Will diesel become significantly more popular soon

[RoadRaceJosh]

Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
You don't need to worry about the details. The EPA and the government will take care of us. In fact Senator Harry Reed said that oil was bad and made us sick and that we need to stop using it. So that would make diesels bad, right?

Harry has our best interests at heart, doesn't he? He has stated that we should drive electric vehicles because they have zero pollution. He may have forgotten that the electricity comes from somewhere but after all, he's an administrator and a politician and they don't delve into minor details like that.


Lets play "Name-drop the Boogie Man!" Go line up behind Bill O'Reilly and wait for your dunce cap. That doesn't seem fair of me does it? See my point?

If we're serious we can charge all the electric vehicles with solar panels. The cars sit for most of the day anyhow. Solar panels last well over 25 years, and in fact are rated to produce 80% of their original power after 20 years. For many people their dream car is a Tesla Model S. Enough solar power is coming on-line in California that they are having to curtail conventional generation during mid-day. If we can store enough power to get us from sun-down to sun-up and move enough power around the grid we can stop burning fuels for electricity.

 

[Burt]

Originally Posted By: Joshua_Skinner
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack



Lets play "Name-drop the Boogie Man!" Go line up behind Bill O'Reilly and wait for your dunce cap. That doesn't seem fair of me does it? See my point?

If we're serious we can charge all the electric vehicles with solar panels. The cars sit for most of the day anyhow. Solar panels last well over 25 years, and in fact are rated to produce 80% of their original power after 20 years. For many people their dream car is a Tesla Model S. Enough solar power is coming on-line in California that they are having to curtail conventional generation during mid-day. If we can store enough power to get us from sun-down to sun-up and move enough power around the grid we can stop burning fuels for electricity.


Why do we need to direct solar generated electricity to specifically recharge cars rather than general use in the grid? Are you primarily about superficial feel good? Doesn't the first kwh in come from renewables, because you can't turn it off and last kwh of demand come from fossil fuels?

Please tell us what technology we would use to store daytime electric to fulfill our needs through the night?

 

[RoadRaceJosh]

The argument against electric cars was how the electricity is being produced. I gave a counter argument. You are making a different argument.

Currently pumped storage is the best/least cost solution available. For distributed storage we're still stuck with batteries. Once they are made grid-interactive, battery plants on board electric cars can play a role in this. The pilot thermal plants which store heat in molten salts to run a turbine after the sun goes down is still fringe/very expensive. More directly we can store heat/cold for use in space conditioning overnight. This past month I have been able to cool my house at night by simply opening windows and not see temperatures greater than 75°F during the day. I have had zero air conditioning expense so far while my neighbor in his single-wide runs his window AC for many hours a day. Obviously investment in conservation is needed.

 

[edwardh1]

some French friends say Paris pushed diesel and regret it they say due to particulates.
MAny of their taxi even cut off at red lights.

 

[edwardh1]

some French friends say Paris pushed diesel and regret it they say due to particulates.
MAny of their taxi even cut off at red lights.

 

[OneEyeJack]

In California a permit was issued for a solar farm out in the desert. The area was a WWII bombing range deemed otherwise uninhabitable. It was stipulated that no towers or cables or wires of any kind could extend outward from the farm and no lines would be allowed across the mountains into places like Los Angles or San Diego where the utilities were located that would pay for the project. The EPA and the Bureau of Land Management claimed that the transmission lines and towers would permanently damage protected forest and other wilderness land and that there were several species of birds and mammals that needed to be protected and could not survive without their help.

It appears that the government is having fun messing (insert your own word) with us and having a good laugh while they spending our money.

 

[A_Harman]

Originally Posted By: Joshua_Skinner
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
You don't need to worry about the details. The EPA and the government will take care of us. In fact Senator Harry Reed said that oil was bad and made us sick and that we need to stop using it. So that would make diesels bad, right?

Harry has our best interests at heart, doesn't he? He has stated that we should drive electric vehicles because they have zero pollution. He may have forgotten that the electricity comes from somewhere but after all, he's an administrator and a politician and they don't delve into minor details like that.


