$1b electric car infrastructure deal

I'm not sure that it is just efficency, but more startup and sht down times. AFAIK coal fired takes 24 hours to start up, gas turbine minutes and hydro seconds. so if you have the coal burning and the boilers bubbling you want the generator to be spining producing electricty that you are getting paid for.

Certainly, rechargng a whole pile of electric cars during off peak would give he coal station generators better return and thus higher efficency.

It is NOT however worth the home owner charging a whole pile of batteries atthe cheap rate and then runing their house on an inverter during the day. Efficency in and efficency out, then cost of asset and deprecation takes care of all that.

**Electricity generators. That may include:

• Coal fired plants (up to around 50% efficient).

• Nukes (up to around 40% efficient)

• Gas turbine (up to 60%)

• Wind (efficiency unimportant)

• PV cell (efficiency unimportant)

• Roof top PV cells (efficiency unimportant)

Don't forget: When you're judging automobiles, that several factors should be considered:

• The vast majority of private cars in Australia are petrol powered.

• The actual efficiency of the engines in those cars is significantly lower than the theoretical maximum.

• The cost of distribution (petrol tankers, petrol bowsers, lighting, etc) should be taken into account (since you are costing electricity grids into your costing).

**In SOME cases (and the number is growing) Australians are generating much of their own power from their own rooftops. Additionally, you need to accept that the theoretical efficiency of a car engine is not the real-world efficiency. You also need to add fuel distribution costs into your equations. **Indeed. THAT is the biggest problem I see. There is not a snowball's chance in Hell that mass adoption of electric vehicles will occur anytime soon. That should not stop planning for such an event right now, though.

The

**Nope. Australia has abundant reserves of geo-thermal energy, at costs which rival nukes. Even better, public acceptance is pretty much assured. Solar, wind and todal can supplement the base load plants. Don't foget: The Sun shines a lot in Australia, over a wide range of time zones and at times when demand is highest.

You have the uranium

**Indeed. However, we need to start planning for the lack of oil NOW. There's not much being made right now. Sticking one's head in the sand and saying: "electric cars are not as efficient as petrol cars" will not solve the problem. Eventually, we have to find an alternative (or, more likely, a range of alternatives).

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

And don't forget the subsidised road costs as well.

**Indeed. It is remarkable how many fossil fuel proponents forget how the automobile got to where it is by the use of general taxation. Now that some want subsidies to be provided to some of the alternative energy proponents, the fossil fuel guys call "foul".

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

So you really think burning more brown coal will create less pollution?

MrT.

means,

A bit of a contradiction there, how can it be "AT BEST", if so many modern engines can do better?

Mine does under 5 Litres/100km under those same conditions, and *averages*

6L/100km, all without expensive batteries. And can still manage to safely overtake in sixth gear!

MrT.

Please explain? The total government revenue from motorists *FAR* exceeds expenditure, and has done so for many decades.

MrT.

Since 1985 actually, when Keating changed the rules with what could be done with fuel excise. Fuel excise is now simply a revenue measure which can be used for any Government purposes. Last year fuel excise raised around $15 billion dollars of which around $6 billion went back to roads, the rest was used to partly fund the operation of Centrelink.

**Non-sequitur. Modern Petrol engines can only mange around 35% efficiency, AT BEST. Typically, in heavy city traffic, fuel consumption will easily double. **Great. BTW: How much does it weigh? How many people can it legally carry? How much luggage? What is the fuel consumption under acceleration (mine can easily exceed 60L/100km (yes, SIXTY), when I really give it some stick) What is the fuel consumption is typical SYDNEY/LA/NYC/London heavy peak hour traffic? Don't forget: The Prius and pure electric cars are designed for cities, not country towns.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

and

But as I said the "total government revenue from motorists" (of which the fuel excise is only a part), was far higher than the total expenditure

*long* before then. (that doesn't include the general taxation that motorists pay of course, only those related to motoring, including taxation, fees, surcharges, duties, levies, fines etc. etc. etc.) Soon we can add carbon credits as well :-(

As is, and was, all consolidated revenue in any case.

