Clean Air Vehicle?

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2017: Clean Air Vehicle?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mike Green - So Cal on Monday, December 04, 2017 - 09:23 am:

At a new shopping center in town, I couldn't resist parking in this slot....Clean Air Vehicle


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dave Wells, Hamilton Ontario on Monday, December 04, 2017 - 09:59 am:

Well, compared to a big Packard or Cadillac, I guess it qualifies but what if a Detroit electric arrives?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dallas landers on Monday, December 04, 2017 - 12:06 pm:

Dave it would be a draw. Cole burned to produce electricity to charge batteries vs gas for T? T would still win I believe.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Wayne Sheldon, Grass Valley, CA on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 03:01 am:

An argument I have used for decades:
"Just because it doesn't have a tailpipe to suck on, does NOT mean it doesn't produce a lot of pollution!"

I hate political correctness! It is nearly always wrong!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Wayne Sheldon, Grass Valley, CA on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 03:01 am:

Nice photo by the way. Thank you.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dan Killecut on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 08:50 am:

That's my kind of clean air vehicle. You should make posters and T-shirts.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Fred Dimock, Newfields NH, USA on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 09:04 am:

Don't you mean open air vehicle?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis-SE Georgia on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 12:19 pm:

Better watch out. That may be punishable by death.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dick Fischer - Arroyo Grande, CA on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 12:29 pm:

I noticed a while back that the Nissan Leaf electric car has a badge that says, "Zero Emissions". Yeah, right. I suppose the battery charger runs on "Magic".

Ever since seeing that Zero Emissions badge, I've threatened to buy a couple and stick them on my '85 El Camino. My car doesn't emit any pollutants from coal fired or gas fired or nuclear powerplants, after all.

I have never done the calculation, but I'll bet that the net atmospheric emissions per car mile generated by the Camino are less than any electric car.

Dick


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mark Strange - Hillsboro, MO on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 12:59 pm:

Others have. FWIW, according to this site, your gasoline powered vehicle would have to get at least 40 mpg to have a lower carbon footprint than an electric vehicle charged by the U.S. power grid:

http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/electric-car-emissions


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By dale w on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 01:31 pm:

Of course if you insist on bringing in the ultimate source of power to recharge an electric car into the equation, to be fair, you would also have to figure in the power consumed and what fuel generated it into the mix for the petroleum refining plant, and the fuel used to transport it around the globe to get it to your local self serve, to say nothing of the cost involved in maintaining standing armies required to ensure the flow of oil from unstable regions of the globe into the cost of operating a gasoline or diesel powered vehicle...

As the technology evolves, electric cars will continue to cost less and less to operate- maybe the initial cost of purchasing one will even come down to a reasonable level!

Combine that with the potential to use zero emission power- wind and solar- and you are probably looking at the future direction of personal transportation vehicles.

Now, if some entrepreneur could just come up with a simple, easy to operate, ruggedly built basic model at a price that anyone could afford, he or she would probably dominate that emerging market for a generation or two........


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Rich Bingham, Blackfoot, Idaho on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 01:34 pm:

In all of the straining over gnats that accompanies the PC party-line dogma on "being green" I'm reminded of the old saw that "figures may not lie, but liars certainly can figure". I think it's possible to cobble together statistics to prove most any point of view.

As far as pollution from motor vehicles, it's been my understanding that comparatively, autos pre WW II emit far less than post-war models through the early '70s when the "anti-smog" campaign really started rolling.

As far as fuel economy goes (here come the statistics !) in a smart-aleck moment, I once reckoned that our big ol' Packard was over twice as efficient by the gross ton mile than a Toyota, reckoning it's 4500# curb weight and loaded up with our family of four, the dog, our luggage for a week and the tools and spare parts I felt I had to pack along, though they never got used. The "Beast" got an actual 11mpg, cruise at 60 or 40, uphill, downhill, headwind, tail wind, never made enough difference to bother about.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Marv Konrad (Green Bay Area) on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 02:11 pm:

-Mike-
Be careful... Your 'Uncle Jerry' needs to fund that budget of his! You're giving him 'evidence'.
Take Care; Behave; "Don't Shoot!" (and)
"Happy T-ing!"


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By dale w on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 03:01 pm:

I dont think anyone would argue that engines today run far more efficent and run far cleaner than they did in the '20's, 30's, 40's ect.
All you have to do is compare earlier pictures of the Los Angeles or the New York skylines in the twenties through the 1970's with today.
Government mandates and clean air laws forced auto companies to clean up their act far sooner than heath and market pressures could have- if at all.

Take a look at Beijing or Mumbai if you want to see how unregulated emissions work out!

Ironically, this is the 65th anniversary of the beginning of the Great London Smog of 1952

http://today.tamu.edu/2016/11/14/researchers-solve-mystery-of-historic-1952-lond on-fog-and-current-chinese-haze/


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By dale w on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 03:04 pm:

"Health", not "heath"!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dennis R on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 03:32 pm:

I was surprised when my son told me about how one of his college professors went on a major rant about how the production and recycling of the electric car batteries are projected to become a major source of environmental pollution. Gasoline may have refining and distribution costs, but electrics have their demons too. Guess we'll just have to outsource it to some third world nation...


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Dennis R on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 03:34 pm:

PS- I love those "Clean Air" vehicle parking spaces. I usually take two when I park my 30+ year old F250 diesel.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By dale w on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 03:36 pm:

we can send them to the slums of Bangladesh to be "recycled", like all our out-dated electronics and computers...


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Pat Clark-Deer Lodge, Tn on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 08:17 pm:

Where do they store the spent nuclear fuel rods, that made the electricity to charge their batteries.

