http://www.pureelectricvehicles.com/features.html

repost to be careful about copyrighted material.

[Default] On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 02:36:13 -0000, "shane_digital"
<shane_digital@...> wrote:

>MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to `Unlimited' Solar Power
>
>Written by Andrew Williams
>Published on October 25th, 2008
>4 Comments
>Posted in solar energy
>
>Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have
>discovered a new way of storing energy from sunlight that could lead
>to `unlimited' solar power.

[...]

>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/25/mit-energy-storage-discovery-could-lead-to-\
unlimited-solar-power/

I agree it looks interesting.

I have truncated in order to be more careful of copyrighted material.
The reason I am heavy-handed about this has nothing to do with your
particular post.  It is that I anticipate that all these groups may
one day be brought under scrutiny on the matter of pasting copyrighted
material, and those groups which have been extremely careful may pass
muster more readily (though it is hard to be perfect).  I think that
for some groups which criticize the status quo, something like the
issue of copyright could be used as a pretext by the authorities to
censor them (in effect).

Also, many of us posting here know that it takes work to put together
even a modest-sized article or web-post like this one, and so we would
not wish to deny the authors and their editors and hosts their "hits".

In this case, I just realized that Shane appeared to have copied and
pasted the whole thing, so I am just being a bit careful.

I must emphasize that no offense to anyone is intended.



[Default] On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 14:47:44 -0000, "Randy Juras"
<rcjuras@...> wrote:

>This project by MIT and professor Nocera is very interesting. If this
>concept can be moved forward, it can start a new way to look at energy
>recovery in America. If not the world.
>It also seems to me that this concept is exactly the sort of energy
>project Obama has talked about. A practical way to move beyond fossil
>fuels.
>While the Chesonic Family Foundation has funded the basic research,
>does any one know of any commercial enterprises that are actively
>looking into developing this concept into an actual product?
>
>Randy
>
>--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, "shane_digital"
><shane_digital@...> wrote:
>>
>> MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to `Unlimited' Solar Power
>>
>> Written by Andrew Williams
>> Published on October 25th, 2008
>> 4 Comments
>> Posted in solar energy
>>
>> Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have
>> discovered a new way of storing energy from sunlight that could lead
>> to `unlimited' solar power.
>>
http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/25/mit-energy-storage-discovery-could-lead-to-u\
nlimited-solar-power/

Thanks!
I am glad you caught the oversight.

Since this group follows alternative fuels I thought someone may know
more about this potential product. Whenever I talk to just about
anyone about fuel cells, the question always comes up about obtaining
hydrogen. This idea seems to have the potential to solve that problem.

Randy

--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, murdoch
<murdoch@...> wrote:
>
> I agree it looks interesting.
>
> I have truncated in order to be more careful of copyrighted material.
> The reason I am heavy-handed about this has nothing to do with your
> particular post.  It is that I anticipate that all these groups may
> one day be brought under scrutiny on the matter of pasting copyrighted
> material, and those groups which have been extremely careful may pass
> muster more readily (though it is hard to be perfect).  I think that
> for some groups which criticize the status quo, something like the
> issue of copyright could be used as a pretext by the authorities to
> censor them (in effect).
>
> Also, many of us posting here know that it takes work to put together
> even a modest-sized article or web-post like this one, and so we would
> not wish to deny the authors and their editors and hosts their "hits".
>
> In this case, I just realized that Shane appeared to have copied and
> pasted the whole thing, so I am just being a bit careful.
>
> I must emphasize that no offense to anyone is intended.
>
>
>
> [Default] On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 14:47:44 -0000, "Randy Juras"
> <rcjuras@...> wrote:
>
> >This project by MIT and professor Nocera is very interesting. If this
> >concept can be moved forward, it can start a new way to look at energy
> >recovery in America. If not the world.
> >It also seems to me that this concept is exactly the sort of energy
> >project Obama has talked about. A practical way to move beyond fossil
> >fuels.
> >While the Chesonic Family Foundation has funded the basic research,
> >does any one know of any commercial enterprises that are actively
> >looking into developing this concept into an actual product?
> >
> >Randy
> >
> >--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, "shane_digital"
> ><shane_digital@> wrote:
> >>
> >> MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to `Unlimited' Solar Power
> >>
> >> Written by Andrew Williams
> >> Published on October 25th, 2008
> >> 4 Comments
> >> Posted in solar energy
> >>
> >> Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have
> >> discovered a new way of storing energy from sunlight that could lead
> >> to `unlimited' solar power.
> >>
>
http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/25/mit-energy-storage-discovery-could-lead-to-u\
nlimited-solar-power/
>

Looks like no more then an improved way to make hydrogen. The storage,
transportation and conversion issues associated with hydrogen appear to remain
unchanged.

You can't make gasoline on your roof.