MrT.

engines).

modern

efficiency,

And yet *YOU* were the one who already pointed out the now common VVT engines might do better, not me! Not to mention the increasingly common turbo diesels.

*averages*

About 1.4 Tonne

Five.

Enough.

The instantaneous readout has never exceeded 20l/km, but the important thing to me is that the average is 6.0L/100km over more than 10,000km, both city and highway use.

I live in a city myself, and even then the Prius would cost me *far* more to own/run, and perform worse in many situations. We don't all have to drive to the CBD every day you know! But how come you don't have one if you think they are so great? Frankly I think they are a pathetic attempt at cashing in, and can easily be improved on when the demand/economics justify it. It may be quite a while before a one car owner in Australia could seriously consider an electric vehicle IMO however. I won't hold my breathe waiting for the government to do something about the CTP disincentive though. At the moment you are FAR better off simply buying a Falcodore and taking the $2k taxpayer handout to convert it to gas. then not having to pay the huge fuel excises either.

In fact the conversion companies are now starting to do quite a few four cylinder cars as well, I can't see how a Prius could possibly compete with that.

MrT.

**Basic efficiency is not improved. Just the efficiency over a wider rev range. **All quite impressive for a petrol engine. What is the fuel consuption under acceleration and in typical Sydney peak hour traffic? **You have a commendably light foot, or your car accelerates very slowly. **Fine.

**Fine. Don't buy a Prius. The Prius is designed for people who do *a lot* of heavy traffic driving. **For a bunch of reasons:

• I NEVER buy new (or near new) cars.

• I need a vehicle which can carry long (2 Metre) loads.

• I drive as little as possible. The Prius only makes sense for heavy city drivers.

Frankly I

**You're entitled to your opinion. I also feel that Toyota COULD have done better. However, credit should go them, since Ford, GM and others have managed to completely ignore the issue. **We'll see.

**That is obscene. Along with the nonsensically high price of Diesel. **In pure Dollar terms, it cannot. Prius purchasers often have other incentives.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Not for turbo diesels, Increased efficiency over a narrower rev range compared to petrol engines. Not a problem when mated with lots of gears or CVT

Not for a turbo diesel as I keep telling you.

My *average* is 6.0L/100km, including peak hour city driving. Why should I care about Sydney peak hour traffic anyway? That's what public transport is for.

city

Nope *easily* out exelerates most cars in traffic without needing a petrol bowser in tow!

Thanks, I won't!

Actually designed for countries/cities different than our own. But mostly just to get in on the developmental ground floor. Pity they haven't climbed any higher in the last decade though.

And not even then! But you see it it pointless for you, just as it is for

*most* people in Australia.

Nope, the Ford Focus and GM Astra Turbo diesels (among others) are far more practical in Australia than the overpriced Prius. And God help you when the batteries need replacing. GM had an electric car long before the Prius. The time wasn't right, just as it still isn't. I'm not saying that won't ever change however. Maybe then the vehicles will improve, they certainly need to!

If you live long enough.

then

No argument from me!

with

Exactly.

Ignorance of the total costs involved until too late, or simply a wish to scare pedestrians? :-)

MrT.

er, make that accelerates :-)

MrT.

Could you list that "revenue" Motor vehicle rego barely covers the cost f the rego dept. Considerinfg that out major highways cosy $1B+/km now, then add allthe major roads, minor roads, and back streets that are subsidised by state fess and local government rates.

You are forgetting all the other sources that fund roads.

Could you please list that "revenue", then list all the money spent on roads at federal, stae and local government level?

It will be very informative for you.

That compression will cost you a LOT of energy. No free lunch remember.

Same with the MDI/Tata 'air car' too btw.

Graham

For how long ? And for what energy output ?

You're quoting power when you should be quoting energy. A classic mistake of wannabes. Don't get your units mixed up.

READ IT !

Graham