Germany Needs Emissions-Free Car Fleet by 2030, Senior Government Official Says - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Retardation;50526735]I guess I'm a dying breed then because an ultra-responsive, sharp and smooth car are all things that I absolutely dislike. [B]There needs to be some form of clunkyness to it, you need to feel all the gears and levers moving as you turn the wheel, feel all the well-oiled parts of the machine twisting and churning in the engine when you slowly lift your foot off the clutch and depress the gas pedal. [/B] You need to feel that authentic torque pushing you forward, and in newer vehicles that's less and less common, and in Telsa is entirely nonexistent because everybody wants to hear the engine as little as possible since the majority of daily commuters don't give two shits about what's happening inside of the car as long as it gets them where they need to go. [/QUOTE] Cars haven't been like that for the last 20 years [quote] you need to feel all the gears and levers moving as you turn the wheel, [/quote] How can you say this and not realize that you can't "feel the levers moving" in any car of the last decades yet you are saying stuff like [quote]commuters don't give two shits about what's happening inside of the car [/quote]

[QUOTE=Retardation;50526735]I guess I'm a dying breed then because an ultra-responsive, sharp and smooth car are all things that I absolutely dislike. There needs to be some form of clunkyness to it, you need to feel all the gears and levers moving as you turn the wheel, feel all the well-oiled parts of the machine twisting and churning in the engine when you slowly lift your foot off the clutch and depress the gas pedal. You need to feel that authentic torque pushing you forward, and in newer vehicles that's less and less common, and in Telsa is entirely nonexistent because everybody wants to hear the engine as little as possible since the majority of daily commuters don't give two shits about what's happening inside of the car as long as it gets them where they need to go. Suppose Im not the targeted demographic anyway. Feels shitty. But I guess new things aren't always for everyone. I just dont believe that Tesla are the groundbreaking road spaceships everyone thinks they are. Give it a year or two of widespread use, and let that aftermarket and part scarcity settle in. And then finding out that Tesla will probably hold exclusive manufacture rights to all of the parts of the Tesla that might need to be replaced (meaning they can charge for part replacement literally whatever they like since they're the only ones making and selling them), plus the battery topic which is still under question whether or not it's even sustainable, I believe Tesla will have a peak and then witness a decline over the years once the hype wears off, and perhaps a number of people getting killed or killing someone while abusing computer assisted steering and blaming it on the machine instead of the driver will also contribute to the decline in popularity.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure why you don't like a responsive car but okay I guess if that's your thing. If the feeling you are after is getting less and less common in newer cars, even ICE ones then the issue probably isn't that it's an EV. The motors in an EV do have a unique noise as well. Battery degradation isn't really an issue either so far: [thumb]https://electrek.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/tesla-battery-degredation-plugin.png?w=819&h=497[/thumb] Important to note that Li-ion batteries degrade a fair bit the first few cycles and then degrade very slowly from that point on. On the safety side of things Tesla's are way safer than ICE vehicles due to an extremely low centre of gravity and the entire front being a crumple zone, no engine to worry about coming through the dashboard.

[QUOTE=Morgen;50524855]The key to 24 / 7 renewable energy is batteries. Like how SolarCity are doing a couple of projects in the US with batteries so that the solar plants provide energy 24 / 7.[/QUOTE] That isn't cost effective, and in all likelihood never will be. The key is nuclear, because it runs regardless of the weather, droughts, or anything else. Alternatively, there's some research into using mirrors to focus solar energy onto certain types of salts, which have heat capacities that are astronomically large, then using that energy to run turbines. Lots of engineering hurdles to overcome here, and some major inefficiencies, but it does work.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50526856]That isn't cost effective, and in all likelihood never will be. The key is nuclear, because it runs regardless of the weather, droughts, or anything else. Alternatively, there's some research into using mirrors to focus solar energy onto certain types of salts, which have heat capacities that are astronomically large, then using that energy to run turbines. Lots of engineering hurdles to overcome here, and some major inefficiencies, but it does work.[/QUOTE] There's already a few solar plants like that up and running around the world. Let's see how much Li-ion batteries cost per KWh in 5 years when the Gigafactory is up and running.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50526856]That isn't cost effective, and in all likelihood never will be. The key is nuclear, because it runs regardless of the weather, droughts, or anything else. Alternatively, there's some research into using mirrors to focus solar energy onto certain types of salts, which have heat capacities that are astronomically large, then using that energy to run turbines. Lots of engineering hurdles to overcome here, and some major inefficiencies, but it does work.[/QUOTE] Nuclear is not cost effective either though..