--- On Sat, 1/3/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:

> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> Subject: Re: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could
Lead to ‘Unlimited’ Solar Power
> To: future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 8:46 AM
> repost to be careful about copyrighted material.
>
> [Default] On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 02:36:13 -0000,
> "shane_digital"
> <shane_digital@...> wrote:
>
> >MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to
> `Unlimited' Solar Power
> >
> >Written by Andrew Williams
> >Published on October 25th, 2008
> >4 Comments
> >Posted in solar energy
> >
> >Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology
> (MIT) have
> >discovered a new way of storing energy from sunlight
> that could lead
> >to `unlimited' solar power.
>
> [...]
>
>
>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/25/mit-energy-storage-discovery-could-lead-to-\
unlimited-solar-power/

In items I submitted in the past, my idea was to use photovoltaic
cells to generate electricity, store surplus energy by using the
direct current from the PV cells to create hydrogen and oxygen by
electrolysis, and pump it into tanks.  At night, the stored H2 and O2
are recombined either in fuel celld or in gas turbine engines to
generate electricity when the sun is set.  The DC then powers motors
that turn AC generators that feed the power grid.

This is the future vision I have.  I hope Mr. Obama can do his part
to get a pilot program going soon to prove it as worthwhile and
encourage the power industry to use this approach to generate
electrical power that is cheap to generate, even if the front end
capital investment is large.

As for the H2 safety issues, these plants can be built far from
populated areas and conform to standards for storing volatile gases.

Rich


--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, murdoch
<murdoch@...> wrote:
>
>
> repost to be careful about copyrighted material.
>
> [Default] On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 02:36:13 -0000, "shane_digital"
> <shane_digital@...> wrote:
>
> >MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to `Unlimited' Solar Power
> >
> >Written by Andrew Williams
> >Published on October 25th, 2008
> >4 Comments
> >Posted in solar energy
> >
> >Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have
> >discovered a new way of storing energy from sunlight that could
lead
> >to `unlimited' solar power.
>
> [...]
>
> >http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/25/mit-energy-storage-discovery-
could-lead-to-unlimited-solar-power/
>

I have always thought that to some extent the answer is in front of
us, in the form of simple hydrocarbons and alcohols and the like. They
are more easily stored than Hydrogen.

Would it be impossible to solar energy not into the form of hydrogen
but into those simple molecules, as nature ultimately does with
photosynthesis?  Aren't such molecules a way to store some of the
energy we are thinking of when we see energy stored in H2?



[Default] On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 09:52:07 -0800 (PST), Lee Dekker
<heprv@...> wrote:

>Looks like no more then an improved way to make hydrogen. The storage,
transportation and conversion issues associated with hydrogen appear to remain
unchanged.
>
>You can't make gasoline on your roof.
>
>
>--- On Sat, 1/3/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:
>
>> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
>> Subject: Re: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could
Lead to ‘Unlimited’ Solar Power
>> To: future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com
>> Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 8:46 AM
>> repost to be careful about copyrighted material.
>>
>> [Default] On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 02:36:13 -0000,
>> "shane_digital"
>> <shane_digital@...> wrote:
>>
>> >MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to
>> `Unlimited' Solar Power
>> >
>> >Written by Andrew Williams
>> >Published on October 25th, 2008
>> >4 Comments
>> >Posted in solar energy
>> >
>> >Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology
>> (MIT) have
>> >discovered a new way of storing energy from sunlight
>> that could lead
>> >to `unlimited' solar power.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>
>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/25/mit-energy-storage-discovery-could-lead-to-\
unlimited-solar-power/
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

The next phase of development, or basic research, would be to find a
way to duplicate nature. It could easily be a much more efficient way
to move energy in and out of a stored mode.

But for right now, to move forward with getting off of fossil fuels, I
can see direct conversion of water into hydrogen using solar energy.

Another aspect of all this is the real need for a Smart grid.

I believe Obama has made mention of this need in his election. If so,
using all renewable energy processes will become easier and less costly.

Randy

--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, murdoch
<murdoch@...> wrote:
>
>
> I have always thought that to some extent the answer is in front of
> us, in the form of simple hydrocarbons and alcohols and the like. They
> are more easily stored than Hydrogen.
>
> Would it be impossible to solar energy not into the form of hydrogen
> but into those simple molecules, as nature ultimately does with
> photosynthesis?  Aren't such molecules a way to store some of the
> energy we are thinking of when we see energy stored in H2?
>
>
>
> [Default] On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 09:52:07 -0800 (PST), Lee Dekker
> <heprv@...> wrote:
>
> >Looks like no more then an improved way to make hydrogen. The
storage, transportation and conversion issues associated with hydrogen
appear to remain unchanged.
> >
> >You can't make gasoline on your roof.
> >
> >
> >--- On Sat, 1/3/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:
> >
> >> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> >> Subject: Re: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] MIT Energy Storage
Discovery Could Lead to `Unlimited' Solar Power
> >> To: future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com
> >> Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 8:46 AM
> >> repost to be careful about copyrighted material.
> >>
> >> [Default] On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 02:36:13 -0000,
> >> "shane_digital"
> >> <shane_digital@...> wrote:
> >>
> >> >MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to
> >> `Unlimited' Solar Power
> >> >
> >> >Written by Andrew Williams
> >> >Published on October 25th, 2008
> >> >4 Comments
> >> >Posted in solar energy
> >> >
> >> >Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of Technology
> >> (MIT) have
> >> >discovered a new way of storing energy from sunlight
> >> that could lead
> >> >to `unlimited' solar power.
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>
>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/25/mit-energy-storage-discovery-could-lead-to-\
unlimited-solar-power/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

