy, so why do we?

that's ther $64k question. the tech is for sale to anyone TODAY (google it). the gas is available TODAY and prices are actually slunmping. a smart company would jump all over this if they could believe that Congress wouldn't rape them for it.

the last step is an easy, convenient delivery system and thats 90% there TODAY.

I'm all over it when it comes.

 

[dahermit]

that's ther $64k question. the tech is for sale to anyone TODAY (google it). the gas is available TODAY and prices are actually slunmping. a smart company would jump all over this if they could believe that Congress wouldn't rape them for it.

the last step is an easy, convenient delivery system and thats 90% there TODAY.

I'm all over it when it comes.

When I was a kid, the city of Ludington, Michigan used propane to power their city police cars. Natural gas is very similar, but would take different jets due to the different burn rate (for lack of better word).

One of the problems of such gases is that it must be in large steel tanks. The tank they used was a single standard (then), 100 lb. cylinder in the trunk. Most people would not want to wrestle a 100 lb. cylinder into the trunk of their cars in order to re-fule...something different would have to be used.

Other than that, they used propane for many years, and for all I know, they still do.

Nevertheless, officer Bill Jocks was moderately burned (large second degree burns), when his cigarette ignited a leaking cylinder, destroying the car.

 

[dogtowner]

When I was a kid, the city of Ludington, Michigan used propane to power their city police cars. Natural gas is very similar, but would take different jets due to the different burn rate (for lack of better word).

One of the problems of such gases is that it must be in large steel tanks. The tank they used was a single standard (then), 100 lb. cylinder in the trunk. Most people would not want to wrestle a 100 lb. cylinder into the trunk of their cars in order to re-fule...something different would have to be used.

Other than that, they used propane for many years, and for all I know, they still do.

Nevertheless, officer Bill Jocks was moderately burned (large second degree burns), when his cigarette ignited a leaking cylinder, destroying the car.

They've been using gas here in Richmond for city vehicles for many years. I'm thinking a deal where you just couple the built in tank to a filling source to fill up just like for gas grills. product is the same jsut a difference in pressure.

 

[Hobo1]

They've been using gas here in Richmond for city vehicles for many years. I'm thinking a deal where you just couple the built in tank to a filling source to fill up just like for gas grills. product is the same jsut a difference in pressure.

I have a friend that works for a company that wholesales various gases in tanks. He said the wholesale price of propane is very low - below that of natural gas. However, the distribution costs are very high, with trucks filling small on-site tanks at every gas station and convenience store that refills/ exchanges propane tanks. So now the retail cost is high.

He also said that both Federal and State incentive payments to use electric cars are killing competition. If the incentives were given to all alternative fuel cars, then cars could be built with propane tanks designed into the vehicle. Since many places sell propane from a tank, the car's propane tank would have to be fitted to match the distribution tank.

As usual, the government has its thumb on the scale which tilts everything toward electric cars - which I don't think will be the answer in the long run.

 

[dogtowner]

As usual, the government has its thumb on the scale which tilts everything toward electric cars - which I don't think will be the answer in the long run.

more like its jackboot on the throat.

get rid of the ethanol and this insane electric crap and then just BACK OFF and sllow the market to work FREELY.

 

[Dr.Who]

We do not. We depend on Mexico and Canada for most of our oil. Only a small amount comes from the Middle East.

My mistake. I was thinking "foreign" when I wrote ME.

 

[Dr.Who]

You posted your typical twisted response. Our government (and those of the allies), had no interest in developing the airplane until war made it necessary. The development was only paid for by the governments after World War One (not WWII as you were mistaken about my post...read it again), had started. Therefore, the airplane was developed into a viable item in less than 3-4 years and continual got better.

Rocket to the moon. After the famous JFK speech, the government resources of rocket science developed the science of rocketry to the point of manned flight to the moon in a few short years.

Given that central team of this thread is that the Government should or should not spend money developing electric cars, why would it take any longer to do so than it took in the two examples?

Electric cars are a fact now...Even if it does not fit into your Conservative philosophy. Hybrid electric cars are on the highway now. Gas powered only on the highway; electric powered in the city where most of the driving is done. My son and daughter-in-law drive one.

It will take as long as it takes. I do not think that your facts are completely right on airplanes and walking on the moon is a perfect example of something that was not needed.

But to answer your question directly - the gov should not spend on those programs because it is not the place of government to do that. Government was never intended to compete with enterprise.

Electric cars are a fact more as theory than as practical reality. They are just not procatical and won't be for years. I am in favor of electric cars so my thoughts are not the result of conservative thinking. Unless you start talking about the government funding their development. The as a conservative I say "no way". Even if it were a real good and practical idea we just cant afford it when we need to pay off the debt.

 

[dahermit]

I do not think that your facts are completely right on airplanes...

That is because unlike me, who has watched many documentaries on the development of air craft during WWI, you have not bothered to study that aspect of history. The Fokker Tri-plane and the Eindecker were very different from the aircraft the could barely take to the air four years earlier.

But to answer your question directly - the gov should not spend on those programs because it is not the place of government to do that. Government was never intended to compete with enterprise.

Subsidizing the research on electric cars is not "competing", it is helping.

Electric cars are a fact more as theory than as practical reality. They are just not procatical and won't be for years. I am in favor of electric cars so my thoughts are not the result of conservative thinking. Unless you start talking about the government funding their development. The as a conservative I say "no way". Even if it were a real good and practical idea we just cant afford it when we need to pay off the debt.

Hybrids use electricity for power (city driving), until they require gas for more speed and power. Refer to the first paragraph above. They are practial now, albeit a little pricy.

 

[Dr.Who]

That is because unlike me, who has watched many documentaries on the development of air craft during WWI, you have not bothered to study that aspect of history. The Fokker Tri-plane and the Eindecker were very different from the aircraft the could barely take to the air four years earlier.

Subsidizing the research on electric cars is not "competing", it is helping.



Hybrids use electricity for power (city driving), until they require gas for more speed and power. Refer to the first paragraph above. They are practial now, albeit a little pricy.

Links?

Competing.

The battery is so costly and dangerous that it makes the whole car a failure.

 

[dahermit]

Links?

Competing.

The battery is so costly and dangerous that it makes the whole car a failure.

Links?

 

[nobull]

Then what will we do with the biproducts of oil..

doug

 

[Dr.Who]

Links?

You really need a link to know that the batteries are the most expensive partof the car, will wear out before the car does, contains toxic chemicals, and is prone to explosion?

I will be happy to provide links but am short on time now.

 

[Dr.Who]

Then what will we do with the biproducts of oil..

doug

I believe many people think the oil will sit in the earth undisturbed causing no harm.

The reality is that if we switch to alternatives then suddenly we will discover that there is no such thing as global warming and those who have a choice* will use oil because it will be cheaper and more convenient in many instances.
But the vast majority of Americans will have invested huge sums of money in alternatives and will be subject to regulatory restrictions.

And who do you think "those who have a choice" will be?

 

[dahermit]

You really need a link to know that the batteries... prone to explosion?

I will be happy to provide links but am short on time now.

Yah, right!

 

[dahermit]

I believe many people think the oil will sit in the earth undisturbed causing no harm.

The reality is that if we switch to alternatives then suddenly we will discover that there is no such thing as global warming and those who have a choice* will use oil because it will be cheaper and more convenient in many instances.
But the vast majority of Americans will have invested huge sums of money in alternatives and will be subject to regulatory restrictions.

And who do you think "those who have a choice" will be?

"Global warming" is not the most seious issue. ITS THE PRICE OF OIL!!!