• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Republicans Big-Time Wrong on Ethanol Issue

rathi said:
Electric cars are the future.
Click to expand...

I think you're right but far in the future, I'd say. Maybe fifty sixty years out. Good thing we have plenty of oil to tide us over until the technology is equal to the ease, speed, range and utility we enjoy with our present vehicles.
 
aegyptos said:
Nonsense. If that were true they would be building and selling millions of them.
Click to expand...

Ever heard of Tesla Motors? Their first production line was entirely bought out before cars even started rolling off the assembly lines. Their second production line hasn't even started and there are huge amounts of orders. Israel is running tests for an electric car as we speak having several driving around Israel.
The problem with electric cars is that the big manufacturers aren't setup for electric production.

What they are in fact building and what you and I are buying is smaller more fuel efficient gas and diesel powered vehicles. That's the future.
Click to expand...

And 10 years ago it was SUVs. Things change. Some people have the foresight to see further into the future then others. Honda and Toyota saw further then Detroit when they started hybrid technology decades back. Look what it's done for them now. Electric will be the way to go.

And the original point you made was that electric can't power vehicles. That is flat out wrong.
 
And the original point you made was that electric can't power vehicles. That is flat out wrong.
Click to expand...

No he claimed that solar panels cannot power cars, which is correct.


I think you're right but far in the future, I'd say. Maybe fifty sixty years out. Good thing we have plenty of oil to tide us over until the technology is equal to the ease, speed, range and utility we enjoy with our present vehicles.
Click to expand...

Nanosolar is currently shipping products as we speak. Teslas are driving around our streets. EEstor will probably ship products in 2009. 5 years is as reasonable timeframe for electric cars to start becoming the defacto standard, at least based on technology and engineering alone. The political and social factors could also influence the time frame.

Oil is already at 4 bucks a Gallon in the U.S., and world wide demand is only going to increase. Oil has many uses in the future, but powering cars is not one of them.
 
If you're right they should sell million so them the first year. We will see but I'm not holding my breath. I'd say they may sell a few hundred then go **** up.
 
aegyptos said:
If you're right they should sell million so them the first year. We will see but I'm not holding my breath.
Click to expand...

I doubt they can even MAKE a million of them their first year.

aegyptos said:
I'd say they may sell a few hundred then go **** up.
Click to expand...

It's possible that they go bankrupt, but that doesn't change the fact that the technology exists and is coming soon. Even if they go bankrupt, there will surely be other entries into the market offering similar products in the near future.
 
obvious Child said:
No he's not.

Car race shows solar power potential - Green Machines - MSNBC.com

Furthermore, using solar panels as an electrical source in a electrical grid for electric cars can power vehicles.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are wrong. Perhaps you should actually read your own submissions? At a glance I laughed that you would argue that this means solar power will provide viable energy to power automobiles. Then I simply scanned through the article, all the way to the start of the third paragraph.

"They weren't salesmen for solar cars. In fact, experts say solar cars won't be viable for many decades to come, if ever. But the cars and last month's race showcase recent advances in technology and demonstrate the promise of solar energy in other uses."
 
Sir Loin said:
Yes, you are wrong. Perhaps you should actually read your own submissions? At a glance I laughed that you would argue that thiomobils means solar power will provide viable energy to power autes. Then I simply scanned through the article, all the way to the start of the third paragraph.
Click to expand...

So you're saying it's impossible for a electric car to be charged from an electric grid that is powered by solar panels?

Explain to me the difference in electricity produced from a solar panel and power from fossil fuels.

Furthermore, are you suggesting that there is actually no electricity generated from huge solar plants in Arizona, Nevada and Southern California?

Pray tell, why are two large utility companies planning on building two more huge solar plants?

Huge Solar Plants Bloom in Desert

"They weren't salesmen for solar cars. In fact, experts say solar cars won't be viable for many decades to come, if ever. But the cars and last month's race showcase recent advances in technology and demonstrate the promise of solar energy in other uses."
Click to expand...

Apparently you have failed to learn the basics of electricity.

Furthermore, I never argued that direct solar was a great idea only possible. You wrongly assumed otherwise while ignoring my other main argument that solar can be hooked up into an electric grid and then used to charge electric cars.

