Re: New cars are shit

Just making sure history isn't changed by the young whipper-snappers. The old cars after Babbitt bearings and flatheads were great. Easy to repair..NUFF SAID! LOL!

Re: New cars are shit

Overpriced Parts /

Let’s keep this thread going to little bit longer ha ha,

I’ve always believe this the same thing with nuclear/so-called clean nuclear power for the mining and processing of all these things both nuclear and making batteries causes so much pollution it isn’t funny.

I use to protest nuclear power/making of nuclear power plants maybe I’ll start protesting making batteries/electric cars,

https://www.technocracy.news/shock-electric-vehicles-emit-more-co2-than-diesel-cars/

https://pjmedia.com/trending/are-electric-cars-really-better-for-the-environment/

0141F8CA-9F28-4356-9138-A9F23CD6174B.jpeg

So imagine you have electric car that has a battery in it that was made by causing a lot of pollution and CO2 powered by a nuclear power plant that caused much pollution and CO2 for its mining and processing of ore into fuel and construction of plant then you have to dispose of a battery causing more pollution then you have to dispose of used nuclear fuel rods which many don’t get disposed of really, most are just sitting in a pool of water at the power plant waiting to cause untold catastrophic damage when the pool water or something happens,

And of course there’s already been five severe reactor meltdowns, 4 in futajimia Japan and 1 in Russia/Chernobyl that probably caused thousands of cancer deaths untold ecological damage

Thousands of contaminated sites all over the world from experimental reactors and such damage from the mines it’s ridiculous, The recycling/disposing of all these batteries in the next 10 years are going to cause much pollution and emissions also,

Us humans aren't smarter then we think, no matter what we make or do has to come from the earth/destroys the earth

Re: New cars are shit

Yes,electric cars are for greenies...….LOL!

Re: New cars are shit

kevin Smellaflange /

greenie beenie babies...lol

Re: New cars are shit

Can we actually talk about batteries honestly though?

1st glaring issue is that's looking at a full cradle to grave analysis of the batteries, and comparing it to just the running emissions of the ICE.

#2 it's comparing the best ICE vs battery cars - most people aren't driving 55mpg diesels however, they're driving 15-20mpg trucks or SUVs, which are just no contest worse no matter how you derive the energy. in every case the best path is reduce energy demand, before you even start thinking about how energy is best distributed (which is the essence of the gas vs electric question)

and 3rd obvious is it's relying on the CO2 emissions of the power plant. Which is incomplete at best for a few reasons, a) it's based on current era generation spread - that emission drops drastically if we implement more renewable power generation, which is not just likely but expected. whereas a drop in emissions from fossils is reaching its theoretical limits. and b) single source emissions like power generation have much better prospects for carbon capture and sequestration or better, utilization, because you can feasibly apply those technologies on a large scale.

Also 4) you're comparing a very mature ICE technology vs batteries in their infancy. As we continue to implement and accept battery technology it has a lot of room for improvement, through battery recycle, improved capacity and lifetimes, improved safety etc. But nobody is going to invest in that until people invest in it - chicken and egg - more people buying batteries drives better batteries which in turn drives more demand, and there's a clear and attainable room for major improvements.

So 100% yes, batteries are not perfect, but they definitely are better, and only getting more so. And shying away from them because theyre not yet perfect or instantly economical only makes their improvement and economy slower

Re: New cars are shit

That last post led me to this interesting plot with relevance to the original topic

Re: New cars are shit

Angry Hipster /

I drove 7 miles and counted 103 4door full sized pickup trucks..

People driving vehicles that are oversized has to be the biggest factor in efficiency and pollution.

How should it be addressed? Giant trucks for grocery shopping has to a worse fad that people on their smartphones.

Re: New cars are shit

#4 for the win. The other thing we can do that would reduce energy across the board, is reduce waste, no running the Suburban 3 blocks to the Burger King drive thru kind of crap, walk, bike etc. Public transit has to lose its stigma, here the bus is seen as very "ghetto" while the light rail is new modern and "ok" so weird, but true. IDK maybe clean up the behavior on buses, they will not stop one here unless someone has a weapon, and I can see how that can make people reluctant to ride, but we need to reduce miles driven in heavily populated area's any way we can, I would ride the bus if it was still running when I got off work at 2am, but it is not. The further increase of telecommuting would also reduce energy use a great deal, for jobs where it is practical of course. Innovation is great, but intelligent use of what we have would go a LONG way in buying us time to work the bugs out of new tech.

Re: New cars are shit

kevin Smellaflange /

i saw a hybrid suv @ the tractor supply store yesterday...it was a monster for an electric vehicle.

our junk yards are going to kill us off.

rebel moby shows how to rejuvenate them.

storing whats already here would be a good start.

Re: New cars are shit

Dirty30 Dillon /

> Thomas Davis Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> How should it be addressed? Giant trucks for grocery shopping has to a

> worse fad that people on their smartphones.

a-fuckin-men to that

Re: New cars are shit

It's still a very interesting consideration, with current electricity mix here in Ohio, using grid power mostly coal, you're better off with ICE if you're getting better than ~45mpg. that's still current energy mix tho, and assuming it wont improve. Kansas it'd be almost a 35mpg cutoff.

Here's another neat calc I just went through - the 15 tons CO2 for a Tesla battery is same as almost 40k miles on a 25mpg car. That's based of carbonate processes though, I think theyre all on hydroxide now. Also the batteries for a Leaf or the new electric VW's (with only <100 mile range) are only around 1ton CO2, that's roughly 100 gallons of gas.

on a car with an average lifespan of we'll say 135,000 mi, and an average current electricity grid, an EV would account for less than half the emissions of an equivalent ICE car over its lifetime.