I'll take the old oil. I am trying to pave my driveway. Will they take a few spent rods home with them?

Pat


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By dale w on Tuesday, December 05, 2017 - 09:42 pm:

Storing spent fuel rods from nuclear plants is an unsolvable problem- nobody wants them around their property!
I had a relative who worked for the DoD in linguistics. When Yucca Flats was proffered as a waste storage site in the 1980's (?) that dept. was tasked with devising a type of hieroglyphic language for signage that would be placed around the dump because the half lives of the radioactive isotopes stored there would remain deadly for millions of years into the future- long after any other trace of our civilization, culture and even any form of our language had all gone extinct, it would still be as deadly as the day it was concentrated.

Instead of a man-made material, these warning signs were also to be etched into large commonly available local rock outcrops so human or human-like descendants in the distant future wouldn't be tempted to remove them from the location. This same material was to be used to eventually seal the site in the hopes that large piles of massive common rocks wouldnt be removed and the tunnels would never be exposed.
Yucca Flats fell through and I dont think we ever found another site to develop. I believe nuclear plants simply store their spent rods on site to this day in a less than ideal stop-gap measure.

Thats the Achilles heel of nuclear power, its a fantastic source of almost emission free perpetual energy, but what do you do with its deadly (and from our fleeting perspective, immortal) waste?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Jeff Hood -Long Beach, California on Wednesday, December 06, 2017 - 03:16 am:

Interesting that the link that Mark Strange posted seems to show that an electric car charged presumably at home lowers your carbon footprint, and a newsletter recently included in my utility bill had a piece concerning the role our homes play in global warming which, to me, seems to indicates that electricity production for home use is a major source of pollution and home electricity use needs to be reduced. Here is an excerpt of the piece:

"...US emissions associated with residential energy use consist of between 20.5% and 35% of all carbon emissions for the US Similar measures hold true for Canada, Japan, and other first world economies.
Interestingly, of the greenhouse gas production attributed to residences, 70% is thought to be from the production and use of electricity, and only 30% from direct use of fossil fuels, such as oil and gas.
Given that electricity production is the largest contributor, it makes sense to reduce residential processes that use electricity..."


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Chadwick Azevedo on Wednesday, December 06, 2017 - 07:23 am:

For those believing wind and solar can provide the power we need I suggest you try it. I Have lived with a zero carbon footprint (well close to it). It is not enjoyable and is expensive. Constant use wears down parts and batteries. Simple dirt obscures solar panels, they must be cleaned. That water must be pumped etc etc. The Best power hands down for clean use is hydro electric. This doesn't even get mentioned by most searching for clean power as they don't want to admit that damns are needed.

Back to the picture, I am glad it said clean air and not ground. Did you "mark" your territory?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis-SE Georgia on Wednesday, December 06, 2017 - 07:33 am:

There will be negatives associated with ANYTHING. What gets me is how some of this stuff is touted as the cure to all our ills and they put on this "Holier than Thou" attitude and the socialist tree huggin' sandal wearers take it hook, line and sinker. What they don't realize is the people perpetrating the hoax are nothing more than the dreaded capitalist in sheep's clothing trying to get their piece of the pie.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Terry & Sharon Miller, Westminster, CO on Wednesday, December 06, 2017 - 08:12 am:

Addressing the spent fuel cell problem.

When I was teaching nuke power at the Idaho Nuclear Energy Laboratory in the desert West of Idaho Falls, ID, there was an Expended Core Facility in the same complex. They would bring spent fuel cells and entire reactor cores into that building for disassembly and recycling. Much of the remaining uranium and all of the plutonium were recovered for reuse.

Did it generate contaminated waste? YES. But it did reduce the number of stored, spent fuel cells in reactor complexes all over the U.S.

Pollution source? YES but it was a self sufficient business as the recycled/recovered materials were/are in high demand.

There will always be the argument of which is better when it comes to energy and pollution. BTDT and there is NO winner because everyone believes theirs is the best and will pick apart any other type.

Good Luck,
Terry


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Daren Carlson on Wednesday, December 06, 2017 - 08:24 am:

Thank you Dale W. Oh those terrible environmentalist.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Wayne Sheldon, Grass Valley, CA on Wednesday, December 06, 2017 - 05:00 pm:

You know? I like this place. Model T Fords seem to attract intelligent people. There are a number of very good short comments above. If only much of the rest of the population could understand so much so well. Unfortunately, for most of past fifty years, this nation has been teaching its people to NOT think. Be good little liberals and allow (us?/them? the elitists) to fix everything for you and make life wonderful for all! The sad thing is, most people are much too eager to accept that, and allow the promise makers and breakers to take care of everything.
And while I poked at the liberals already, in reality, the conservative side of the isle has not done any better.

The laws of science and mathematics apply to EVERYTHING! A reasonable balance could be found for all our energy wants and needs, and the proper handling of its necessary waste. However GREEDY politics must be taken out of the equation before those solutions will be found.

In my happier youth, I truly believed that good electric cars would one day be the major transporter of most individuals. However, all my life I have argued that the time hasn't come yet, because the necessary technological advancement has not yet been made.
I still want to believe that the right fuel cell technology can be found, and we can all have wonderful electric cars in our future. But at this point, with all the greed and lies in our politics, an economic system based upon the Ponzi scheme, and teaching people and bribing people to NOT think? I am not sure our civilization will survive long enough to make those technological advancements.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By dale w on Wednesday, December 06, 2017 - 05:19 pm:

Here you go Wayne,

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcqNV_xbw0Y


Add a Message


This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Username:  
Password:

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration