Share your energy/resource saving tips

[David]

electric cars are dorky. oh yeah?

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

Far out!    Sounds too good to be true!

The irony is that if we all switched to Electric cars, there would be a sudden glut of Gasoline available thus driving down the price!

[Giancarlo]

I think it would be a better idea if we switch to Hybrids. Seems more practical. Remember that to charge electric vehicles you need electricity and to provide that electricity it has to come from petroleum power plants (in the United States (roughly 70% of power in the US is provided from either oil or coal [mainly oil, as coal has been phased out]). So even if we all switch to electric vehicles the power has to come from somewhere (and right now, electric vehicles are not really a good idea in California as our power grid is stretched).

[starboardlight]

nope. it doesn't have to come from petroleum derived power. at least not in California. did you know that you can designate your power to come from green source, if you're a LA DWP customer? It'll cost you slightly more to be a green power consumer but it's worth it, and as more people sign on, economy of scale will help bring down the cost to individuals. In addition, Tesla has a deal where they'll help you set up solar charger at home, so that all your energy need for the roadster comes from solar energy. Even if you use petroleum generated electricity, it's still much less than the hybrid. I would encourage you to read through their site as well as other researched stats. The film "Who Killed the Electric Car?" has a great section on this. The amount of petroleum used per mile in an electric car versus a hybrid still favors the electric, simply because of economy of scale. The power plant can turn petroleum into energy more efficiently than a hybrid motor. Admittedly, the electric car is harder for renters who have to deal with parking, much less a place to install the charger. But for home owners, the electric car will be ideal.

[Giancarlo]

nope. it doesn't have to come from petroleum derived power. at least not in California. did you know that you can designate your power to come from green source, if you're a LA DWP customer? It'll cost you slightly more to be a green power consumer but it's worth it, and as more people sign on, economy of scale will help bring down the cost to individuals. In addition, Tesla has a deal where they'll help you set up solar charger at home, so that all your energy need for the roadster comes from solar energy. Even if you use petroleum generated electricity, it's still much less than the hybrid. I would encourage you to read through their site as well as other researched stats. The film "Who Killed the Electric Car?" has a great section on this. The amount of petroleum used per mile in an electric car versus a hybrid still favors the electric, simply because of economy of scale. The power plant can turn petroleum into energy more efficiently than a hybrid motor. Admittedly, the electric car is harder for renters who have to deal with parking, much less a place to install the charger. But for home owners, the electric car will be ideal.

I am in an apartment building that has the utlities covered by the management (as many apartment buildings are, utilities are covered by the rent). Even if I could, I would most likely not be able to afford it. What we need in this city is a centralization. A sprawling urban mess like what it is now leads to more power usage, more gas usage (obviously you have to drive from place to place) and poor air quality. The more people who sign up for it, the more strain there is on the power source and then the price goes up. Supply and demand. The more people who demand a product, the higher the price goes. We see this with petroleum. Either way, I still think hybrid vehicles are far more effective then electric vehicles, and they last longer too. I would recommend you stop making things up and start reading the facts about hybrid vehicles (which are incredibly effective vehicles, and are faster then electric cars). For anyone, hybrid vehilces are the ideal, and Toyota basically has it down with its hybrid line (especially the Toyota Prius which gets 42/65MPG).

You can even reverse engineer hybrids to get even higher then that (some estimates say from 80-100MPG).

Please also go through supply/demand and see why your reasoning is not entirely accurate.

[starboardlight]

I am in an apartment building that has the utlities covered by the management (as many apartment buildings are, utilities are covered by the rent). Even if I could, I would most likely not be able to afford it. What we need in this city is a centralization. A sprawling urban mess like what it is now leads to more power usage, more gas usage (obviously you have to drive from place to place) and poor air quality. The more people who sign up for it, the more strain there is on the power source and then the price goes up. Supply and demand. The more people who demand a product, the higher the price goes. We see this with petroleum. Either way, I still think hybrid vehicles are far more effective then electric vehicles, and they last longer too. I would recommend you stop making things up and start reading the facts about hybrid vehicles (which are incredibly effective vehicles, and are faster then electric cars). For anyone, hybrid vehilces are the ideal, and Toyota basically has it down with its hybrid line (especially the Toyota Prius which gets 42/65MPG).

You can even reverse engineer hybrids to get even higher then that (some estimates say from 80-100MPG).

Please also go through supply/demand and see why your reasoning is not entirely accurate.

actually a rudimentary understand of supply/demand might lead you to think that that's always true, but you're arguing with an econ major here. the laws of supply and demand is not always an upward curve. Economy of scale is a factor that can shift the supply curve to the right and thus puts a downward pressure on price. The overhead cost of running a power plant is always constant, and is distributed into each unit of consumption. If the power plant produce twice the amount of energy, the overhead/unit cost will be half as expensive. In which case, an increase in demand would in fact result in a lower per unit cost.

and as I've said, there is not need to use energy from the power plant. Tesla will help its buyers set up a solar charging station at home, so no use of petroleum derived energy to drive the car, so in that sense, it beats the hybrid.

as far as the hybrid being faster. who cares, the Tesla Roadster can go 0-60 in 4 seconds, and has a top speed of 130, which is more than any one needs. What's the stats for speed on the Prius anyway?

and I'd like to see that research on hybrid lasting longer. neither cars have been around for more than 10 years, so I don't think anyone knows. so provide some back up stats on that if you please.

without an internal combustion engine, electric cars are cleaner and requires less maintenance. I'm not making this up. Previous owners of the EV will tell you as much.

[Giancarlo]

actually a rudimentary understand of supply/demand might lead you to think that that's always true, but you're arguing with an econ major here. the laws of supply and demand is not always an upward curve. Economy of scale is a factor that can shift the supply curve to the right and thus puts a downward pressure on price. The overhead cost of running a power plant is always constant, and is distributed into each unit of consumption. If the power plant produce twice the amount of energy, the overhead/unit cost will be half as expensive. In which case, an increase in demand would in fact result in a lower per unit cost.

I may not be an econ major, but my major (political science) deeply requires economics, and I did take several courses involving that (I am taking a course called business ethics this upcoming semester but it is more for my general education requirements). I never said supply and demand is an upward curve. But when it comes to power, the more that is demanded the higher prices go up, and we in California know that dearly. By the way, if you put a lot of strain on a power plant by demanding that it produces more power you run the risk of a fire or even a plant meltdown. What happened in Santa Monica yesturday was a much smaller scale outage but it equals a electrical meltdown. Myspace for example was knocked out because of that outage. The circuits overloaded and there was a fire. You need to take into account natural forces, which no offense or anything, they don't seem to teach you in economics. You cannot just demand that a power plant produces twice the amount of energy. You actually have to upgrade or expand it.

Tesla will help its buyers set up a solar charging station at home, so no use of petroleum derived energy to drive the car, so in that sense, it beats the hybrid.

Impractical and expensive. It doesn't beat hybrid.

as far as the hybrid being faster. who cares, the Tesla Roadster can go 0-60 in 4 seconds, and has a top speed of 130, which is more than any one needs. What's the stats for speed on the Prius anyway?

I highly doubt that is true. The Prius is just a better vehicle and is more cost efficient. The prices are going down for hybrids much faster then they are for electric vehicles, and lets face it... people work in the petroleum market too and it would be disasterous for them if we make a switch to electric. I just think about long term implications.

without an internal combustion engine, electric cars are cleaner and requires less maintenance. I'm not making this up. Previous owners of the EV will tell you as much.

You are making this up in my mind. Hybrids are very effective and can be reversed engineered to go faster, and run longer then electric vehicles.

[starboardlight]

I may not be an econ major, but my major (political science) deeply requires economics, and I did take several courses involving that (I am taking a course called business ethics this upcoming semester but it is more for my general education requirements). I never said supply and demand is an upward curve. But when it comes to power, the more that is demanded the higher prices go up, and we in California know that dearly. By the way, if you put a lot of strain on a power plant by demanding that it produces more power you run the risk of a fire or even a plant meltdown. What happened in Santa Monica yesturday was a much smaller scale outage but it equals a electrical meltdown. Myspace for example was knocked out because of that outage. The circuits overloaded and there was a fire. You need to take into account natural forces, which no offense or anything, they don't seem to teach you in economics. You cannot just demand that a power plant produces twice the amount of energy. You actually have to upgrade or expand it.

you'd have to upgrade if the plant is already function at capacity. Most plants aren't. Many petroleum currently keep many of their generators off and overtax the ones that are in use. That's what happened in the east coast black out several years ago, and that's what happened in Santa Monica. This is documented in many newspaper reports. But I was talking about green energy. Natural gas plants as well as solar and wind plants which still have room for increased capacity. With these plants, demand increase will indeed bring down the per unit cost for quite a while until we hit critical mass, but that's a long way off.

[quoteI highly doubt that is true. The Prius is just a better vehicle and is more cost efficient. The prices are going down for hybrids much faster then they are for electric vehicles, and lets face it... people work in the petroleum market too and it would be disasterous for them if we make a switch to electric. I just think about long term implications.[/quote]
the numbers are what they are. doubt all you want. but when these cars hit the road next year, we'll know for sure.

