Gas Broke $5 a Gallon!

[DX]

Most Americans thought it was a bad idea too...course the ones that have a brain aren't making the decisions

The economy here will get worse before it gets better...New England is still reeling from the decline in manufacturing and the outsourcing of jobs...the current problems are just another layer on the cake for us. It will take more than just a recovery in housing, looser credit, and a solution for oil to fix this region. We need a strong dollar, fiscal responsibility, and a pullback in the services sector of the economy...none of which are likely anytime soon under any administration. This was once the most prosperous region on Earth...now many of our cities are falling apart.

The funding for Iraq could have been used in better ways...like college education...it will cost $51,000 this year at Conn...this isn't even the Ivy League...and it rises about 4K every year...

[Silence]

Hey, Mars: The difference is Americans don't worship the UK.

I'm a bit of an isolationist in these matters, at least while we're in this state. Outsourcing and foreign energy dependence are such obvious threats, and no politicians seem to be addressing it. I'd also point to our massive national debt whose interest accounts for 40% of our yearly expenditures...but that happens everywhere, I think. Not to mention the debt => printing more money => inflation => no investment from foreign investors => a declining dollar.

[StormGlorious]

Australians don't either. Up until recently we pretty much did everything you Yanks asked us to do. 'Insert rude face here'

Storm

[MarsGlorious]

Well, something that's been a bit scary is the massive decline of the American dollar. A couple of years ago, the Australian dollar was worth $US 0.51. Whenever I saw a price on Ebay, I would have to double it.

Now it's $AU 1.00 = $US 0.97. When I see a price on Ebay, it's almost the same in Australian currency.

[cantab]

Yeah, US to Canadian dollars has changed similarly, while in Britain we hit the 'two dollar pound' (it's gone back a touch now, £1 = $1.98).

[emperor_james]

The only way to make prices substantially drop would be to tap our own oil reserves. But no one seems to want to do that. So we really need to work on increasing fuel efficiency, driving less, public transportation and all that stuff. Ultimately I guess we need an alternate source of energy, but we have to be careful with that too, considering how producing ethanol has contributed to the food crisis in poor countries.

[cantab]

Part of the problem is that decades of low oil prices resulted in the oil companies having neither the money nor the economic rationale to invest in much development of new fields. Now prices have shot up, they're doing more exploration, but it takes a long time to get from 'hey, d'you think that might be oil there' on some geophysical data, to pumping the stuff out of the ground in commercial quantities. Also, all (well, most of) the easy stuff has already been found, leaving things like the several km deep waters of the gulf of mexico, which are much more difficult and expensive to work in.

[DX]

The stuff in the GoM is useless. It takes one hurricane to shut down that whole region. If anything, we want to be LESS dependent on oil operations there. Even if we do hit the Gulf, hit Alaska, and the tar sands of Canada...the impact won't be more than two dollars lower at the pump and won't propagate through the economy for over a decade.

Fuel Efficiency is a start, we lag waaaaay behind Europe. Driving less and mass transit are more difficult...it's great to talk about...but you should see the existing strain on what we already have. Every train to the city from Jersey is standing-room only. They added more trains to the schedule last year; those are packed now too. You have to live in like Suffern in order to get a seat. The state doesn't exactly have plentiful funds to spend on mass transit either, Jersey is in the worst fiscal shape [in the years I've been alive] now than ever.

But I don't live there anymore...so...Connecticut...most towns have no rail service. I'm almost half an hour from Fairfield's Metro-North station. The wait-list for reserving a parking spot in the station lot is 3,000+ names long. Long story short, people need to drive, and fairly far, every day, oil problems or no oil problems. People from all over the county have to commute into New York, White Plains, Stamford, Bridgeport, New Haven, and Hartford, most need their cars to do it.

As far as alternative energy goes, those with the power to make it happen won't. We have the technology to make $20K electric cars with powerful batteries that can deliver ranges in the hundreds of miles and highway speeds over 70 MPH. But a certain battery company was bought out by GM [the power in their batteries has been significantly toned down since then]. GM scrapped the EV1. They saw how dangerous this stuff could be to their bottom lines...let's think, where do automakers make much of their money? Repairs and maintenance. Electric cars have nothing that really needs it that. Oil companies don't want to see electric cars either. So there is a natural alliance and the outcome? Hydrogen fuel cells...if the oil companies simply change their stations, they retain all of their power. Hydrogen is the alternate energy that never should be, no matter how clean they say it is...it is a hidden sham.

So...real progress will only happen when those with power lose it. That has already started to happen, but it is a race to see who will be hurt more...GM will be on its knees later this year...but so will the country. Fuel efficiency standards have to go up, the dollar has to rise, big oil has to fall. Good luck with that.

[SSCBen]

I'm actually considering converting a junker into an electric car. There's many websites out there about it and it doesn't cost too much ($8000 to $12000 typically from what I've read). Of course, the savings are quickly earned back, especially today. If I do it cheap I'm sure I could make one for less than $6000, which is great. They won't have the range of other ones but I'll be laughing while others fill up.

When you work at a gas station you have a good perspective of how much people spend... it's not unusual to see people spend over $150 on gasoline at all. Over $150 usually is diesel vehicles (trucks or big rigs exclusively) except for lawn crews who'll burn through money like mad. The biggest I've seen was a $960 bill from a guy who said "That'll last me until Wednesday maybe." That was Sunday afternoon.

[MarsGlorious]

$8000 is not very much to go to electric. Why don't they just sell cars like that?

[Silence]

The first real concern about electric vehicles is performance in cold weather. Ideally, the batteries should be kept warm and the motor(s) should be kept cool. Temperature in the south is sufficient; temperature in the north isn't. (Flip the north-south for you Aussies.) Additionally, gas-powered cars use heat from the engine to warm up the car, whereas electric vehicles would have to use a heating coil or something, which draws a lot of energy.

The second concern is the range. Most batteries won't last over 100 miles - it can only be done with huge lithium packs in small cars, and lithium batteries can still explode under high stress. Lithiums also don't have very high discharge rates/current unless you use capacitors. GM's EV1 was a disaster because it was only built to satisfy a California law requiring a few zero-emissions vehicles per automaker. It used heavy lead acid batteries at first, then middle-of-the-road NiMH packs. The range was only 160 miles.

GM didn't see the truth about electric vehicles: that you don't use them for long-distance traveling, at least not while gas and gas-powered vehicles are on the market. Most driving is commuting - no more than 20 miles per day, depending on where you live. The idea is you let the car charge overnight, drive to work, drive home, rinse and repeat. GM (and many others, I'm sure) freaked out when they realized you couldn't go over 160 miles (especially with no "electricity stations"). Not to mention it takes several hours to safely charge the batteries. Swapping batteries at stations lends itself to abuse.)

Ben, if you have the know-how to build an EV, go for it! Tools-wise I'm sure you'll be fine if you get access to the UMD labs.

[SSCBen]

DX already explained it pretty well as to why companies don't manufacture them much. What SilentGuy said is true too but it's more problems with electric vehicles themselves than the business behind them. It comes down to car manufacturers and energy companies (well, petroleum companies) making less profit in the long run. I hope the electric energy companies start getting into the business though and start pushing electric vehicles because they're becoming easily superior to everything else for the customer.

I'm seriously considering making an EV. I'm fairly certain some junior level ME classes are automotive design and I have to take some of them so I'm interested. They've been pushing alternatives heavily at UMD lately so I'd imagine they'd at least touch on EV there. I need to check that though...

[cantab]

I reckon flow batteries could be the vehicle power source of the future. Basically in a flow battery, the functions that are done by solids in other battery types are instead done by liquids. What this means is that it will produce electricity like a normal battery, can be charged like a normal battery, but can also be effectively recharged by replacing the electrolytes.

So at a 'battery station', you connect the car up to the pump, it pumps out the old electrolyte and pumps in fresh. The old electrolyte is then put in the stations own (much larger) flow battery for recharging. You'll be charged little more than the cost of the electricity, and partial changes should work just fine.

Of course there are still issues. For example, preventing electrolyte contamination, since it ends up being circulated between many different vehicles; it could take only one faulty vehicle or malicious owner to cause problems for thousands. Also, I think current technologies are rather toxic. Petrol's dangerous enough, but some of these chemicals are far worse.

[MarsGlorious]

I think they should combine all the ideas. The best one, is to make stream-lined cars out of carbon composites. I saw this show where the heaviest part of the car could easily be lifted. Combine this with efficient motors and batteries and you have much longer range.

This has heaps of other advantages. Because they're lite they're easier to transport and work with. If your cars breaks down, its easier to push and if your car falls into water, it doesn't sink as fast. It also easier to get out.

[Silence]

Unfortunately, there are some serious safety problems with all-carbon cars. Crumple zones, which absorb impact energy by forcing the metal bodies to crumple, are harder to make with synthetics. And in a collision with metal-bodied cars that do have weight, you'll get tossed around like a feather.

As far as sinking...I think any car can float. Just as in boats, all the air inside somewhat balances out the high density of the frame. So at the very least, a regular car would sink slowly. The problem is that few cars are perfectly sealed off (and they're not for sale), and those that are are only sealed to a certain level (like Humvees). Once you get under a few feet of water in any car, the water will find an opening and gush in, displacing all the air.

Also, the reason mileage hasn't really increased much over the past few decades despite technological advances is the safety bar is always rising. Cars have actually become much heavier thanks to all these air bags, safety systems, and crumple zones. And smaller cars, once again, aren't very safe. I wouldn't want to be in a ForTwo, Aveo, Yaris, or Fit in an accident.

Obviously we're going to see some improvements. But as long as heavier cars are also on the road, safety is a big issue.