http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf-electric-car/index?dcp=ppn.39666654.&dcc=0.216878497#/leaf-electric-car/index

Did a spit take watching TV just now when I saw the ad.
Im sure there are intentional built in drawbacks in the design so as not to make the idea too apealing. The batteries are sub-par "100 miles/charge based upon US EPA LA4 City cycle2"-( the oil companies bought the patent for the most advanced batteries from GM a while ago). Still its a huge step in the right direction especially compared to the pathetic and insulting hybrids.

Edited by MAYNARD76 on 04/21/2010 16:41:33 MDT.

The only major problem is the infrastructure problem. Seems like this is only an option for homeowners.

When does TopGear get one?

Much more interesting topic than aliens! :)

Hmmmm, now I have to buy two cars. One that I can drive around town, and one for longer trips. That means this electric car is not a dual purpose item!

But yes, this is a step in the right direction. I'll put all my gear on the fact that if oil companies didn't run the world, we'd have several zero-emission technologies on the market available to consumers at a reasonable price.

254.4 million registered cars in the U.S. in 2007.

Magically convert every single one of them to an electric car- where would the electricity come from? I'll wager we're going to see the world's mining companies making a rapid shift into lithium extraction. Just hope there's none in the beautiful places you love.

Electric cars are a great step- but given the USA has an practically non-existent renewable/clean energy system, doesn't it just shift the burden away from oil and into another filthy energy sector? Perhaps they should only be sold with solar charging systems for your home...

As it stands now, electricity IS coal and gas in the USA. Think of the mountaintop removal that would be needed to keep up with new demand from transportation.



As for natural gas, from what I read, you do NOT want to be living anywhere near an extraction site. Raise your hand if you like benzene in your air and water!

Nuclear?
I've always found it strange that it gets pitched as safe and "clean"...providing you just keep pretending the U-233 half-life isn't ~150,000 years and bury it all in someone else's backyard. Leaking containers on the bottom of the ocean or a cave in the desert? Don't worry, we'll figure it out...someday...

This issue is so complex...but I suppose any shift away from oil would be smart in the short term. If anything, we might seriously begin implementing alternatives if the oil stranglehold is eased.

No ones claiming electric cars are going to save the world.
EV s will help break our dependence on foreign oil. Unlike other pie in the sky ideas EVs are real and practical and the infrastructure already exists, we just need to install outlets.
Electricity is also the only energy source that can be and will be made from clean sources as technology progresses.
You can not make any of those claims for any of the liquid fuel so-called alternatives.

craig makes some good points. however, wind plants and solar plants are being built everywhere. hopefully, those plants should start replacing some of the coal plants. unfortunately, solar isn't nearly as efficient as i needs to be to be. Another renewable source is methane from water treatment facilities and dumps. those can actually generate significant amounts of power and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, however they aren't widely used.

Also, you are right about not wanting to live anywhere near where natural gas is being pumped out of the ground. however, its a much better, cleaner alternative to coal given that its mined away from populated areas

Edited by denver_whitest185 on 04/22/2010 16:29:41 MDT.

I think you guys are both right.
I guess I see EVs a being an important first step towards an alternative system, but a first step only.

I'm a big-time cycling advocate/commuter: an even better solution...problem is, you gotta get of your a$$. I don't think most people like that very much.

Now if the USA could simply approach clean energy with the enthusiasm and urgency with which it embraces weaponry, war, and military spending, we might actually get somewhere in the next decades.

Pathetic trivia of the day:
First major production automobile, 1908 Ford Model T: 25 mpg

And after another 102 years of innovation, breakthroughs, and high-tech science...we're still averaging ~25 mpg and talking "progress" by setting 27 mpg as a goal! But I'll be damned if they're not bigger, faster, and sexier.
This certainly shows you how shortsighted industry and demand can be.

Edited by xnomanx on 04/22/2010 16:49:50 MDT.

Burning trash looks good . And here in the NW use of forest slash is being proposed for conversion of coal plants. All of it is very controversial. In China electric Bikes are displacing conventional bikes.Porsche is buildina hybrid that is quite fast. No clear way forward.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/technology/personaltech/22pogue.html?ref=technology

Tesla Motors has been making an all electric car for awhile now. Of course, they cost upwards of $100,000. But they're absolutely beautiful cars! And, for all you ULer's out there, the body is carbon fiber!

PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS for the roadster
Acceleration
0 to 60 mph in 3.9 seconds

Range
244 miles EPA combined city/highway

Top Speed
125 mph

Charging
As short as 3.5 hours for a complete cycle (partial cycles are faster)

.

"Now if the USA could simply approach clean energy with the enthusiasm and urgency with which it embraces weaponry, war, and military spending, we might actually get somewhere in the next decades."

We could do it if there was a leader like JFK who would make it our mission the same way we put a man on the moon. The problem is we haven't had a leader who represents the people since ...well JFK.

"EV s will help break our dependence on foreign oil."

LOL, and drilling at home won't?

"EV s will help break our dependence on foreign oil."

LOL, and drilling at home won't?

No, it won't. Would someone please explain to me why it would?

AFAIK it does not matter a lot where the drilling takes place -- whether at "home" or in "Timbuktu". Once the oil surfaces, it becomes part of one global oil market. For example, my recollection is that Alaskan oil never sees the lower 48.

AFAIK saying "If we drill in <your favorite fragile place> we can supply X% of the U.S. oil needs" is simply emotional poppycock. All you will have done is added that much to the global supply. You won't even bring prices down, because if prices drop enough to matter people such as OPEC will hold part of their production off the market to offset your new supply.

The major thing you will have accomplished is to use up some of our own supply, instead of saving it for a possible emergency some day, and allowed others to retain their supply, to be sold in the future for higher prices.

--MV

Edited by blean on 05/19/2010 13:43:29 MDT.