EVie'sDad
Member
Or, once autonomous level 4/5 capability exists and is approved by local municipalities, they will just summon your car and summon you a loaner.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
The M3 terrifies BMW
- Thread starter JoeCoolMan24
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model 3
Or, once autonomous level 4/5 capability exists and is approved by local municipalities, they will just summon your car and summon you a loaner.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
All this talk about GHGs and other emissions let's all not forget that the HEPA filter that comes with Tesla's biohazard defense mode actually cleans the ambient environment of particulates... The volt and the prius don't do that. That's like having emissions measured in negative numbers...
I agree that corn based ethanol is not as energy dense as gasoline. IIRC it is ~ 70%, so your fuel economy is going to suffer by ~25%. Therefore, if it costs more than 75% of regular gas, the math is not positive.
The other ethanol possibility would be sugar based, like Brazil does. Their E100 vehicles get ~ 90% the fuel economy of gasoline, but the cost of the fuel at the pump is dramatically cheaper, making it a far better option. Our political handling of the situation has us sending money to the Middle East for the gas, but putting huge tariffs on sugar ethanol so it can't compete. Not everyone would think that is too smart, since Brazil effectively killed the strangle-hold the oil industry had on them. We could do it too.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
The energy density of Etoh does not magically jump from 70 to 90% because the source plant changes.
Any bio-fuel that is grown on land that could have better use - like growing food or rain forest should be banned.
As a sustainable solution, the efficiency math vastly favors the electric car over anything else I've seen.
Current mass production solar of panels convert 20% of incident light into power, of which you get ~75% out of the car as movement after the battery charging, inverter, and motor losses.
Photosynthesis is at best around 6% efficient:
Photosynthetic efficiency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Even if there's no energy losses at all going from plant to fuel, when you burn that fuel at 30% efficiency you're getting at best 2% of the solar energy back as motion, compared to 15% above.
Initial investment in a bio fuel system is smaller, and some of that is already made in our food supply system (but we need more food every year, too...)
I don't really think there's any bio fuel based on crops that makes sense at this point. The jury's still out on algae, but the numbers above still apply.
Current mass production solar of panels convert 20% of incident light into power, of which you get ~75% out of the car as movement after the battery charging, inverter, and motor losses.
Photosynthesis is at best around 6% efficient:
Photosynthetic efficiency - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Even if there's no energy losses at all going from plant to fuel, when you burn that fuel at 30% efficiency you're getting at best 2% of the solar energy back as motion, compared to 15% above.
Initial investment in a bio fuel system is smaller, and some of that is already made in our food supply system (but we need more food every year, too...)
I don't really think there's any bio fuel based on crops that makes sense at this point. The jury's still out on algae, but the numbers above still apply.
I did the math. The Volt beats the Prius for a a small piece of the daily-miles-driven vs cleanness-of-the-grid matrix, and loses for the rest. It could be that most people fit in that section (or not). But if you think it is cut and dried, you really should add the question back to your mind.
The Bolt starts more expensive, and far fewer of them will get the tax credit. After that GM will need to lose money on them in order to sell any. Doesn't sound sustainable to me.
Thank you kindly.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Photosynthesis would be viable if not for the fossil fuel, fertilizer, and phosphate inputs and discharges.
Minor details, I know ;-)
@JeffK -- can one buy a Mr. Fusion mock up? One, with a suction cup, attached to my Model 3 would make a good joke
Maybe.
Back to the Future Mr. Fusion Replica
and
Back to the Future Mr. Fusion Replica - Diamond Select - Back to the Future - Prop Replicas at Entertainment Earth
Thank you kindly.
For twenty or forty dollars I might well get one to put on the back of the Tesla for laughs. For four hundred, not so much.
MassModel3
Member
I think (or at least hope) everyone's moved on past arguing over your definition of "average". Dead horse, move on.
As @ohmman has pointed out, we drive Tesla's, not Tesle's. Or Tele's, in this case.
Argh, the Telerati. It's always "teleportation is near zero carbon" with them. They absolutely do not support having BEVs in the transportation mix at all. It's teleport-or-nothing. Drives me nuts.
MiamiNole
Member
Tinky Winky! (Tinky Winky) DIPsy! LaLa! (LaLaaa) Po... Teletubbies, teletubbies! Say... Hel-LO!
SpiceWare
Member
I've seen better implementations of Ignore on other sites. If done like this the flow isn't broken:
Red Sage
The Cybernetic Samurai
FYI... If someone in a thread has IGNORED another member, your posts may sometimes appear as if you are responding to one person, instead of the IGNORED. That is because the IGNORED posts don't appear at all to someone who has blocked them. Someone who hasn't IGNORED that particular person will, of course, see the whole conversation in context. Keep in mind that even quotes from the IGNORED won't appear to other people, even within your posts. So, unless you specifically mention the name of the IGNORED within your own text (instead of just the auto-quote when you REPLY), or manually quote them, someone may be a mite bit confused from time-to-time and stuff.No, I was not. If I was responding to your post, I would have quoted you. You will notice that I actually quoted EaglesPDX, because I was responding to him.
But thanks for the unnecessary snark, it was much appreciated.