Tiny bubbles. Do you all remember the song tiny bubbles? This
discovery is indeed a big one, not tiny. All the storage problems
are solved because hydrogen can be extracted from water at a source
of water through the use of a catalyst.

cat•a•lyst (ktl-st)n. 1. Chemistry: A substance, usually used in
small amounts relative to the reactants, that modifies and increases
the rate of a reaction without being consumed in the process. ~The
Free Dictionary by Farlex http://www.thefreedictionary.com/catalyst

"without being consumed in the process" are the most important words
in this. What does this mean? It means that hydrogen and more
importantly oxygen are separated into two separate gasses when water
(H2O) is placed in contact with the particular substance. And, most
importantly the particular substance doesn't get consumed in the
reaction so it will keep separating water into hydrogen and oxygen
continuously and indefinitely. It would keep going and going and
going.

Currently our situation is that we generate electricity with
photovoltaics during the day when we don't need artificial light and
at night we use electricity and storage, even with batteries,
becomes a problem. This way we make hydrogen and oxygen during the
day and make electricity when ever we need it using a fuel cell from
the hydrogen and oxygen.

It also solved the transmission losses problem too. We now try to
transmit electricity over aluminum wire long distances. Over the
miles a large portion of the electricity becomes heat, radio waves
and escaped electromagnetic field. So in reality you can't send
solar energy made in the desert southwest to the highly populated
North East over wire. You can, however, send hydrogen from the
Southwest to the Northeast in a pipe with out serious transmission
losses. You would have to watch for pinholes and the like, so there
would have to be some development there, but hydrogen is already
transported through pipe by refineries and natural gas reformers in
some industrial applications. It is not new.

In transportation is where we might see a problem. It depends on how
virulent the reaction is. For example, if you take hydrogen
peroxide, yes the stuff we use as a disinfectant, only in a purer
form. (We currently use only 3% hydrogen peroxide solution for
disinfection.) And you put it through a screen of silver or
titanium, the resulting steam's thrust is powerful enough to lift a
person off the ground and keep them in the air until the hydrogen
peroxide runs out. Jet packs are typically powered by hydrogen
peroxide and typically only carry less than a minutes worth of the
fuel. If the catalytic reaction were that powerful, producing lots
of hydrogen from water then the storage question would be how much
water would you need to power the car. If the production from water
is virulent could the hydrogen be used in an internal combustion
engine where water is stored in what used to be the gasoline tank?
Would employing a fuel cell allow for much greater range since fuel
cells and electric motors are so much more efficient that internal
combustion engines or would fuel cell vehicles make even a
relatively week production of hydrogen from the catalyst usable?

At this point the reaction is very weak from what I can see, only
tiny bubbles. And the reaction seems to need an assist from added
electricity at this moment, 1/3rd the electricity of electrolysis
but energy never the less. So it is difficult to say what this new
discovery means. Hydrogen from water is infinitely more preferable a
fuel than using any fossil fuel. I am looking forward to seeing more
about this development. Batteries currently are my number one choice
in my mind for transportation, batteries with an internal combustion
engine or fuel cell that is relegated to only being used for long
distances, but if that engine or fuel cell could be powered by
hydrogen made from water through a catalyst that uses sunlight as a
means to split the molecule instead of using gasoline where the
hydrogen is derived from water on board, I would have to seriously
consider it.

~ Joe the Analyst

--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, "Randy Juras"
<rcjuras@...> wrote:
> But for right now, to move forward with getting off of fossil
fuels, I
> can see direct conversion of water into hydrogen using solar
energy.
>
> Another aspect of all this is the real need for a Smart grid.
>
> I believe Obama has made mention of this need in his election. If
so,
> using all renewable energy processes will become easier and less
costly.
>
> Randy
>
> --- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, murdoch
> <murdoch@> wrote:
> > I have always thought that to some extent the answer is in front
of
> > us, in the form of simple hydrocarbons and alcohols and the
like. They are more easily stored than Hydrogen.
> >
> > Would it be impossible to solar energy not into the form of
hydrogen
> > but into those simple molecules, as nature ultimately does with
> > photosynthesis?  Aren't such molecules a way to store some of the
> > energy we are thinking of when we see energy stored in H2?

> > >Looks like no more then an improved way to make hydrogen. The
> storage, transportation and conversion issues associated with
hydrogen
> appear to remain unchanged.
> > >
> > >You can't make gasoline on your roof.

Murdock, you are very nice. Your suggestion is logical positive and hopeful. I
am not so nice, and hope I'am wrong.

My bet is that if you managed to get the "Hydrogen will save us" people to look
long and hard at hydrogen's storage, transportation and conversion issues, they
would actually be more convinced that hydrogen is the ticket. Also my guess that
they would be annoyed at your attempt to point out that they may be barking up
the wrong tree.

But since current conditions my turn out more like the revolution then the great
depression, all such talk may be just talk.


You can't make gasoline on your roof, but if you could or if you could make any
of the types of liquid fuels you mention, it would be a hell of a lot more
helpful then making hydrogen up there.


--- On Sun, 1/4/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:

> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> Subject: Re: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could
Lead to ‘Unlimited’ Solar Power
> To: future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, January 4, 2009, 1:37 AM
> I have always thought that to some extent the answer is in
> front of
> us, in the form of simple hydrocarbons and alcohols and the
> like. They
> are more easily stored than Hydrogen.
>
> Would it be impossible to solar energy not into the form of
> hydrogen
> but into those simple molecules, as nature ultimately does
> with
> photosynthesis?  Aren't such molecules a way to store
> some of the
> energy we are thinking of when we see energy stored in H2?
>
>
>
> [Default] On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 09:52:07 -0800 (PST), Lee
> Dekker
> <heprv@...> wrote:
>
> >Looks like no more then an improved way to make
> hydrogen. The storage, transportation and conversion issues
> associated with hydrogen appear to remain unchanged.
> >
> >You can't make gasoline on your roof.
> >
> >
> >--- On Sat, 1/3/09, murdoch
> <murdoch@...> wrote:
> >
> >> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> >> Subject: Re: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] MIT
> Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to ‘Unlimited’ Solar
> Power
> >> To: future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com
> >> Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 8:46 AM
> >> repost to be careful about copyrighted material.
> >>
> >> [Default] On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 02:36:13 -0000,
> >> "shane_digital"
> >> <shane_digital@...> wrote:
> >>
> >> >MIT Energy Storage Discovery Could Lead to
> >> `Unlimited' Solar Power
> >> >
> >> >Written by Andrew Williams
> >> >Published on October 25th, 2008
> >> >4 Comments
> >> >Posted in solar energy
> >> >
> >> >Researchers at Massachusetts Institute of
> Technology
> >> (MIT) have
> >> >discovered a new way of storing energy from
> sunlight
> >> that could lead
> >> >to `unlimited' solar power.
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>
>
>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/25/mit-energy-storage-discovery-could-lead-to-\
unlimited-solar-power/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >

EV  News including The 10 Biggest Cleantech Victories of 2008
<http://electricandhybridcars.com/index.php/pages/electriccarnews.html>

The 10 Biggest Cleantech Victories of 2008
BMW's Electric Mini Cooper Beats GM to Test Drivers' Green Zeal
Japan races to build a zero-emission car
Electric Car Drives 32,000 Miles On Solar Power
Boring Electric Car Gets 100 Miles Per Charge; Goes 85 MPH; Still Due
2010
End of Life Approaching for Many Prius Battery Packs
2010 Toyota Prius Preview — With Blue Men
Ford Hybrid Emphasizes High Mileage

For all these stories and a video of the  Solar Power Car -  Click Here
   <http://electricandhybridcars.com/index.php/pages/electriccarnews.html>
Cheers,
Susie



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The Electric Car concept is spreading.  It is only a matter of time
before the number of EV cars available will provide the competitive
environment for performance and price improvements.

Here is an EV sports car that is not a Tesla:

http://autos.yahoo.com/auto-shows/la_auto_show_2008/738/Dodge-EV

Lifebatt USA is run by Don Harmon, who brought us the now defunct and
always massively overpriced Raptor trike, and when they first wanted
to sell their LiFePo4 batteries for the e-vehicle market about a year
ago, I took a chance on their first pack and was even their rep for a
short time, though i never sold a single battery or made a penny.
Because of their recent flat refusal to support the one set of cells
we purchased when we had warranty problems related to leaking cells
and failure of the vms, i can no longer recommend anyone buy their
batteries.

On their website www.lifebatt.com they are continuing to make the
claim that they are a "Phostech Lithium TM Licensed Manufacturer",
while Don has admitted publicly that their cells are not made with the
premium Phostech powder as we were told at the time of purchase.

This is really too bad, as what could have been a great product is
suffering great damage as more people become aware of the truth about
the 3 year warranty that might make these cells worth the high price
they charge.

Another real problem with these 40138 format cells is leakage. The
cells have a 1/4" threaded stud on each end that looks like it would
make them perfect for the hobbyist, stringing the cells together in
any configuration we might wish. In the original Lifebatt packaging
these threads are covered by brass sleeves with a smooth outer
surface, and the cells are clamped into copper cradles for interconnect.

Any torque on the studs at all, even slight strain on interconnecting
cables, will cause the cells to leak corrosive electrolyte. Even in
the factory packaging the weight of the cells is supported by the
electrodes on the ends, which does not seem like the greatest idea,
and we have seen some cells leaking under this condition as well.

The weakest link in most battery systems is the bms or battery
management system. This system is critical if the cells are to deliver
the promised 3000 cycles. The Lifebatt vms has so far proven to be
inadequate and a number of cells were damaged as a result. Don
recently told me that the new vms still does not protect against
overly deep discharge, the worst thing you can do to these cells.

If the problem of leakage at the studs can be solved, and the promised
14 Ah cells turn out to be real, and some kind of bond to assure
performance of the warranty was established, this could be a good
product, but unfortunately if you want to buy them in the US you will
have to deal with people i cannot recommend.

bob mcree

>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1t4ue-WmlU&feature=channel
>
>Aramco will "discourage the move to electric cars by alleviating our
>concerns about the environment." Go to 7:20 for the exact quote.

On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:57:36 -0000, "doug korthof"
<live_oil_free@...> wrote:

>
>When it came to securing a spot in President-elect Barack Obama's
>inauguration parade, electric vehicle advocates at Plug In America were
>hoping to hear a resounding "Yes, you can!" from event
>organizers. Instead, the California nonprofit got a "Thanks, but no
>thanks" to their proposal to add a fleet of electric vehicles to the
>Jan. 20 procession.
>
>So they came up with Plan B: a parade in Santa Monica on Jan. 17.
>
>  [Ravlineupcropped_2]
><http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorize\
>d/2009/01/07/ravlineupcropped_2.jpg>  Plans call for a 9:30 a.m. news
>conference at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, followed by a parade of
>50 plug-in vehicles south on Main Street to the neighborhood of Ocean
>Park and then back to the auditorium via Neilson Way.
>
>The procession will include more than two dozen Toyota RAV4 EVs, three
>Tesla Roadsters, two Vetrix electric motor scooters and experimental
>plug-in hybrid versions of the Ford Escape sport utility vehicle and the
>Toyota Prius.
>
>There will also be a 50-ton cargo truck built by Balqon Corp., a
>California electric vehicle manufacturer, as well as a 1971 Porsche 914
>that has been converted to electric drive.
>
>State Sen. Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills), a prominent voice in Sacramento
>for green transportation, will be among the speakers at the news
>conference. Chris Paine, director of "Who Killed the Electric
>Car?" — the "Citizen Kane" of the EV movement — will
>have a crew on hand to shoot footage for a sequel, "Revenge of the
>Electric Car," said Zan Dubin Scott, spokeswoman for Plug In
>America. (For more info, go to Plug In America's web site
><http://www.pluginamerica.org/> .)
>
>Plug In America leaders are philosophical about getting snubbed by Obama
>parade organizers, who had to wade through more than 1,300 applications
>before selecting the more than 90 marching bands, community groups and
>other outfits that will participate.
>
>"We might've gotten lost in all the business back there" in
>Washington, said Scott. "Here we won't be competing with as much
>noise."
>
>Here's betting the weather will be nicer, too.
>
>-- Martin Zimmerman
>
>Martin.Zimmerman@... <mailto:Martin.Zimmerman@...>
>
>http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/uptospeed/2009/01/when-it-came-to.html
><http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/uptospeed/2009/01/when-it-came-to.html>

Toyota unveiling electric concept car in Detroit - Yahoo! News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090110/ap_on_bi_ge/auto_show_toyota

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/11/AR2009011101882.\
html

Yep. The nerdy wacky EV conspiracy nuts were right all along.

This is Probably only one of many sources for anti EV PR funding over the last
decades. They sure have done a great job though. The simplest, cleanest, most
officiant vehicle technology available has successfully been kept totally
unavailable (unless you make your own) from the entire world. And it's all made
to look like it just kind of happened that way naturally.

While all plans for EVs were being uniformly and mysteriously scuttled, the
mantra pounded into all of our heads by our PR owned government and press was
"You don't want and will never be able to buy an EV". Over and over and over.

Thanks Gov., thanks PR minions. May you all choke to death on the money you
made.


--- On Sat, 1/10/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:

> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> Subject: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] (fwd) Aramco will "discourage the move to
electric cars..."
> To: murdoch@...
> Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 12:56 PM
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1t4ue-WmlU&feature=channel
> >
> >Aramco will "discourage the move to electric cars
> by alleviating our
> >concerns about the environment." Go to 7:20 for
> the exact quote.

Murdoch,



I personally feel that a law like this is going too far.   As an
example, when getting street by street directions from someone by cell
phone, one can use a hands free device.  In traffic, and in some
places, there is no place to pull over.  Using a cell phone with a hands free
device is no more distracting than using a GPS to get directions when driving.  

Also, I don' t like a law like this because it could lead to making it illegal
for taxi cab drivers and ham radio operators to talk on their 2-way radio while
driving. 

I cheat at times, when I don't have my hands free device with me,  and answer a
call on the cell phone while on the road to tell the person to hold while I pull
over.  Then I put the cell phone down and find a place to park, before I
continue the conversation.   I do this very carefully noting all the traffic
around me and sometimes don't answer the call.


Rudy Stefenel



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ya think!

Amen to that.  I hope the idea flies.  Here in North Carolina we clearly
need laws the prohibit all forms of cell phone use, while driving.  We
currently have none.

Ron

Reason is "the slave of the passions, and can pretend to no other office
than to serve and obey them." - David Hume



   _____

From: future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of murdoch
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 12:23 AM
To: future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] Safety Council Says Phoning and Driving
Don't Mix





http://www.washingt
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/11/AR200901110
1882.html> onpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/11/AR2009011101882.html






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It wouldn't have been possible for them to accomplish this without so
much help.  I think the biggest help came from the alleged (not real)
defenders of free markets who saw joyfully, nastilly and uncritically
bought into the argument that if mass-produced EVs were wanted they
would be mass-produced and sold, and since they weren't mass-produced
and sold they must not be wanted.

This incorrect but widespread thinking was, in my view, a critical cog
in the decades-long delay of better technology.

[Default] On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:45:59 -0800 (PST), Lee Dekker
<heprv@...> wrote:

>Yep. The nerdy wacky EV conspiracy nuts were right all along.
>
>This is Probably only one of many sources for anti EV PR funding over the last
decades. They sure have done a great job though. The simplest, cleanest, most
officiant vehicle technology available has successfully been kept totally
unavailable (unless you make your own) from the entire world. And it's all made
to look like it just kind of happened that way naturally.
>
>While all plans for EVs were being uniformly and mysteriously scuttled, the
mantra pounded into all of our heads by our PR owned government and press was
"You don't want and will never be able to buy an EV". Over and over and over.
>
>Thanks Gov., thanks PR minions. May you all choke to death on the money you
made.
>
>
>--- On Sat, 1/10/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:
>
>> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
>> Subject: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] (fwd) Aramco will "discourage the move
to electric cars..."
>> To: murdoch@...
>> Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 12:56 PM
>> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1t4ue-WmlU&feature=channel
>> >
>> >Aramco will "discourage the move to electric cars
>> by alleviating our
>> >concerns about the environment." Go to 7:20 for
>> the exact quote.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

It isn't just Aramco. If you read our own trade publications, such as
Design News, Machine Design, R&D, etc., you only hear about the costs
of batteries. How EV vehicles will never sell until "new" battery
technology is created.

The American media only wishes to report how EV vehicles can not
totally replace the ICE. In their minds, unless you have an EV that is
even better than the current technology it is not worth manufacturing.
They see no value in making a niche vehicle.

As for the executives running the big three, they have no clue what to
make! I have heard from GM engineers all the horror stories about
their own Corvette. As far as most executives are concerned, if you
can not sell around 250,000 "units" worth of any vehicle, it is not
worth the cost to produce. It is all about the numbers.

The environmental movement has been going on for decades. Yet it has
always had to fight the stigma of "cost". Corporate has always said it
is too costly to be environmentally correct. American corporations are
having to compete globally with both hands tied behind their back. If
the EPA and the department of the Interior did not exist, American
corporations would be doing a lot better.
In their eyes, that seems right. To them, any and all "fixes" must be
Market driven! If there is not a clear and Hugh profit in it, they
will not make it!

Since that is the case, it is very easy to see why major corporations
worldwide do not see the current need for ANY EV.

So the question is, how does this way of thinking get changed?

Randy

--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, Lee Dekker
<heprv@...> wrote:
>
> Yep. The nerdy wacky EV conspiracy nuts were right all along.
>
> This is Probably only one of many sources for anti EV PR funding
over the last decades. They sure have done a great job though. The
simplest, cleanest, most officiant vehicle technology available has
successfully been kept totally unavailable (unless you make your own)
from the entire world. And it's all made to look like it just kind of
happened that way naturally.
>
> While all plans for EVs were being uniformly and mysteriously
scuttled, the mantra pounded into all of our heads by our PR owned
government and press was "You don't want and will never be able to buy
an EV". Over and over and over.
>
> Thanks Gov., thanks PR minions. May you all choke to death on the
money you made.
>
>
> --- On Sat, 1/10/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:
>
> > From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> > Subject: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] (fwd) Aramco will "discourage
the move to electric cars..."
> > To: murdoch@...
> > Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 12:56 PM
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1t4ue-WmlU&feature=channel
> > >
> > >Aramco will "discourage the move to electric cars
> > by alleviating our
> > >concerns about the environment." Go to 7:20 for
> > the exact quote.
>

You also have to ask the question about manufacturing costs.

Clearly, GM felt they could not afford to pay for the tooling. Even
back in the 90's, GM, and the other American manufacturers, were not
about to pay for more tooling. They had more than enough "costs" to
deal with!

I do believe that they had behind the scenes discussions with the
likes of Honda, Toyota, and the Koreans about EV costs. ABout how it
would be very helpful to all of them to NOT produce ANY EV products.
The re-tooling costs for making an EV could better be spent elsewhere.
Such as buying corporate jets!

In my humble opinion, the only real way to see EV vehicles made is
thru small companies. Start-ups. They do not have the corporate BS to
battle! They are also passionate about the product. They actually want
to see it made.

Randy

--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, murdoch
<murdoch@...> wrote:
>
>
> It wouldn't have been possible for them to accomplish this without so
> much help.  I think the biggest help came from the alleged (not real)
> defenders of free markets who saw joyfully, nastilly and uncritically
> bought into the argument that if mass-produced EVs were wanted they
> would be mass-produced and sold, and since they weren't mass-produced
> and sold they must not be wanted.
>
> This incorrect but widespread thinking was, in my view, a critical cog
> in the decades-long delay of better technology.
>
> [Default] On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:45:59 -0800 (PST), Lee Dekker
> <heprv@...> wrote:
>
> >Yep. The nerdy wacky EV conspiracy nuts were right all along.
> >
> >This is Probably only one of many sources for anti EV PR funding
over the last decades. They sure have done a great job though. The
simplest, cleanest, most officiant vehicle technology available has
successfully been kept totally unavailable (unless you make your own)
from the entire world. And it's all made to look like it just kind of
happened that way naturally.
> >
> >While all plans for EVs were being uniformly and mysteriously
scuttled, the mantra pounded into all of our heads by our PR owned
government and press was "You don't want and will never be able to buy
an EV". Over and over and over.
> >
> >Thanks Gov., thanks PR minions. May you all choke to death on the
money you made.
> >
> >
> >--- On Sat, 1/10/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:
> >
> >> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> >> Subject: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] (fwd) Aramco will
"discourage the move to electric cars..."
> >> To: murdoch@...
> >> Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 12:56 PM
> >> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1t4ue-WmlU&feature=channel
> >> >
> >> >Aramco will "discourage the move to electric cars
> >> by alleviating our
> >> >concerns about the environment." Go to 7:20 for
> >> the exact quote.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

EV & Hybrid News including  Cadillac Converj electric car
<http://electricandhybridcars.com/index.php/pages/electriccarnews.html>

Cadillac Converj electric car is what the Chevy Volt should have looked
like
E-car startups try to compete with major companies
Army goes electric with new Chrysler vehicles
Chrysler Plans Electric Car Push in 2010
Toyota to build electric town car, plug-in hybrids
Ford plans small electric car in 2011
Electric car maker seeks federal loan
Aptera Electric Car Available in "Volume" by October 2009
Electric Car Woes: Aptera Delays, Odyne Dies and Battery Makers Seek
Loans
An Electrifying Ride In The Chevy Volt
Solar Powered Prius: Not Just Yet
`Juiced' hybrids - Entrepreneur taps into market for modifying
green machines
2010 Lexus RX 450h: Luxury in a hybrid SUV
Production Photos of Euro-Spec Honda Insight Hybrid Leak
New Cadillac SRX expected to get hybrid option

For all these stories and a video of the  Saturn - Vue Gas, Hybrid and
Electric  -  Click Here
   <http://electricandhybridcars.com/index.php/pages/electriccarnews.html>
Cheers,
Susie



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

For the first time, two Chinese carmakers are exhibiting this year on
the main floor of the Detroit auto show.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/business/worldbusiness/13chinacar.html
?emc=eta1

I figured some of you Californians out there might want a bit of a
reminder that your bankrupt state government is still living with some
of its (comparatively expensive) Hydrogen Delusions, and is still
keeping its head in the sand as far as the excellence of some of the
plug-in-vehicle technology which California Taxpayers have already
heroically helped to fund and advance.

I'm not a Hydrogen Opponent in all things (at least, I'm a fan of
keeping some open mind toward various competing technologies) but it
seems like EVs are more the proven technology, and have been popular
with the few allowed to use them and it looks to me like they lower
costs in some areas (such as in the costs of building a charging and
fuel distribution infrastructure).

>On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:17:13 -0800, info@... wrote:
>
>>Hydrogen Station RFP 08-606 - The question and answer period has
>>been extended from 01/09/09 to 01/16/09. Please review the
>>following website for an updated Key Actions time line.
>>http://hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/policy_funding/policy_funding.htm
>>
>>======================================================================
>>You are subscribed to the h2hwy mailing list.
>>You may unsubscribe from this list by going to:
>>http://www.hydrogenhighway.ca.gov/sub2hwy.html
>>typing in your e-mail address and hitting the "Unsubscribe" button.
>>======================================================================

It appears that Warren Buffett has more faith in the Chinese than the
Big Three. Can you blame him?