[QUOTE=Retardation;50526228]Goddamn do I hate this electric car trend that's going around recently. Anyone for appreciates cars more than "A to B" vehicles will know that electric cars are absolutely shitty to drive. One of the purest and fundamental joys of cars is revving the engine, it's almost primal. It doesn't have to be some riced up shitbox or a V8 engine, it can even be a Prius, it's a fine thing to rev the engine hearing it growl and roar ready to take you to where you need to be. Electric cars have don't have this. They're bland, optimized for comfort and lack any sort of personality or "fun" that an internal combustion engine bestows upon us. Instead of working on ways to improve emission control and filters in vehicles, so that we may maintain the greatness of combustion engines while not destroying the environment in the process, we throw the entire concept out of the window and look to electricity to solve it all. It's pretty shitty. Tesla continues to seem like one massive gimmick on wheels. [/QUOTE] its the same excuse that harly and VW have made for not making the jump to EV. Unfortunatly, they're pushing against the tide, the majority of consumers don't care what their car [I]sounds[/I] like as long as it works, the prius should be a prime example, its always been terribly under powered but Toyota can barely keep up with demand. Currently Tesla offers the best fully electric vehicle on the market and it drives like a high end luxury sedan. BMW, Merc and Audi have all fallen in step behind them but their feet dragging has cost them, none of them offer any viable every day full EVs, they all have stopgap or terrible conversions of ICE cars i'm not sure you've driven a modern hybrid or electric car though. I've driven both a base and fully loaded Hyundai Sanata, as well as a Prius and a Volt, with the exception of the Prius, they didn't drive like clunky battery wagons like you described. The Sanata will do 75 MPH on the electric motor alone

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50526856]That isn't cost effective, and in all likelihood never will be. The key is nuclear, because it runs regardless of the weather, droughts, or anything else. Alternatively, there's some research into using mirrors to focus solar energy onto certain types of salts, which have heat capacities that are astronomically large, then using that energy to run turbines. Lots of engineering hurdles to overcome here, [B]and some major inefficiencies[/B], but it does work.[/QUOTE] actually there isn't really much inefficiencies, during the day the working fluid runs the turbines and the waste heat is absorbed by the 'battery', then at night you bypass the solar tower and run the working fluid through the 'battery' again until its depleted. Since its all grid scale, you can cover everything in tons of insulation and make the thing nearly isothermal. the engineering hurdle is that these systems are only slightly less complex than a refinery in terms of equipment, also the heleostats can if misaligned, melt your powerplant [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=ilikecorn;50527247]I have a prius. It's not horribly under powered (the first few gens were). It's not a super performance car by any means, but it gets the job done. To that end, "fun" is all fine and dandy till gas takes up 1/4th of your budget. "Fun" is also really subjective.[/QUOTE] i'm not saying its a dog anymore, but i've driven a few hybrids to compare to it. if you want to be the most economical, yes it wins out, but the competition does have more getup. Its also been probably 2 gens since i drove a prius so i may be out of date

[QUOTE=Morgen;50526902]There's already a few solar plants like that up and running around the world. Let's see how much Li-ion batteries cost per KWh in 5 years when the Gigafactory is up and running.[/QUOTE] You don't use lithium batteries for long term storage where mass and space aren't limiting issues. Their selling point is their (relatively) high energy density, both in terms of volume, and mass, and their ability to sustain high charge and discharge rates without chemically falling apart. None of those matter for grid storage where you just care about total energy capacity and cost. Grid storage has full charge/discharge cycles that can be measured in days or weeks, possibly even months.

I'm gunu drive my 5.7 v8 from the 60s fuck the boring tree huggers.

[QUOTE=Killuah;50527169]Nuclear is not cost effective either though..[/QUOTE] It is if you don't have an obstructive regulator and a million frivilous lawsuits.

[QUOTE=Morgen;50526902]There's already a few solar plants like that up and running around the world. Let's see how much Li-ion batteries cost per KWh in 5 years when the Gigafactory is up and running.[/QUOTE] I've always liked the idea of residents being the biggest power station/plant. I want more government subsidies and improvements in battery + solar so everyone can feed power into the grid through their own houses, rather than having big power stations. In WA the biggest power station is rooftop solar and this will continue to increase as time goes on.