Your method of 'debate' is dishonest and underhanded.

There are two reasons for why aegyptos is wrong.

1) Solar panels have been proven as a proof of concept as a way of powering vehicles.
2) Solar panels as an electrical source for a power grid can power electric cars.
 
Your average solar panel can generate 12 watts per square foot. A reasonable sized car, say a Nissan Altima has about 83 square feet of surface. That means 996 watts of power. A rather puny 100 horsepower engine deliver about 75 kW, or 75000 watts of power. Currently solar panels run at about 15% efficiency, so that means that even with 100% efficiency you can only deliver about 6.6 kW of power. Simply put, there isn't enough solar energy radiated on the roof of a car to provide power for it, regardless of the technology involved. A battery or other energy storage medium is required for an electric car.

The Tesla is a high-priced sports car that costs $109,000, its not meant to be a high volume vehicle. Its production volume is currently in the hundreds with every model already having been purchased. It's based on the lotus Elise chassis, and sells for a similar market in similar volumes. Commuter cars don't come with 4 second 0 to 60 times.
 
Neither you nor I have argued that solar panels is a practical solution in terms of directly powering cars. I only cited as to why aegyptos was wrong. It is indeed possible. I never said it was practical, only possible and thus met the requirements for proving aegyptos wrong.

What IS practical however is widespread use of solar power in the electrical grid being used to charge electric cars. None of the opposition wish to discuss this at all and appear to want that subject to merely disappear.
 
solarx-large.jpg


Companies give folks solar help to go green

Here is what one person did, not much fossil fuel being consumed just has more “clean energy available to charge up his Tesla” if he chooses to buy one.


<By Paul Davidson, USA TODAY
For years, Bruce Crawford dreamed of putting solar panels on his one-story house to cut his power bill and "do something good for the environment." But he couldn't see past some dark clouds — the $20,000 to $30,000 purchase price.


I wanted to do it, but I was choking on what I had to" spend, says the software engineer who lives in Pleasanton, Calif.

Then, a Silicon Valley start-up called Sun Run offered Crawford a way to go green without straining his wallet. Last month, the company installed a 3.8-kilowatt system on his pitched roof for $6,000. Crawford, 62, says he'll immediately save money on his electric bill. Sun Run monitors and maintains the system, replacing worn parts at no extra cost.



The setups, called power purchase agreements (PPA), are among several initiatives that aim to overcome solar's obstacles — high upfront costs and design and maintenance hassles — and deliver systems to millions of customers. Several California cities plan to fund home systems with tax-free bonds. Now, utilities are joining in. Southern California Edison on Thursday said it will install panels on about 100 warehouses, running them as it would a power plant. Duke Energy wants to put solar panels on up to 300,000 customer rooftops in the Carolinas.>



Companies give folks solar help to go green - USATODAY.com
 
obvious Child said:

So you're saying it's impossible for a electric car to be charged from an electric grid that is powered by solar panels?

Explain to me the difference in electricity produced from a solar panel and power from fossil fuels.

Furthermore, are you suggesting that there is actually no electricity generated from huge solar plants in Arizona, Nevada and Southern California?

Pray tell, why are two large utility companies planning on building two more huge solar plants?

Huge Solar Plants Bloom in Desert
Click to expand...
No, I’m saying that right now self sustained solar powered vehicles are far far far away. Any argument otherwise is simply fantasy.
obvious Child said:
Apparently you have failed to learn the basics of electricity.

Furthermore, I never argued that direct solar was a great idea only possible. You wrongly assumed otherwise while ignoring my other main argument that solar can be hooked up into an electric grid and then used to charge electric cars.

Your method of 'debate' is dishonest and underhanded.

There are two reasons for why aegyptos is wrong.

1) Solar panels have been proven as a proof of concept as a way of powering vehicles.
2) Solar panels as an electrical source for a power grid can power electric cars.
Click to expand...
 Great all of that, wonderful. However, “proof of concept” aint viable and as you admitted (and your own source confirms) true solar powered automobiles are a long long way away. I’ll ignore your silly chide and laugh instead that you think my knowing that solar powered autos are on the distant horizon is somehow “dishonest and underhanded.”

I think anybody with an IQ above room temperature knows that solar power can be added to the grid and used in electrical cars. Still not sure how that is supposed to buttress the idea that self sustained solar powered automobiles are not decades or more away. Proof of concept or no. I feel so dirty and underhanded!:roll:
 
Last edited:
I think that you had better go back and reread what he has stated again Sir Loin. :confused:
 
donc said:
I think that you had better go back and reread what he has stated again Sir Loin. :confused:
Click to expand...

Having already read what he had to say, I'll pass on the three-peat experience. Did you want to relate what you took away donc?

Please feel at liberty to 'splain it to me.

So far I see a person claiming that an electric conversion kit for automobiles is a viable replacement or alternative to the vehicles I have now. Tell me donc; will such a conversion kit be viable for you, a truck driver? I’m no truck driver, but I take one all across the state about every week and half. There has been a reason I had not thought such an option would really be very viable for me or anyone else not sticking close to home and a power source or generator. Oh wait, solar cars are currently able to do that, or will be very soon eh? By all means donc, do tell me how I’m misreading things here. Be careful that you don’t hang yourself or me with the noose both aegyptos and obvious child have hung each other with. It is a tight hemp rope with the word “possible” stenciled all over it.
 
Quote obvious Child

No he's not.

Car race shows solar power potential - Green Machines - MSNBC.com

Furthermore, using solar panels as an electrical source in a electrical grid for electric cars can power vehicles.



Come on sirloin, even a steak eating truck driver knows out of context when he sees it;Note the highlighted parts of obvious Childs post.

Seeing as how you wont go back and see what your were responding to. I went and retrieved it for your viewing pleasure. As for as you’re assertion that you are giving me a noose to hang myself on, again the word is “context”. Besides I kinda like hemp. :mrgreen:

Quote sirloin.

By all means donc, do tell me how I’m misreading things here.

….Ok.

<So far I see a person claiming that an electric conversion kit for automobiles is a viable replacement or alternative to the vehicles I have now. >
<
< Oh wait, solar cars are currently able to do that, or will be very soon eh?>



Where did he say this? It surely wasn’t when he referenced the college student’s solar power vehicles, that have about 1 to 2 horsepower, :confused:
 
Sir Loin said:
No, I’m saying that right now self sustained solar powered vehicles are far far far away. Any argument otherwise is simply fantasy.
Click to expand...


Again, your method of arguing is dishonest and underhanded

http://www.debatepolitics.com/1057613482-post37.html

No one except YOU argued they were practical. All I did was show proof of concept. That it can be done. There was NO discussion of actual practicality until ageo started losing and you jumped in. There both of you changed the discussion away from mere possibility to actual practicality. In reality, the people you should be arguing with is yourselves as your side made the arguments you are current trying to tear down.

Great all of that, wonderful. However, “proof of concept” aint viable and as you admitted (and your own source confirms) true solar powered automobiles are a long long way away. I’ll ignore your silly chide and laugh instead that you think my knowing that solar powered autos are on the distant horizon is somehow “dishonest and underhanded.”
Click to expand...

See above why you are dishonest and use underhanded tactics. If you want to flame someone for arguing about the practicality of solar panels on cars, flame yourself. You created that argument, not I.

I think anybody with an IQ above room temperature knows that solar power can be added to the grid and used in electrical cars.
Click to expand...

And yet you still declare I'm all wrong.

Go figure. This place has its share of immature crazies.

Still not sure how that is supposed to buttress the idea that self sustained solar powered automobiles are not decades or more away. Proof of concept or no. I feel so dirty and underhanded!:roll:
Click to expand...

Do you enjoy discussing arguments that you made yourself with yourself?
 
obvious Child said:
Again, your method of arguing is dishonest and underhanded

http://www.debatepolitics.com/1057613482-post37.html

No one except YOU argued they were practical. All I did was show proof of concept. That it can be done. There was NO discussion of actual practicality until ageo started losing and you jumped in. There both of you changed the discussion away from mere possibility to actual practicality. In reality, the people you should be arguing with is yourselves as your side made the arguments you are current trying to tear down.
Click to expand...
That is the second time you have insulted me using aegyptos’s insult to you. Guess you think that is the way to “win” a conversation. I pointed out the fact that we are nowhere near having the sources you cite be viable. As you cite your ideas and possibilities, you ignore the topic of the thread. You chose not to acknowledge any points about reducing our dependence on foreign oil while a truly viable solution is being sought. Great for you, stupid for a conversation dealing with the OP IMO.

You can flagellate about me jumping in to help out aegyptos because he was “losing” till you expire. Chuckle, another net poster who thinks one “wins” a discussion on a board such as this. That kind of high school shite doesn’t hold much interest for me, if you wish to continue to argue past and tango with aegyptos, your “possibility” noose just a twirling, carry on then. My comments had nothing to do with who was “winning” or “losing” your silly little fracas.

obvious Child said:
See above why you are dishonest and use underhanded tactics. If you want to flame someone for arguing about the practicality of solar panels on cars, flame yourself. You created that argument, not I.
Click to expand...


Yes; I am dishonest and use underhand tactics!! I’m flaming you, for arguing with me. I “created” an argument. I care about who is “winning” this great debate you have going here. Chuckle.

obvious Child said:
And yet you still declare I'm all wrong.

Go figure. This place has its share of immature crazies.

Do you enjoy discussing arguments that you made yourself with yourself?
Click to expand...
 Oh no, you are correct. This place does indeed have a few immature insult flinging crazies. Some of them get quite flustered if you comment on their statements, they even start elucidating about defending argument losers, insult you often, rant that you are flaming them, cry you created an argument, claim you’re a liar and underhanded and then ask you with a straight face if you enjoy having an argument with yourself. Real jabberwocky.

Carry on…………….:rock
 
Last edited:
donc said:
Quote obvious Child

No he's not.

Car race shows solar power potential - Green Machines - MSNBC.com

Furthermore, using solar panels as an electrical source in a electrical grid for electric cars can power vehicles.



Come on sirloin, even a steak eating truck driver knows out of context when he sees it;Note the highlighted parts of obvious Childs post.

Seeing as how you wont go back and see what your were responding to. I went and retrieved it for your viewing pleasure. As for as you’re assertion that you are giving me a noose to hang myself on, again the word is “context”. Besides I kinda like hemp. :mrgreen:

Quote sirloin.

By all means donc, do tell me how I’m misreading things here.

….Ok.

<So far I see a person claiming that an electric conversion kit for automobiles is a viable replacement or alternative to the vehicles I have now. >
<
< Oh wait, solar cars are currently able to do that, or will be very soon eh?>



Where did he say this? It surely wasn’t when he referenced the college student’s solar power vehicles, that have about 1 to 2 horsepower, :confused:
Click to expand...

Sorry you did not get my joke about the noose. I’ve already been back through the thread, and I’m not real hung up on the whole who is right or wrong argument. I made my comments quite clear in my first reply here, which presumably you have read.

I’ll resist the urge to whine you are jumping in because someone is about to “win” or “loose” this argument for obvious reasons.:roll:

I’m now out the door and down the road. I’ll take it you indeed do not find any of the solutions offered here as being a viable alternative to oil at present. Thanks for answering. Sorta.

 Heck, maybe you might even think that one short term goal is to reduce our dependence upon foreign oil as we seek a solution. Getting back to the OP, I sure hope nobody takes up the solar power solution issue and creates another biofuel debacle out of it.
 
Last edited:
Quote sirloin

I’m now out the door and down the road. I’ll take it you indeed do not find any of the solutions offered here as being a viable alternative to oil at present. Thanks for answering. Sorta.

Heck, maybe you might even think that one short term goal is to reduce our dependence upon foreign oil as we seek a solution. Getting back to the OP, I sure hope nobody takes up the solar power solution issue and creates another biofuel debacle out of it.


While you’re out you might want to check this out, Just might save you a few Quid if you’re handy with a wrench.


