• 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!

PetroChina buys entire Alberta oilsands project

May I remind you, yet again, that you chastised someone else's source as biased, yet you come up with yet another right wingnut source?

Based upon your arguments so far, I must stress that I am not saying your source is wrong simply because it is a trumpet of right wingnuttery, I'm just amazed at the hypocrisy.

I also wonder why your argument that contains fewer words than the link you provide to support' your argument (and I'm not really sure what your argument is in the above case, other than 'people aren't buying the Volt so that means we need to import more oil').

You can always argue that any source that disagrees with you is biased... Whether someone is biased or not shouldnt effect the strength of your argument, if there is strength to be had.
 
Last edited:
Two words: Re Cycle.

Now that was hard, wasn't it?
That is an ignorant answer. You think that all you need to do is put some old piece of trash on a conveyor belt called "recycle" and it come off the other side as some brand new item. [...]
The irony is stunning.
 
Other than some temporary construction jobs, there are no statements of fact that any of your -- or the CS Monitor's -- lip service support will actually come to fruition. So far all we have is a PR campaign by the oil companies, which the right is swallowing hook, line, and sinker.

No, id say so far all we have is a staggering unemployment rate... Oh, and a President who is more interested in his Tee time than in any of us.
 
You can always argue that any source that disagrees with you is biased... Whether someone is biased or not shouldnt effect the strength of your argument, if there is strength to be had.
I realize that it may be hard for some to keep up, but you just described the right wing argument.

An Op-Ed by a far left environmentalists.

Yep, convinced me............... :roll:
 
Perhaps you can use the quote where I chastised any source. [...]
My apologies, it was Gill, not Grant. I stand corrected.
 
Do you have any idea how long it would take for a home solar station to fully charge an electric vehicle?? [...]
Yes, it would take exactly as long as if you plugged the electric vehicle into a wall outlet (which is what a properly designed home solar station is -- a series of solar panels charging a bank of batteries which provide normal household current via an inverter).

Why do you require explanation of the obvious?

[...] that will be obsolete within a few years.
Such a claim is, quite simply, insane.
 
Those conditions weren't mentioned but is a $40,000 plus investment worth 20 miles a day? Taxis might be less.
Many new cars cost $40,000. Are you under the impression that new cars which use gasoline (exclusively) are given away free?

Taxi fare in Charlotte NC (picked out of the blue) is $2.50 per passenger plus $2.50 per mile plus $24.00/hr wait charge. Given 100 miles a week, plus wait time as errands are run, 6 trips per week, you're looking at $18,772 per year (more or less). Given the expected 8 year battery life of the Volt, and sans any other maintenance, you're looking at $40,000 -- heck, toss in tires and insurance and windshield washer fluid for $50,000 (Volt) vs $150,176 (taxi). Any more bright ideas?

Crown Cab Charlotte : Taxi Cab Rates in Charlotte NC , Charlotte Airprot to Down Town Taxi rates etc
 
Last edited:
If you never had to go more than a short distance from your home, then that would work just fine, but if thats the case you really have no reason to spend $40 to $60,000 on the car and charging system in the first place. But a scooter or something.
How about a balloon? There is enough hot air in this thread to float several of them :lamo
 
My apologies, it was Gill, not Grant. I stand corrected.

At least Dan gave a source, which is more than you've done. Baseless speculation sounds like the extent of your debating skills (or lack thereof).
 
Yes, it would take exactly as long as if you plugged the electric vehicle into a wall outlet (which is what a properly designed home solar station is -- a series of solar panels charging a bank of batteries which provide normal household current via an inverter).

Why do you require explanation of the obvious?


Such a claim is, quite simply, insane.

Come on Karl, life isnt quite as simple as you would like it to be. Not all of us can just go to the store and buy whatever we want without giving a second thought to how its made or what makes it work...

Household current is usualy 120 volt single phase ac (alternating current). With an inverter a battey, which is DC (direct current) can provide 120 volts for a short period of time. With a panel of batteries you can extend that time depending on the amount of amps your drawing, but since the rate of discharge is higher than the rate of charge, its always a limited amount of time. So once you have charged your vehicle, those batteries are going to need to recharge before it can provide another charge. And thats gonna take a while. Even if your solar system is devoted entirely to your car, its gonna take a while to recharge your system. You can expect to get one charge a day out of them unless you have a pretty large bank of batteries. In case you havent checked, solar storage batteries run anywhere from $100 for the crap ones, to $800 for the better ones. Thats PER battery. No solar panel can provide the needed amps to supply a steady stream of household current.
 
Last edited:
At least Dan gave a source, which is more than you've done. Baseless speculation sounds like the extent of your debating skills (or lack thereof).
Dunno who Dan is, don't know what you're talking about. Excellent post :roll:
 
[...] once you have charged your vehicle, those batteries are going to need to recharge before it can provide another charge. And thats gonna take a while. [...]
Again, the insistence on stating the obvious puzzles me. In a typical solar system, the batteries are charged during the day, and are discharged ('used') during the evening and night.

In a typical Chevy Volt operation, the car is driven during the day, and recharged during the evening and night. A full charge would be in the neighborhood of 10kWh, or about 10 hours at about 9 amps (120 volts). That is within the capabilities of a smallish or moderate home solar installation ($10K and up).

It may save you some time if you accept that I will make no claims that cannot be backed up with logic and/or facts, nor do I ramble on about things which I do not know. I rarely shoot from the hip, which is why I rarely have any trouble proving my point (or causing problems for those that do shoot from the hip).
 
Other than some temporary construction jobs, there are no statements of fact that any of your -- or the CS Monitor's -- lip service support will actually come to fruition.

What? So your crystal ball tells you so? Look, the low end is that it would create at least 30,000 sustainable jobs. But I have to give it to you. You have learned your Alinsky well. In fact with a few word changes you could be talking of exactly what happen with Obama's stimulus plan, and all the shovel ready jobs thing...pure projection with progressives.

So far all we have is a PR campaign by the oil companies, which the right is swallowing hook, line, and sinker.

Ha, is that all you got? The big bad oil companies are duping everyone? so predictable.

j-mac
 
It was Dan's post that I criticized. Try and keep up.
See, you had a chance to clear everything up and perhaps -- perhaps -- make a point. Yet you wasted that chance.
 
What? So your crystal ball tells you so? Look, the low end is that it would create at least 30,000 sustainable jobs.
Your crystal ball tells you that? :lamo

Even Tea Party hand puppet John Boehner only says 20,000 unspecified jobs (see the last page of your own CS Monitor link). Better ease up on the Kool Aid . . . .
 
Ha, is that all you got? The big bad oil companies are duping everyone? so predictable.
As we can see, some are more gullible than others :2razz:
 
Again, the insistence on stating the obvious puzzles me. In a typical solar system, the batteries are charged during the day, and are discharged ('used') during the evening and night.

How many homes today are using energy solely supplied through solar systems?

In a typical Chevy Volt operation, the car is driven during the day, and recharged during the evening and night. A full charge would be in the neighborhood of 10kWh, or about 10 hours at about 9 amps (120 volts). That is within the capabilities of a smallish or moderate home solar installation ($10K and up).

Your hypothesis falls apart when you consider that most hybrid owners today do not have their charging capability strictly from solar energy. In fact most are on the public grid which is supplied largely from coal. That's right, not so green eh?...So, we are subsidizing cars in the volt's case that cost up to $250K to build each one, so that they can plug into a coal generated source of energy, that Obama is trying to kill. Wonderful.

It may save you some time if you accept that I will make no claims that cannot be backed up with logic and/or facts, nor do I ramble on about things which I do not know. I rarely shoot from the hip, which is why I rarely have any trouble proving my point (or causing problems for those that do shoot from the hip).

Well, you certainly think highly of yourself don't you? Address the coal energy issue with hybrids, then we can move on to where, and how dangerous these batteries are.

j-mac
 
Again, the insistence on stating the obvious puzzles me. In a typical solar system, the batteries are charged during the day, and are discharged ('used') during the evening and night.

So your house doesnt use any electricity during the day?

In a typical Chevy Volt operation, the car is driven during the day, and recharged during the evening and night. A full charge would be in the neighborhood of 10kWh, or about 10 hours at about 9 amps (120 volts). That is within the capabilities of a smallish or moderate home solar installation ($10K and up).

The 2012 Chevy Volt uses a 16KWH battery and that is good for UP TO 35 miles. that number will decrees as the battery ages. Im not sure what the 9 amps number is that your refering to. Are you talking about the amps required to run the inverter? Most homes get around 6 hours of direct (optimal) sunlight a day. thats when your solar panel is most likely to be generating at manufacturers specs. Assume you take a discharged 100-amp hour battery and charge it with a 30-watt solar panel under ideal summer time light conditions. After a full week the battery will be just about fully charged. Using this example you can see that it will take at least 100-watts of solar power to recharge a 100-amp hour battery in a few days. Keep in mind that it takes direct sunshine on the surface of the panel to produce the maximum rated power of a solar panel. Conditions such as an overcast sky, shadows, improper mounting angle, equatorial direction or short winter days will reduce the actual solar panel output to below the rated values. You need to go learn the difference between watts, volts, and amps before we can go any further.[/quote]



It may save you some time if you accept that I will make no claims that cannot be backed up with logic and/or facts, nor do I ramble on about things which I do not know. I rarely shoot from the hip, which is why I rarely have any trouble proving my point (or causing problems for those that do shoot from the hip).

I think your plethora of one liners are proof to the contrary...
 
Last edited:
Your crystal ball tells you that? :lamo

Even Tea Party hand puppet John Boehner only says 20,000 unspecified jobs (see the last page of your own CS Monitor link). Better ease up on the Kool Aid . . . .

So even if every single one of these jobs was temporary, you argue that its better to keep people unemployed rather than have them support themselves, even for a short period of time. And at the end of that time we have a secure source of oil to boot... Sounds like a liberal to me...
 
Oil, coal and natural gas are limited non-renewable resources that we have no choice but to replace, especially as the geopolitical ramifications of securing these resources are becoming untenable. But in the meantime we have no choice but to use what dwindling sources that are left in order to make the transition. It's the speed and affordability at which we should be switching to renewable sources that is the true argument. Electric, solar, wind, hydro and other renewable sources are all that's realistic, unless technology turns out some form of abundantly available clean source through chemical reaction such as Hydrogen based. Nobody can possibly calculate the initial economic impact and turnover cost of replacing the gas, oil and coal based industries and their related infrastructure with the comparative new sales, manufacturing and employment boom of emerging technologies. But it must be done with diligence and determination if we are to survive the energy hungry future of modern civilization and existence. These are non disputable facts of common reason that every party should eventually agree on.
 
How many homes today are using energy solely supplied through solar systems?
Who has claimed that they are?

Your hypothesis falls apart when you consider that most hybrid owners today do not have their charging capability strictly from solar energy.
It is not a hypothesis. It is a path to reducing oil consumption. The lack of solar production at the residential unit level is a national failure, aided and abetted by the oil industry and their deluded, shallow minded, and often greedy followers.

Address the coal energy issue with hybrids, then we can move on to where, and how dangerous these batteries are.
Since the thread is about oil, I'll pass on the attempt to change the subject and derail the thread. I will, however, note that ignorance and complacency are far dangerous than batteries.
 
Who has claimed that they are?


Well, you did sir. By implying that the volt could be charged through a solar source, knowing that the owners of these cars primarily charge them by plugging them in at the end of their day into their home energy.

It is not a hypothesis. It is a path to reducing oil consumption.

In other words an unproven Hypothesis. And if people don't accept your as of yet unproven technology, you'll force it through regulation, or pricing, right? Liberal ideas are so good that they have to be forced on people.

The lack of solar production at the residential unit level is a national failure, aided and abetted by the oil industry and their deluded, shallow minded, and often greedy followers.

Says you. There are to date, NO industrialized countries that have shown solar to be a viable replacement to fossil energy. But in your mind it is a failure that we don't adopt an energy source that is unable to achieve what you dream of to begin with.

Since the thread is about oil, I'll pass on the attempt to change the subject and derail the thread.

Talk to the hand. You won't address the fact that hybrid plug ins are charged using coal fired electricity in this country, which makes these cars as much, if not bigger polluters than my F-150.

I will, however, note that ignorance and complacency are far dangerous than batteries.

So, anyone that doesn't buy into your line of bull, is ignorant, and complacent eh? Nice.


j-mac
 
So your house doesnt use any electricity during the day?
What is the point of a stupid question? If it is supposed to make me look stupid, then may I suggest contemplating the possibility of a self-inflicted wound?

Im not sure what the 9 amps number is that your refering to.
That doesn't surprise me.

Assume you take a discharged 100-amp hour battery and charge it with a 30-watt solar panel under ideal summer time light conditions. After a full week the battery will be just about fully charged.
You didn't understand anything I posted previously, did you? A 5.5kW solar system, including two dozen 230 watt panels and a 6kW inverter, will set you back $12K (plus batteries). That is a moderate size solar system, which will provide peak power of 240 volts at 22 amps. This is equivalent to 120 volts at 44 amps, or a peak battery charging current of 392 amps at 14 volts DC -- sufficient to fully charge 46 of your 100 amp-hour batteries in a six hour period (under optimal conditions) based upon a 50% discharge limit, upon which you would have a 29kW reserve (battery) capacity with which to then charge your 10kW Chevy Volt battery (which, if using the 240 volt charger, would take about five hours).

In fact, with that system you could charge three Chevy Volts every night (assuming six hours of sun every day in between, and assuming that you used the solar battery reserve for no other energy needs).

If you're going to criticize or marginalize solar, you should at least be aware of what is out there. 5.52kW Online Solar Grid Tie System

You need to go learn the difference between watts, volts, and amps before we can go any further.
:lamo
 
Back
Top Bottom