[QUOTE=Badballer;50529455]I've always liked the idea of residents being the biggest power station/plant. I want more government subsidies and improvements in battery + solar so everyone can feed power into the grid through their own houses, rather than having big power stations. In WA the biggest power station is rooftop solar and this will continue to increase as time goes on.[/QUOTE] No thanks. Driving up our high electricity prices further and spending more tax dollars on this is not what we should do.

[QUOTE=Retardation;50526735]I guess I'm a dying breed then because an ultra-responsive, sharp and smooth car are all things that I absolutely dislike. There needs to be some form of clunkyness to it, you need to feel all the gears and levers moving as you turn the wheel, feel all the well-oiled parts of the machine twisting and churning in the engine when you slowly lift your foot off the clutch and depress the gas pedal. You need to feel that authentic torque pushing you forward, and in newer vehicles that's less and less common, and in Telsa is entirely nonexistent because everybody wants to hear the engine as little as possible since the majority of daily commuters don't give two shits about what's happening inside of the car as long as it gets them where they need to go. Suppose Im not the targeted demographic anyway. Feels shitty. But I guess new things aren't always for everyone. I just dont believe that Tesla are the groundbreaking road spaceships everyone thinks they are. Give it a year or two of widespread use, and let that aftermarket and part scarcity settle in. And then finding out that Tesla will probably hold exclusive manufacture rights to all of the parts of the Tesla that might need to be replaced (meaning they can charge for part replacement literally whatever they like since they're the only ones making and selling them), plus the battery topic which is still under question whether or not it's even sustainable, I believe Tesla will have a peak and then witness a decline over the years once the hype wears off, and perhaps a number of people getting killed or killing someone while abusing computer assisted steering and blaming it on the machine instead of the driver will also contribute to the decline in popularity.[/QUOTE] What aftermarket parts do you need? It is an electric motor. The beauty of an electric motor is that it just works. It works and works and works because it has very few moving parts to fail. You can't really upgrade it either due to the simple fact that the motor already runs at basically peak safe performance. The motors already have to be limited because they will snap your axel like a twig with unadulterated torque. The rest of the aftermarket community will come in time. Though given the dramatically lowered maintenance frequency of an electric vehicle, buying factory parts really shouldn't be an issue.

[QUOTE=Morgen;50524855]The key to 24 / 7 renewable energy is batteries. Like how SolarCity are doing a couple of projects in the US with batteries so that the solar plants provide energy 24 / 7.[/QUOTE] Don't bet on solarcity going far, shit like this happens [url]http://www.srpnet.com/environment/business/solar/Default.aspx[/url] Basically solar was becoming so popular in Arizona(due to like 99% sunlight year round), that the power company made it near worthless to do solar since you have to sell back excess at half, or less than, of what you pay for it. It's at the point where the setup of solar is nearly worthless for anyone to do it. Lawsuits are going on but doubt they will go anywhere seeing as the cities are usually in bed with the power companies. [url]http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/solarcity-files-lawsuit-against-salt-river-project-for-antitrust-violations[/url]

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;50530933]Don't bet on solarcity going far, shit like this happens [url]http://www.srpnet.com/environment/business/solar/Default.aspx[/url] Basically solar was becoming so popular in Arizona(due to like 99% sunlight year round), that the power company made it near worthless to do solar since you have to sell back excess at half, or less than, of what you pay for it. It's at the point where the setup of solar is nearly worthless for anyone to do it. Lawsuits are going on but doubt they will go anywhere seeing as the cities are usually in bed with the power companies. [url]http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/solarcity-files-lawsuit-against-salt-river-project-for-antitrust-violations[/url][/QUOTE] It's called supply and demand. What do you expect to happen to the electricity price if the market is flooded with excess electricity? They're going to lose and rightly so.

