[Malsua]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

As has been pointed out in other posts, alternatives to petroleum-powered vehicles will become more available when they become as cheap and as reliable as petroleum-powered vehicles. That appears to be far in the future however.

Another technology that shows great promise is hydrogen power. A hydrogen-powered vehicle is essentially an EV but without the huge and expensive (to produce and to own) batteries. Instead the hydrogen is pumped into a fuel cell, and a reaction takes place that produces electricity to run the car. They have about the same range as battery-powered EVs and the running gear is pretty much the same. The difference is that you can fuel up a hydrogen-powered car in about four minutes vs. "X" length of time to charge a battery.

This technology already exists, albeit in infancy. Toyota makes a hydrogen-powered car (the Toyota Mirai) and a couple of other car manufacturers make one too. I don't think the infrastructure exists here yet, but it is available in a limited manner in California where you can fuel up with hydrogen at the some of the same stations that sell gasoline, and hydrogen tanker trucks are available to deliver it. I have no idea of the cost (probably a whole lot more at this stage than either petroleum - or battery - powered vehicles), but that should come down as the technology advances and infrastructure is adapted.

Best of all, absolutely emission-free.

Hydrogen is low density. It requires a lot of it for any fuel applications. This means high pressures.

It is also very leaky. Put hydrogen in ANYTHING and if you wait long enough, it is all gone. The molecules are small and literally just work their way out of containment. It will diffuse into everything it contacts. Look up hydrogen embrittlement if you want a deep dive into what it can do to metals.

There is no "source" of hydrogen that doesn't require more energy to obtain than the hydrogen can create. A 100% efficient fuel cell(impossible) is still an energy loss.

This makes Hydrogen simply a storage medium of energy. It's not a very good one at that.

[Two Bills]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

Do you mean the reciprocating piston engine that has been faithfully and reliably serving the world for the past 100 years? The engine that has powered tanks and other vehicles that won wars for us? The engine that is used in airplanes to safely get us airborne? Yes, that would be terrible. The problem with electric motors is that they take too long to charge. If you drive a long way and need to charge, you’ll need to stop for a minimal of several hours. If charging time can get reduced to minutes there might be a chance of EVs being successful. Even then, the entire electrical grid would need to be upgraded. How are we supposed to generate all of this additional electricity?

...and a lot of experts said a man would never stand on the moon.
Then the other experts solved the problem, which turned out to be 'One giant leap for mankind!'

[biker1]

You would need equipment to compress the natural gas. Equipment to do this has been available for about 10 years but I don't see wide spread adoption. The decision that EVs are the future has already been made by virtually every car maker.

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

People need homes. They don’t need electric vehicles when gasoline vehicles work just fine. Those that are worried about the environment should be pushing for natural gas vehicles. Current gas burning cars can be easily converted as can service stations. Those who have natural gas in their homes would be able to fill up at home. Natural gas burns much cleaner than petrol. A complete conversion would reduce emissions by over 50%.

[biker1]

Not really true. With DC fast chargers, such as the Tesla Superchargers, you can get about 200 miles of range in about 20 minutes when you are away from home. The vast majority of miles are local and people charge at home over night. People in apartments are more of a challenge that needs to be addressed. Regarding the generation of electricity, if all gas cars were replaced by EVs today, we would need an additional 25%. Since it will probably take 20 years to replace a majority of the gas cars with EVs, we have time for electricity production to ramp up. It would be nice if this country could see it's way to adopt the new nuclear reactor designs and increase the amount of power from nuclear.

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

Do you mean the reciprocating piston engine that has been faithfully and reliably serving the world for the past 100 years? The engine that has powered tanks and other vehicles that won wars for us? The engine that is used in airplanes to safely get us airborne? Yes, that would be terrible. The problem with electric motors is that they take too long to charge. If you drive a long way and need to charge, you’ll need to stop for a minimal of several hours. If charging time can get reduced to minutes there might be a chance of EVs being successful. Even then, the entire electrical grid would need to be upgraded. How are we supposed to generate all of this additional electricity?

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by biker1

Not really true. With DC fast chargers, such as the Tesla Superchargers, you can get about 200 miles of range in about 20 minutes when you are away from home. The vast majority of miles are local and people charge at home over night. People in apartments are more of a challenge that needs to be addressed. Regarding the generation of electricity, if all gas cars were replaced by EVs today, we would need an additional 25%. Since it will probably take 20 years to replace a majority of the gas cars with EVs, we have time for electricity production to ramp up. It would be nice if this country could see it's way to adopt the new nuclear reactor designs and increase the amount of power from nuclear.

Very strange how everyone is going away from nuclear at a time when more energy is needed

[biker1]

Yes, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima have had a negative impact on the public perception. Chernobyl was an example of incompetence in design. The operators of Fukushima were told that they weren't hardened enough against a natural disaster. Three Mile Island appears to be a combination of inadequate training and some bad luck.

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Very strange how everyone is going away from nuclear at a time when more energy is needed

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Kenswing

My last vehicle with an archaic internal combustion engine went over 1,000,000 miles before I rebuilt it. That would indicate to me that they figured out the whole reciprocating explosion thing.
I’m not opposed to electric vehicles. When the price comes down and their reliability is proven I might consider one. Then again I probably only have maybe two new cars in my future so I doubt either of them will be electric.

A million miles on an ICE is possible with good maintenance and especially if it is a diesel because the fuel is also a lubricant. But, a million miles is an unusual outlier......... something to be congratulated!

[jimjamuser]

45 years and only one IC engine problem.......quite a record! And I would consider an ECU to be part of the engine, since it is an ENGINE control unit.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr

Do you mean the reciprocating piston engine that has been faithfully and reliably serving the world for the past 100 years? The engine that has powered tanks and other vehicles that won wars for us? The engine that is used in airplanes to safely get us airborne? Yes, that would be terrible. The problem with electric motors is that they take too long to charge. If you drive a long way and need to charge, you’ll need to stop for a minimal of several hours. If charging time can get reduced to minutes there might be a chance of EVs being successful. Even then, the entire electrical grid would need to be upgraded. How are we supposed to generate all of this additional electricity?

Just saying that the reciprocating piston engine DID successfully REPLACE the horse. Now society and technology are in the beginning stage of replacing the reciprocating piston engines with something better. No innovation is perfect in the early stages of adoption. The early Thomas Edison light bulb used direct current. So, improvements will happen. The world will get less air pollution and Global Warming may decrease as long as it is NOT too far gone. And the horse did not cause the air pollution that the ICE has done........just some street waste.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive

Less powerful than gasoline. I cannot remember the numbers but I recall that natural gas is only 80% as powerful as gasoline.

And a POWERFUL engine is IMPORTANT how? Oh yes, in order to win a street drag race!

[MartinSE]

Nuclear is being considered.

Nukes are potentially very bad, but the do have an excellent safety record. Much better than fossil fuel generators.

No one source will provide all of the energetic we are going to need. Geothermal, hydro, wave, solar, wind and nukes will all have their place.

We need to stop looking for silver bullets and find the best available solutions for each situation.

Someone one said the vast majority of miles driven are local. Simply put. That is a serious understatement.

Also, private ownership of automobiles is not the smartest approach there. Time shared smart cars with full self driving will greatly reduce price ownership.

[toeser]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

That 2-day drive can turn into a one-week drive if you have ENGINE problems! An electrical engine is more reliable than an internal combustion engine

I have been driving for 63 years. Hasn't happened to me yet. I buy only cars that have sky-high reliability ratings.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by toeser

I have been driving for 63 years. Hasn't happened to me yet. I buy only cars that have sky-high reliability ratings.

Very true. Take care of a well made car, change oil frequently and they will last and last

[l2ridehd]

My issue’s are how we get electricity. It’s still 40% coal. So until we move to more renewable or more nuclear it just doesn’t make any sense. All your doing is moving the problem someplace else. And then there is the issue with batteries. Most of the scarce elements are mined by child labor. Then there is the disposal issue, the electric grid issues and the charging issues. IMHO we are a very long way from moving off gasoline. Hydrogen makes a lot more sense if it can be done. We have not even began to see all the environmental issue with batteries.

Perhaps we need more electric trains like Europe has. No batteries and move 100’s of people at a time. We did have the track system but let it fall apart. Still cheaper solution then all the others. Used to have a train station in every small town in America. We could again.

[Tvflguy]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Very true. Take care of a well made car, change oil frequently and they will last and last

100% correct. And if it’s a later ICE model it will have effective pollution control systems. We have a 2015 Mercedes GLA, since new with only 32k miles. It gets avg 30 mpg. Runs great and good size for us. Even tho we drive far less than 10k per year I get the oil changed with the BEST synth on the market Amsoil.

That all said I would love to get a plug-in hybrid or EV. Perhaps the Hyundai plug-in midsize Tucson. Or the EV Ford Mach-E. Those would be my current choices.

But if I put my Financial Advisor hat on, they would say “are you stupid or something’???

I’m not stupid.