Lets play "Name-drop the Boogie Man!" Go line up behind Bill O'Reilly and wait for your dunce cap. That doesn't seem fair of me does it? See my point?

If we're serious we can charge all the electric vehicles with solar panels. The cars sit for most of the day anyhow. Solar panels last well over 25 years, and in fact are rated to produce 80% of their original power after 20 years. For many people their dream car is a Tesla Model S. Enough solar power is coming on-line in California that they are having to curtail conventional generation during mid-day. If we can store enough power to get us from sun-down to sun-up and move enough power around the grid we can stop burning fuels for electricity.


Tell us how many square feet of solar panel are required to recharge a 70 kW*hr battery pack in 8 hours on a day with an average level of cloudiness.

 

[SteveSRT8]

^^^^Shhhh, you're going to get him excited.

Never ask for facts. That is inconvenient, always has been to the Green Energy fanatics. Shannow and others have already showed why solar and wind are nearly impossible to plug into our grid.

All that happens in this country when developing green alternatives is the cronies are made rich with a huge subsidy, very little real progress. Gasoline powered cars are already so clean they can actually emit cleaner air than they ingest in severely polluted areas. Diesels have become unwieldly with all the after treatments required to meet EPA requirements...

 

[RoadRaceJosh]

Originally Posted By: A_Harman

Tell us how many square feet of solar panel are required to recharge a 70 kW*hr battery pack in 8 hours on a day with an average level of cloudiness.


Sorry, but your roof isn't big enough.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Current fuel cost averages in US:
Regular gas $2.81
Diesel $2.86

Thats less than 2%.


Must be nice...
http://www.harrisburggasprices.com/Sam's_Club_Gas_Stations/Mechanicsburg/173394/index.aspx

Regular - $2.68
Diesel - $3.02

http://www.harrisburggasprices.com/Sheetz_Gas_Stations/Mechanicsburg/61097/index.aspx

Regular - $2.75
Diesel - $3.03

I'll take my Diesel-like Ecoboosts with all of the plusses and none of the downsides of a modern Diesel.

 

[RoadRaceJosh]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
^^^^Shhhh, you're going to get him excited.

Never ask for facts. That is inconvenient, always has been to the Green Energy fanatics. Shannow and others have already showed why solar and wind are nearly impossible to plug into our grid.

All that happens in this country when developing green alternatives is the cronies are made rich with a huge subsidy, very little real progress. Gasoline powered cars are already so clean they can actually emit cleaner air than they ingest in severely polluted areas. Diesels have become unwieldly with all the after treatments required to meet EPA requirements...


So, which cronies do you prefer make the money? There is massive subsidy for oil so I have to believe you prefer the status quo.

Yes, wind integration is problematic. In the NW it's working reasonably well because of the hydro balancing reserve. Large scale demand side balancing is coming on line.

Solar is easier to integrate, but still no cake walk. One big problem is that large base-load thermal plants aren't flexible enough to ramp up and down production as needed.

If you think these issues aren't being worked on and won't be solved please turn over all the computers in your car and retrieve a set of breaker points. There is a sea-change happening in the utility industry, but I don't think that's your area of expertise. Change would be happening faster, but there are huge capital expenses involved.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: Joshua_Skinner
There is a sea-change happening in the utility industry, but I don't think that's your area of expertise. Change would be happening faster, but there are huge capital expenses involved.


Indeed. Capital expenses that do not and will not make financial sense.

Unless of course you legislate fossil fuels out of existence and there is no alternative.

 

[Pop_Rivit]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Shannow and others have already showed why solar and wind are nearly impossible to plug into our grid.


Why is wind energy "nearly impossible" to plug into our grid? We've been doing it for a number of years in Iowa. We currently have nearly 1/3 of our electrical needs generated by wind energy, and more wind farms are being built right now across the state. And to top it off, the Rock Island Clean Line will export 3,500 megawatts to state east of us.

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

Never ask for facts. That is inconvenient, always has been to the Green Energy fanatics.


Ok Mr. Jordan, I'll ask you for facts. If it's "nearly impossible" to plug into our grid, please explain why are states like Iowa and Texas able to do it so easily?

 

[Benito]

Originally Posted By: Joshua_Skinner
If you think these issues aren't being worked on and won't be solved please turn over all the computers in your car and retrieve a set of breaker points.


Some people don't understand progress, the bedrock of this country. Oh well.

 

[itguy08]

Has anyone done a cradle to grave TCO of the environmental and other impacts of these various green technologies.

Like - we have to rape the Earth for the metals to make the stuff, have to use hydrocarbons (Fossil fuel is not correct at all; it's been proven oil is not all or even mostly from fossils) to create it, ship it all over, set it up, maintain it, and in the case of solar, wipe out some carbon sinks (the grass underneath).

I wonder if once you add it all up they would not be the same as or worse than what we have today?

 

[Benito]

Yes there are people who calculate all the factors when it comes to alternative energy sources.

Unfortunately, we don't discuss the issue at that level and this skews decision making.

 

[javacontour]

But this changes in winter when the fraction that comprises diesel is squeezed by demand for home heating oil.

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Current fuel cost averages in US:
Regular gas $2.81
Diesel $2.86

Thats less than 2%.

 

[javacontour]

The solution is to stop paying any cronies, not simply changing which cronies get paid.

If it has to be subsidized, why are we doing it?

I don't care if it's oil, wind, solar, nuclear, or any other technology. If it can't stand on it's own virtues, the last thing that we need is government subsidy.

Cut them all off, not just the ones that are not your pet source.


Originally Posted By: Joshua_Skinner
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
^^^^Shhhh, you're going to get him excited.

Never ask for facts. That is inconvenient, always has been to the Green Energy fanatics. Shannow and others have already showed why solar and wind are nearly impossible to plug into our grid.

All that happens in this country when developing green alternatives is the cronies are made rich with a huge subsidy, very little real progress. Gasoline powered cars are already so clean they can actually emit cleaner air than they ingest in severely polluted areas. Diesels have become unwieldly with all the after treatments required to meet EPA requirements...


So, which cronies do you prefer make the money? There is massive subsidy for oil so I have to believe you prefer the status quo.

Yes, wind integration is problematic. In the NW it's working reasonably well because of the hydro balancing reserve. Large scale demand side balancing is coming on line.

Solar is easier to integrate, but still no cake walk. One big problem is that large base-load thermal plants aren't flexible enough to ramp up and down production as needed.

If you think these issues aren't being worked on and won't be solved please turn over all the computers in your car and retrieve a set of breaker points. There is a sea-change happening in the utility industry, but I don't think that's your area of expertise. Change would be happening faster, but there are huge capital expenses involved.

 

[Benito]

I agree no subsidies. We should level the playing field by taxing "externalities".

But we're not politically or ethically mature enough to agree on the simpler solutions.

 

[fdcg27]

Back in 1981, fuel prices hit a solid buck a gallon, which represented a rough tripling in fuel prices over less than a decade.
Diesel cars and light trucks began appearing on car lots everywhere. Most major manufacturers offered at least a couple of diesel model choices, including some that you might never think of.
There were diesel Mercedes cars, of course and they represented the vast majority of MBNA sales at the time.
But there were also diesel S-10s, Rangers, Chevettes, Tempos and Camrys along with a host of others.
BMW would even sell you a 524TD, the engine of which was also offered by Ford in a Lincoln model.
Problem was fuel stayed around a buck a gallon for the next ten years, so interest in paying a price premium for the fuel savings involved in diesel ownership never really gained much popular appeal and the huge range of diesel vehicles offered in this market faded away.
Combine this with the large improvements in fuel economy over the years with gas engines as well as the shift from simple mechanical injection diesel engines to the horrors of today and it's hard to see where there is a diesel future in this country.