[QUOTE=download;50531069]It's called supply and demand. What do you expect to happen to the electricity price if the market is flooded with excess electricity? They're going to lose and rightly so.[/QUOTE] Yeah, that's why SRP is constantly upping their rates and sending me mail about "brown out season is coming!", as well as the news telling me about power concerns. It's more because SRP is tightly in bed with the local government here. Not to mention making new solar farms [URL]http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2014/11/20/srp-announces-new-solar-plant-florence/70016148/[/URL] [url]http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/chandler-breaking/2016/06/12/1300-chandler-srp-customers-without-power/85783202/[/url] Or like this morning going to work and outages caused my excess load in the area (old one but new farms are coming)

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;50531131]Yeah, that's why SRP is constantly upping their rates and sending me mail about "brown out season is coming!", as well as the news telling me about power concerns. It's more because SRP is tightly in bed with the local government here. Not to mention making new solar farms [URL]http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2014/11/20/srp-announces-new-solar-plant-florence/70016148/[/URL] [url]http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/chandler-breaking/2016/06/12/1300-chandler-srp-customers-without-power/85783202/[/url] Or like this morning going to work and outages caused my excess load in the area (old one but new farms are coming)[/QUOTE] You clearly don't understand how the electricity market works. When you crash the price of electricity you push generators that can't respond quickly but are usually the lowest cost generators to operate out of the market. Generally this means your coal or nuclear power stations have to go because they're no longer profitable. The generators that stick around are usually open cycle gas turbines which can rump up and down very quickly but burn through a lot of very expensive gas. Your retailer is trying to correct for this by charging you the same rate every other generator would receive during a price crash. Your rates are going up because they have to burn loads of expensive gas when the sun isn't shining.

The way i see it we only need like batteries for half an hour of driving or less in electric cars, and then just add recharge points/rails in the road that are connected to while driving... You could even add in a small petrol generator the size of a shoebox IF at one point you need to drive further, or replacement batteries you can swap out. Need to travel further? public transport or a specialized vehicle. Batteries to power entire communities are very cheap, efficient and reliable, just dig out or build a massive underground water reservoir the size of a parking garage and pump water up during the day and let it power a hydrokinetic generator by night. For added economics this can basically be the local drinking water reservoir for the town. This is all the same arguments we had before the introduction of the power gird, when people had their own generators and batteries in their house or had no power at all. They have been solved before all we need is a master plan to tackle it and some rich country to go first

[QUOTE=download;50529478]No thanks. Driving up our high electricity prices further and spending more tax dollars on this is not what we should do.[/QUOTE] Why would it drive up prices if it ends up being cheaper down the track? I mean about using solar + storage more than conventional ways of power generation. I'm sure it will be cheaper, more flexible and more efficient one day.

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50531254]The way i see it we only need like batteries for half an hour of driving or less in electric cars, and then just add recharge points/rails in the road that are connected to while driving... You could even add in a small petrol generator the size of a shoebox IF at one point you need to drive further, or replacement batteries you can swap out. Need to travel further? public transport or a specialized vehicle. Batteries to power entire communities are very cheap, efficient and reliable, just dig out or build a massive underground water reservoir the size of a parking garage and pump water up during the day and let it power a hydrokinetic generator by night. For added economics this can basically be the local drinking water reservoir for the town. This is all the same arguments we had before the introduction of the power gird, when people had their own generators and batteries in their house or had no power at all. They have been solved before all we need is a master plan to tackle it and some rich country to go first[/QUOTE] Batteries for only 30 minutes of driving? Are you nuts? [editline]16th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Badballer;50531724]Why would it drive up prices if it ends up being cheaper down the track? I mean about using solar + storage more than conventional ways of power generation. I'm sure it will be cheaper, more flexible and more efficient one day.[/QUOTE] We shouldnt bank on technologies to hopefully "one day" be suitable for our use, its a really bad stance to have

[QUOTE=Badballer;50531724]Why would it drive up prices if it ends up being cheaper down the track? I mean about using solar + storage more than conventional ways of power generation. I'm sure it will be cheaper, more flexible and more efficient one day.[/QUOTE] Except it's not cheaper at the moment. If you buy it now when it's expensive they won't hand you your money back and go "ah, well it's cheap now so we need to pay you back some money".

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50527361]You don't use lithium batteries for long term storage where mass and space aren't limiting issues. Their selling point is their (relatively) high energy density, both in terms of volume, and mass, and their ability to sustain high charge and discharge rates without chemically falling apart. None of those matter for grid storage where you just care about total energy capacity and cost. Grid storage has full charge/discharge cycles that can be measured in days or weeks, possibly even months.[/QUOTE] I agree that using them for "long term" grid storage is unnecessary and a poor choice to use them for. But they do have an application for use on the grid, replacing feeder plants. Li-ion batteries can respond to demand instantly, and discharge extremely quickly (with the right chemistry) if required to. Much more efficiently than pumped hydro power as well. [QUOTE=download;50531183]You clearly don't understand how the electricity market works. When you crash the price of electricity you push generators that can't respond quickly but are usually the lowest cost generators to operate out of the market. Generally this means your coal or nuclear power stations have to go because they're no longer profitable. The generators that stick around are usually open cycle gas turbines which can rump up and down very quickly but burn through a lot of very expensive gas. Your retailer is trying to correct for this by charging you the same rate every other generator would receive during a price crash. Your rates are going up because they have to burn loads of expensive gas when the sun isn't shining.[/QUOTE] Coal and nuclear are a lot cheaper to run than open gas cycle turbines? Combined cycle gas turbine plants are what make gas cheap. Open cycle gas turbines are expensive to run because they are highly inefficient, generally used in emergency situations. If we have "smart grid" connected batteries at peoples homes, at dedicated battery sites or wherever you feel like putting them then we never need to fire up these feeder plants. Sudden spike in demand, power plant goes offline, or apes are taking over the world and sapping our power grid? Command the batteries to discharge into the grid as fast as possible, will give you a few hours of an extremely significant amount of power.

[QUOTE=Morgen;50532113] Coal and nuclear are a lot cheaper to run than open gas cycle turbines? Combined cycle gas turbine plants are what make gas cheap. Open cycle gas turbines are expensive to run because they are highly inefficient, generally used in emergency situations. If we have "smart grid" connected batteries at peoples homes, at dedicated battery sites or wherever you feel like putting them then we never need to fire up these feeder plants. Sudden spike in demand, power plant goes offline, or apes are taking over the world and sapping our power grid? Command the batteries to discharge into the grid as fast as possible, will give you a few hours of an extremely significant amount of power.[/QUOTE] CCGTs have ramp up rates in the range of 45 minutes to an hour from zero to full power. They might be cheap compared to OCGTs but can't deal with the fast paced nature of things like wind or solar. They're called "intermediate" generators for a reason. Even then they're not cheap compared to coal and nuclear. CCGTs are about $50 to 60 MWhr in fuel while coal is $15 to $30 and nuclear is less than $10. CCGTs are favoured because after OCGTs they have the lowest capital cost of any generator which reduces up-front risk. As for batteries, when they're installed you might be right... But they're not.

[QUOTE=Blizzerd;50531254]The way i see it we only need like batteries for half an hour of driving or less in electric cars, and then just add recharge points/rails in the road that are connected to while driving...[/QUOTE] That would be so impractical in the United States. It would take me all day to do a normal 2 hour drive. [editline]16th June 2016[/editline] I could probably commute faster than that with a horse. And be greener, too.

[QUOTE=download;50532541]CCGTs have ramp up rates in the range of 45 minutes to an hour from zero to full power. They might be cheap compared to OCGTs but can't deal with the fast paced nature of things like wind or solar. They're called "intermediate" generators for a reason. Even then they're not cheap compared to coal and nuclear. CCGTs are about $50 to 60 MWhr in fuel while coal is $15 to $30 and nuclear is less than $10. CCGTs are favoured because after OCGTs they have the lowest capital cost of any generator which reduces up-front risk. As for batteries, when they're installed you might be right... But they're not.[/QUOTE] Why not install the batteries then? If they can do the job of OCGTs then we can shut them down, save significantly on emissions, make the grid generally more efficient. In the UK prices are a bit different. Cost estimates for [URL="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/65713/6883-electricity-generation-costs.pdf"]2012 projects[/URL] put CCGT at £80 per MWh, Coal at £102 - £122 per MWh, and Nuclear at £81 per MWh. To be fair to you though coal would be the cheapest option if it wasn't for carbon penalties applied to it. OCGTs aren't shown because they aren't used anymore in the UK except for emergencies in the winter, we used pumped hydro power to store power already. Great site for viewing the status of the UK grid in close to real time: [url]http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/[/url]

[QUOTE=rampageturke 2;50531752] We shouldnt bank on technologies to hopefully "one day" be suitable for our use, its a really bad stance to have[/QUOTE] So instead we bank on tech to be able to capture and store carbon emissions? Also the tech nearly is suitable for use. It's more climatic factors that get in the way. @download Demand for oil and coal is decreasing and shifting to renewables. Investment in renewables is currently and has been for numerous years much higher than fossil fuels. It's a gradual process of change, not a complete switch. It obviously has to be done in parallel with existing infrastructure, but one day, maybe 30 years from now, I don't believe we will be relying on fossil fuels at all in developed countries. It'll be all about that solar + storage