Poulsen Hybrid

< The development is based on the observation that only 10-15 horsepower is required to propel a compact or mid-size automobile along a level road at a steady 60-70 mph. leading to the conclusion that this relatively small amount of electric power would be able to cope with 70-85% of normal driving, only aided by the combustion engine during start up and when extra energy is required for acceleration and hill climbing.>
 
Last edited:
< The development is based on the observation that only 10-15 horsepower is required to propel a compact or mid-size automobile along a level road at a steady 60-70 mph. leading to the conclusion that this relatively small amount of electric power would be able to cope with 70-85% of normal driving, only aided by the combustion engine during start up and when extra energy is required for acceleration and hill climbing.>
Click to expand...

That not a very efficient design. Most city driving involves acceleration and breaking. The most efficient hybrid design that currently could be made would use electric motors for power, have a small battery and a gas turbine generator to charge the battery. Gas turbines are quite a bit lighter than gas engines, burn more efficiently and wouldn't need to output nearly as much power.
 
rathi said:
That not a very efficient design. Most city driving involves acceleration and breaking. The most efficient hybrid design that currently could be made would use electric motors for power, have a small battery and a gas turbine generator to charge the battery. Gas turbines are quite a bit lighter than gas engines, burn more efficiently and wouldn't need to output nearly as much power.
Click to expand...

Go to the link and check it out, it’s a kit that is added to a vehicle, and yes it has a alternator, the cost for the kit is $3300 hundred dollars

< Specifications:
On-Wheel motors: Brushless DC construction. Dimensions 14" diameter x 2". Weight 35 lb. Rated power: 10KW = 13.5 HP (motors on two wheels).
Adapter plates: 4 and 5 bolt patterns, available with 100, 108,114.3mm(4 1/2") and 120mm bolt circle diameters fitting app. 95% of cars.
Motor controllers (2 pc) 72VDC max 120A (one per motor).
Batteries: 6 pc. 12V 120 Amp hours lead/acid deep cycle, or 4 KWh Lithium-ion battery pack (Expected available from several sources by mid 2008).
On board charger: 72 Volts/10 Amp.
Total Weight: App. 300 lb with lead acid batteries, 200 lb with Lithium Ion batteries.
Added un-sprung weight, 38 lb per wheel.>
 
Sir Loin, please in the future argue the points you make yourself with yourself.

You are flaming me for an argument you created.

For the last time, no one argued that direct solar panel powering was practical.

You are dishonestly flaming me for a fabricated argument that said just that. The problem is, I never did, you did.

Flame yourself for your own arguments.
 
Let us examine exactly what it is you are claiming I am “flaming you” about and being sooooooooooo dishonest about.
In post#23 (http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...ime-wrong-ethanol-issue-3.html#post1057611077) you chose to respond to aegyptos’s comment to rahti.
aegyptos said:
No, its not. These things can't power a viable motor vehicle. The OP directed your attention to the farce that is ethanol, a motor fuel. his thread is about powering a vehicle.
Click to expand...
As the discussion developed you chose to then claim that he was wrong, you then supplied your link to the solar car story in post#33, minus a word about this as a "possibility" mind you oh honest obvious child.;) (http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...ime-wrong-ethanol-issue-4.html#post1057613198) Clearly unaware that you were arguing about a viable car engine, you submitted the comment I first engaged you about.
obvious Child said:
No he's not.

Car race shows solar power potential - Green Machines - MSNBC.com

Furthermore, using solar panels as an electrical source in a electrical grid for electric cars can power vehicles.
Click to expand...

Now if you care to read the plainly displayed English with reference to the time and date stamps, an alert “debater” can gleam exactly why it is that I made my original comments to you. It had to do with your choice to respond to the discussion about viable car engines, not your sad little win or lose fears. Though clearly you are very worried about losing something.

Since those comments you’ve flamed me, called me a liar, underhanded and other really intellectually vacant ad homs. In that same time period you have complained publicly that the reason I “attacked” you was because you were “about to win” and that there are some immature internet crazies around here. I wonder does the phrase braying hypocrite hold any meaning for you?

obvious Child said:
donc, has Sir Loin always been that dishonest?
Click to expand...
I’ll add that not only are there some immature net crazies around here, but that one of them in particular also has something of a frothy paranoid thing going on too.;)

Any more questions? Any more claims that you are some kind of victim of misunderstanding or those pesky net crazies who just don’t want you to win? By all means then do tell!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom