Quote:
Originally Posted by Professional
I guess you haven't seen the film "Who Killed the Electric Car?" We were there and more. Hundreds of people had electric cars in California in the mid 90s through law, but the program was ultimately killed by a certain jealous industries.
|
Why would you assume that I haven't seen it? Is there some assumption that people who have seen it are monolithic in their views? Did you read all of my post from which you quoted? That film counters none of what I posted.
The EC1 was not a transportation panacea. It only addressed a small segment of the transportation market. You also have the fundamental law of physics relative to the amount of energy needed to move a mass. Contrast that issue against battery energy density and grossly inadequate power generation and distribution grids and you have a "solution" (the EC1) that was inadequate then and is grossly inadequate now.
As to solar and wind....have any of you actually researched and analyzed the natural resource commitment needed to implement commercial solar farms? Here's a suggestion
- Go research the annual power consumption of the US at present.
- Next, research the total square miles of the US.
- Next, research how many square miles a solar farm (hypothetically) would be needed to meet that energy demand.
- Next, research how many Nuclear plants would be needed to meet that energy demand.
- Next, research how many clean coal plants would be needed to meet that energy demand.
I think that if you understand and know the answers to what I've just listed we will be having a different conversation. BTW, I speak from experience in the implementation of solar and wind generation. Renewable energy is fantastic at the micro-level but it degrades and becomes useless at the large scale level.
edit: The claim that solar has come along way since the 70's is not true. Solar panel efficiencies have not changed very much. Conversion, inversion and storage efficiencies have improved some but the overall technology hasn't changed much.