Smart Car of America Forum banner

1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,592 Posts
FREE charging of a commuting appliance couldn't fly under the radar forever even in the heavily subsidized EV world!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
28,237 Posts
Set up municipal charging networks paid for with tax dollars. Either free or minimal amount for charging - the EV owners are also tax payers. Leaving this to the "free market" just means the consumer will suffer. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,592 Posts
Set up municipal charging networks paid for with tax dollars. Either free or minimal amount for charging - the EV owners are also tax payers.
Who currently pay no road tax? :confused:

Using your "tax paying" logic - as a tax paying ICE owner that local municipality should be driving by every morning to top off my ICE fleet with 93 octane?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
Sorry, jwight, I'm on MB DNA's side on this one. I'm paying for my fuel, and paying road taxes on that fuel; now you want me to chip in so the EV drivers get free "fuel" on top of not paying the road taxes? How much of a free ride does it take to get electric cars to work? There are already tax breaks when you buy one (and yes, we took full advantage of it when we bought our hybrid), and it's cheaper to charge the EV than to buy the equivalent amount of gas. For example, my electric bill last month works out to a little over $0.10 per kWh. So if I round that up to $0.11, and use the Smart EV's figure of 39kWh/100 mi, that's $4.29 to travel 100 miles. My best MPG so far in my ICE Smart is 42, at 3.239/gal, that's $7.71 for 100 miles. So why should my taxes be providing free charging for someone who's already saving over $3.00 per 100 miles, and who already got a tax credit for the purchase?
-Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
Who currently pay no road tax? :confused:

Using your "tax paying" logic - as a tax paying ICE owner that local municipality should be driving by every morning to top off my ICE fleet with 93 octane?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but every ICE driver costs more than a subsidized EV driver when you factor in the entire cost of a car including pollution and costs.

It's no different than how coal, including all of its health consequences, is more expensive than every other type of electricity generation combined.

The real cost of a gallon of gasoline runs $15-20 a gallon because of the pollution causing illness causing taxpayer-funded hospital ER visits.

So basically, if you want LESS of your tax dollars to subsidize other people, you should campaign for free EV charging and a much more extensive public charging network.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
646 Posts
I don't think this is going to be much of an issue for several years. Right now EV's are commuter cars, and 90% of charging is done at home. If ranges improve, and charging times shorten, that may change. But no one except maybe Tesla owners are going on a 1000 mile vacation in their electric car...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
832 Posts
I don't mind paying

I will 99% of the time charge at home. If I do go on a day trip someplace slightly out-of-range, I won't mind paying 10x or more for the charge. It's the convenience that counts!

The mere knowledge that, if you do get stuck, you can pay a few bucks and recharge, will enable a lot more people to get EVs. It's important for this infrastructure to exist and someone has to pay for it! It'll be faster and more efficient if it's a for-profit business and not the government.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,588 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I have no problem with the initial idea to subsidize the Electric Car, even the rich man's toy, the Tesla. The plan here is stimulate the technology.

The technology is in three parts. 1. High efficiency motors. 2. Safe, light weight, body and frame construction. 3. Power source development.

On the first two we are doing fine, and the efforts are worth our investment.

On the third we face the same dead end we knew about in 1900. The Chemical battery will never be viable to power people transportation as we know it.

The tiny improvements in range and end weight are making this effort look like a scam. The Battery car will disappear in a puff of smoke (fun pun) as soon as all the subsidy's end, and the fat cats have milked it dry.

But at least we will be ahead on points 1 and 2 and ready for a new efficient ICE engine. Or better yet, a break through in the physics of motive power. A2Jack.
 

·
To the XCAPEPOD!
Joined
·
6,074 Posts
The Chemical battery will never be viable to power people transportation as we know it.
I think you mean the battery as you know it based on the relatively limited investment in improving the technology over the past decades. Lots of things seem impossible before they aren't. There were a lot of seemingly smart folks that didn't turn out to be the best predictors of the future. Maybe we'll be able to add you to the list in a few years? :) Besides, we've seen steady improvements in usability and energy density in only the past 20 years when we moved from alkaline, to NiCD, to NiMH, to Li Ion. Why would it stop now?

"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The literature was full of examples that said you can't do this." Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M "Post-It" Notepads.

"Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax." William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist, 1899.

Patent Office Chief Henry Ellsworth, testifying before Congress in 1843, suggested that the then-current rush of technological development "seems to presage the arrival of that period when human improvement must end."

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.

"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year." The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of DEC, 1977.

“There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will.” Albert Einstein, 1932
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
Lots of people, including scientists talk or predict things out of their asss. They don’t know anything about what the future will bring to benefit new societies.
Here are some very wrong affirmations from well known people:

1-) Recording video in optical devices like DVD will be impossible
2-) LCD TVs will never replace CTR TVs
3-) Recording data in a CD @ 20x will be impossible
4-) Electric cars will never be marketable in USA
5-) Phone cannot be portable or wireless
6-) HDTV is a joke, never will replace current VHF and UHF signals.

We live in a world that when someone says that something cannot be made it cannot be made because he is already disabled by someone already making it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
This one is a toughie for me. On the one hand, battery power is at the moment far behind ICE power. Of course. The very nature of physics may limit the amount of power from chemical reactions vis a vis as in a battery. Maybe.
On the other hand as stated above, the ICE at one time seemed a fantasy.
"Here's what we'll do......we will have two, four, six or eight powerful explosions inside a container....you know kinda like a cannon and ball. But we'll tether the ball somehow so as to draw it back to be shot again and again. Further we'll take that energy to turn a set of wheels to go places.
Eh? HOW.....I dunno...we'll have to figue it out somehow. Oh and we're gonna make ribbons of almost perfectly flat roads out of oil sludge and rocks that go everywhere..up and down mountains, over water and we'll take the power of a cannon harnessed to do it, oh and we'll regulate the power so we can go fast and slow. And...these things will last for years and years too. :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
All public places, businesses and government agencies should provide FREE electricity for charging electric cars period
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,592 Posts
I think you mean the battery as you know it based on the relatively limited investment in improving the technology over the past decades.
It is sad that 100+ years of incubating the battery "as we know it" has only gotten us 75-100 miles (of range) down the road.

Can you imagine 10 EV owners showing up at your local mall to park in those 5 FREE CHARGING parking spaces on BLACK FRIDAY?

Until we see quantum leaps in EV range, infrastructure and recharge times, EV's remain a work in progress . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,588 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
And they say, a perpetual motion machine is imposable.

They say, you can't drill through the earth and come out in China.

They say, a pig can't fly... LOL
A2Jack.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
It is sad that 100+ years of incubating the battery "as we know it" has only gotten us 75-100 miles (of range) down the road.

Can you imagine 10 EV owners showing up at your local mall to park in those 5 FREE CHARGING parking spaces on BLACK FRIDAY?

Until we see quantum leaps in EV range, infrastructure and recharge times, EV's remain a work in progress . . .
For BLACK FRIDAY I'll get one of this to do my shopping:D
EVS23: The green machine - Smith Electric Truck comes to America

Or one of these:
http://www.smithelectric.com/
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,297 Posts
Sorry, jwight, I'm on MB DNA's side on this one. I'm paying for my fuel, and paying road taxes on that fuel; now you want me to chip in so the EV drivers get free "fuel" on top of not paying the road taxes? How much of a free ride does it take to get electric cars to work? There are already tax breaks when you buy one (and yes, we took full advantage of it when we bought our hybrid), and it's cheaper to charge the EV than to buy the equivalent amount of gas. For example, my electric bill last month works out to a little over $0.10 per kWh. So if I round that up to $0.11, and use the Smart EV's figure of 39kWh/100 mi, that's $4.29 to travel 100 miles. My best MPG so far in my ICE Smart is 42, at 3.239/gal, that's $7.71 for 100 miles. So why should my taxes be providing free charging for someone who's already saving over $3.00 per 100 miles, and who already got a tax credit for the purchase?
-Bob
Actually should be 32kWh per 100 miles. Even better. :cool:
 

·
To the XCAPEPOD!
Joined
·
6,074 Posts
It is sad that 100+ years of incubating the battery "as we know it" has only gotten us 75-100 miles (of range) down the road.

Can you imagine 10 EV owners showing up at your local mall to park in those 5 FREE CHARGING parking spaces on BLACK FRIDAY?

Until we see quantum leaps in EV range, infrastructure and recharge times, EV's remain a work in progress . . .
Sure, as things stand now. Taking A2s "it can never happen" approach is a different thing given the relatively short period of time any serious investment in improving battery technology has been attempted. IMO, until there was personal electronics, there was no serious interest (as there is today) in improving the capabilities and energy density of battery technology - we didn't need a much better 12V battery in our cars. Of that 100 years of "incubation", when did we see anything new such as NiCD, NiMH, etc.? Those are relatively recent improvements on a commercial scale because we needed better batteries for our electronics. There was no great push to improve battery technology until the past 20-30 years because there was no need. Just as there was no push for more efficient ICE engines until there was a need, in the form of more expensive gasoline.

I believe it's a little premature to pronounce the battery as a means of propulsion, in some form, dead. I liked the quote from Einstein - even the person who would later help make it possible didn't believe it was possible a few years before.

There are things that are impossible according to the laws of physics as we understand them (faster than light travel, for instance), but in other cases things are possible, but we haven't discovered the right materials, combination of materials, or processes to make them possible. Making a trip to the moon was never impossible, but the materials and technology required to make the journey had to be discovered and combined in a way to make it happen and it took a while with some trial and error. And, that's all I'm saying. I believe we are still discovering the materials and technology to make EV propulsion what it needs to be. There is no physical law that says it cannot be done just as there is no law that says it can, but I'm a glass half full kind of guy. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,297 Posts
I've been enjoying my new smart EV toy for the past few months. I use it for what it can be used for, otherwise my BRABUS cabriolet gets the long distance trips. I park the BRABUS and the smart EV directly behind each other, bumpers with a couple inches to spare, essentially taking up one car space in the garage. I'm happy.

It only costs me approximately $3.84 per 100 miles I drive the car on my electricity bill. I charge it at night during off-peak hours. :cool:
 
1 - 20 of 62 Posts
Top