--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, "k9zeh" <rich@...>
wrote:
>
> For the first time, two Chinese carmakers are exhibiting this year on
> the main floor of the Detroit auto show.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/business/worldbusiness/13chinacar.html
> ?emc=eta1
>

That is how things get done. If you people wanted EV1s, they wouldn't have been
crushed. If African Americans were not inferior, why were they enslaved in the
first place? If pot were not so dastardly dangerous, why are so many people in
jail for puffing it? And my all time favorite. If she is a witch, she will float
after being bound and thrown in the lake. If she sinks, we will know that she
WAS innocent. Dead but innocent. All very contrived from the get go and we the
masses of asses swallow it again and again.

It's been fun but it's also over. Our dreams for EVs and for a domestic,
renewable energy and transportation system are no longer in the cards. Switching
course and building such a system would have been an incredibly big challenge
under the best of economic conditions. Now it looks as though we will descend
into some sort of feudal police state nightmare in which we  will count
ourselves lucky to have food in the stomach. Sound ridiculous? Good. Hope to
hell I am wrong.

You can't make gasoline on your roof.


--- On Mon, 1/12/09, murdoch <murdoch@...> wrote:

> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> Subject: Re: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] (fwd) Aramco will "discourage the
move to electric cars..."
> To: future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, January 12, 2009, 8:24 PM
> It wouldn't have been possible for them to accomplish
> this without so
> much help.  I think the biggest help came from the alleged
> (not real)
> defenders of free markets who saw joyfully, nastilly and
> uncritically
> bought into the argument that if mass-produced EVs were
> wanted they
> would be mass-produced and sold, and since they weren't
> mass-produced
> and sold they must not be wanted.
>
> This incorrect but widespread thinking was, in my view, a
> critical cog
> in the decades-long delay of better technology.
>
> [Default] On Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:45:59 -0800 (PST), Lee
> Dekker
> <heprv@...> wrote:
>
> >Yep. The nerdy wacky EV conspiracy nuts were right all
> along.
> >
> >This is Probably only one of many sources for anti EV
> PR funding over the last decades. They sure have done a
> great job though. The simplest, cleanest, most officiant
> vehicle technology available has successfully been kept
> totally unavailable (unless you make your own) from the
> entire world. And it's all made to look like it just
> kind of happened that way naturally.
> >
> >While all plans for EVs were being uniformly and
> mysteriously scuttled, the mantra pounded into all of our
> heads by our PR owned government and press was "You
> don't want and will never be able to buy an EV".
> Over and over and over.
> >
> >Thanks Gov., thanks PR minions. May you all choke to
> death on the money you made.
> >
> >
> >--- On Sat, 1/10/09, murdoch
> <murdoch@...> wrote:
> >
> >> From: murdoch <murdoch@...>
> >> Subject: [future-fuels-and-vehicles] (fwd) Aramco
> will "discourage the move to electric cars..."
> >> To: murdoch@...
> >> Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 12:56 PM
> >>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1t4ue-WmlU&feature=channel
> >> >
> >> >Aramco will "discourage the move to
> electric cars
> >> by alleviating our
> >> >concerns about the environment." Go to
> 7:20 for
> >> the exact quote.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >

Sorry, but that looks like a pretty poor effort to me.  Compared to
the pre-release buzz (possible plug in capability, ev only driving, 80
mpg)  it falls short.  I mean really, ev only mode for 1/2 mile?  And
50mpg- that's about what it gets now.  And the solar panel is there to
run the fan and AC, not to charge the batteries.  Whats the point?
What kind of an answer is that to the Volt, I say a weak one if any
answer at all.




--- In future-fuels-and-vehicles@yahoogroups.com, "k9zeh" <rich@...>
wrote:
>
> Toyota unveiling electric concept car in Detroit - Yahoo! News
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090110/ap_on_bi_ge/auto_show_toyota
>

On 1/16/09 12:26 PM, mrlee770 wrote:

> Sorry, but that looks like a pretty poor effort to me.  Compared to
> the pre-release buzz (possible plug in capability, ev only driving, 80
> mpg)  it falls short.  I mean really, ev only mode for 1/2 mile?  And
> 50mpg- that's about what it gets now.  And the solar panel is there to
> run the fan and AC, not to charge the batteries.  Whats the point?
> What kind of an answer is that to the Volt, I say a weak one if any
> answer at all.

Mr. Lee,

There are two different cars in your email above. The features you're
listing -- EV driving for .5 miles, 50 MPG EPA rating (which is an increase
over the current model!), solar panel -- those are all features of the 2010
Prius. The electric concept car is a totally different car, called the
FT-EV. Both cars are on the show floor this week, but they are vastly
different.

~Linda (who was there)