You are making this up in my mind. Hybrids are very effective and can be reversed engineered to go faster, and run longer then electric vehicles.

so you're calling me a liar. great. but research into internal combustion engine and electric engine before you actually make such a serious accusation. The electric engine will run cooler because it doesn't generate heat while converting gas to energy. As such, it is less prone to wear and tear. In addition, it can generate more speed precisely because with less heat, there's less friction and thus less strain on the engine.

and we can keep arguing, but this car is hitting Californian road in early 2007, so we'll see the stats and compare. In any case, it's a very viable option, that may not be for everyone, but it's an option in any case. and more option for consumers is a good thing.

[starboardlight]

people work in the petroleum market too and it would be disasterous for them if we make a switch to electric. I just think about long term implications.

ok, now you're being argumentative just to argue. dependency on petroleum is bad, but wait we need to protect those workers in the petroleum industy. that's an argument that doesn't wash. when a technology or a product become outdated, it's time for those who work in those sectors to retain and get new jobs. They'll be more jobs in green energy as demand increase. More green energy plant will be built to replace dirty petroleum plants. Those people will transition over. That's how technology and society progress. It makes no sense to not switch to electricity just to keep the oil industry at their comfortable jobs. Long term implications, indeed.

[Giancarlo]

you'd have to upgrade if the plant is already function at capacity. Most plants aren't. Many petroleum currently keep many of their generators off and overtax the ones that are in use. That's what happened in the east coast black out several years ago, and that's what happened in Santa Monica. This is documented in many newspaper reports. But I was talking about green energy. Natural gas plants as well as solar and wind plants which still have room for increased capacity. With these plants, demand increase will indeed bring down the per unit cost for quite a while until we hit critical mass, but that's a long way off.

Say what? Now you're running around in circles not really understanding what you are saying. I took into account that you need to make these upgrades.

You know what, I'm not going to argue with anymore. You talk down to me and try to make me feel like an idiot. You pull out "well I'm an economics major" card. I didn't resort to my education as a way to establish "moral and argumentative" superiority over another. We need to improve and build more nuclear power plants.

so you're calling me a liar. great. but research into internal combustion engine and electric engine before you actually make such a serious accusation. The electric engine will run cooler because it doesn't generate heat while converting gas to energy. As such, it is less prone to wear and tear. In addition, it can generate more speed precisely because with less heat, there's less friction and thus less strain on the engine.

A hybrid engine would last longer because it is built differently (it is not necessarily a combustion engine).

and we can keep arguing, but this car is hitting Californian road in early 2007, so we'll see the stats and compare. In any case, it's a very viable option, that may not be for everyone, but it's an option in any case. and more option for consumers is a good thing.

The Prius is better and is more effective and viable, let alone practical.

ok, now you're being argumentative just to argue. dependency on petroleum is bad, but wait we need to protect those workers in the petroleum industy. that's an argument that doesn't wash. when a technology or a product become outdated, it's time for those who work in those sectors to retain and get new jobs. They'll be more jobs in green energy as demand increase. More green energy plant will be built to replace dirty petroleum plants. Those people will transition over. That's how technology and society progress. It makes no sense to not switch to electricity just to keep the oil industry at their comfortable jobs. Long term implications, indeed.

I never said that we need protectionism on the petroleum industry. We just need to move gradually, because a demanded sided shock could be disasterous for numerous countries that are in OPEC. It is a gradual process. You're thinking quite simplistically too. I didn't say that technology should advance. Do you even know any of my beliefs? Or are you just going to continue talking down to me like I'm illiterate or a child? I'm in university too, and I'm not a idiot. I do know what is required.

Higher gas prices have encouraged people to check out hybrid vehicles in a much greater degree.

[starboardlight]

A hybrid engine would last longer because it is built differently (it is not necessarily a combustion engine).

the process of turning gasoline into energy is a combustion process. that necessarily makes it a combustion engine.

I never said that we need protectionism on the petroleum industry. We just need to move gradually, because a demanded sided shock could be disasterous for numerous countries that are in OPEC. It is a gradual process. You're thinking quite simplistically too. I didn't say that technology should advance. Do you even know any of my beliefs? Or are you just going to continue talking down to me like I'm illiterate or a child? I'm in university too, and I'm not a idiot. I do know what is required.

and it will be gradual either way. introduction of the electric car is not going all the sudden shut down the petroleum industry. it's not an logical argument against using electric vehicle.