Re: New cars are shit

also, I dunno where those data are coming from, what I can find the whole model S accounts for 15 tons, the long range battery for tesla weighs in at 6 tons CO2 emissions to manufacture AND dispose.

but even in that piece Ken posted data they've got a number at 200-250 g CO2/mi for the Tesla, whereas a conventional car, calculated for 29mpg is still almost double that.

Re: New cars are shit

Overpriced Parts /

> Stephen Keller Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> #4 for the win. The other thing we can do that would reduce energy

> across the board, is reduce waste,

> Innovation is great, but intelligent use of what we have would go a LONG

> way in buying us time to work the bugs out of new tech.

More Technology, more science, more chemistry, is just more damage to the earth or more sickness. Silicon, rare earth materials and/or whatever else (like more energy) you need to improve technology has to come from the earth,

Science is the most ecological damaging, Energy using industry there is:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider#Design

https://home.cern/science/accelerators/large-hadron-collider

0F2E30A6-0C85-4470-9320-E4B8D87AEABC.jpeg

I mean I’m all for Science and Technology but only to make Space Vehicles,

To save the earth population has to be reduced dramatically like 90% and that’s never gonna happen without a astroid, nuke war/nuclear event like people not monitoring power plants and rod storage (which to be manned by people 24/7 or boom) then it’s destroyed anyway

So I say all the Science, technology and everything should be focused on space exploration and vehicles to find another planet to sustain our race then after we deplete and destroy those planets go on to other ones.

Rinse and repeat !

I’m serious! all we’re going to do is prolong the inevitable anyway for a few more generations maybe a few hundred more years max (some think only 12years ha ha) So let’s use Science and technology to start on making spaceship arks and start finding other planets to move to instead of beating a dead horse !

Re: New cars are shit

Dirty30 Dillon /

Ken's gone Roff the deep end.

Re: New cars are shit

Overpriced Parts /

> Born to be WillD Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> also, I dunno where those data are coming from, what I can find the

> whole model S accounts for 15 tons, the long range battery for tesla

> weighs in at 6 tons CO2 emissions to manufacture AND dispose.

>

> but even in that piece Ken posted data they've got a number at 200-250 g

> CO2/mi for the Tesla, whereas a conventional car, calculated for 29mpg

> is still almost double that.

There’s more than just CO2 emissions to manufacture and dispose of a battery

There so much other pollution/health cancer risks, costs and labor it isn’t funny but ya keep with battery development so we can make the long range battery to get to another solar system

Re: New cars are shit

Overpriced Parts /

> Dirty30 Dillon Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> Ken's gone Roff the deep end.

Why, you don’t believe there’s ever going to be a starship enterprise!

In the early 1800s The railroad naysayers said there’s not gonna be a better form of transportation then the horse

Re: New cars are shit

Dirty30 Dillon /

> Ken Roff Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> > Dirty30 Dillon Wrote:

>

> > -------------------------------------------------------

>

> > Ken's gone Roff the deep end.

>

> Why, you don’t believe there’s ever going to be a starship enterprise!

>

> In the early 1800s The railroad naysayers said there’s not gonna be a

> a better form of transportation then the horse

I completely agree that space exploration is a necessary step towards easing the human burden on this planet.

That said, we can still maintain this planet while we prepare for travel and it definitely involves the switch to electric transportation. No matter how you slice it, battery production doesn't have anywhere near the negative effects of ICE's.

Re: New cars are shit

kevin Smellaflange /

if...there was a way to run off solar MUCH more efficiently...example...

i.e. the paddle board that propels you @ 3mph w/only sun rays...no sun was 7 mph with it's battery.

while still getting charged up.

if a moped was efficiently solar powered & inexpensive, $395.88 walsmart...people could use a peddle/solar/gel or lithium or what ever is the lightest safest way to travel around, aerodynamics would play into the mix.

then we could quibble about the appearance.

Re: New cars are shit

Overpriced Parts /

> Ken Roff Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> > Dirty30 Dillon Wrote:

>

> > -------------------------------------------------------

>

> > Ken's gone Roff the deep end.

>

> Why, you don’t believe there’s ever going to be a starship enterprise!

>

> In the early 1800s The railroad naysayers said there’s not gonna be a

> a better form of transportation then the horse

I think we’re doomed for space travel too!

Man!

All Science and technology does is it seems is to contaminate and pollute everything even space so how we going to launch all our spaceships without getting hit by this debris that goes thousands of miles an hour!

274498A8-ADF5-43AA-B0A6-4C43BDB50709.jpeg

Shame I’ll be long gone before this stuff is figured out/probably never be be figured out but my grandkids won’t,

The secret to pollution is dilution so nothing ever really goes away just gets diluted,

For every good thing that comes from a science and technology bad things are produced and I know because of life saving anabiotic’s I caught anti-anabolic strain of bacteria called MSRA that put me down for years with all the effects from that I’m still affected!

See/read my old thread (the whole thing if you want to see what I went through)

https://www.mopedarmy.com/forums/read.php?18,3743193,page=3

Re: New cars are shit

kevin Smellaflange /

space junk has it's own course...and there is a lot of it.

Re: New cars are shit

Overpriced Parts /

More stupid scientists even though they killed many and themselves they got a Noble prize!

Re: New cars are shit

> Brent Eaton Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> greenie beenie babies...lol

LOL!

Re: New cars are shit

> Dirty30 Dillon Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> Ken's gone Roff the deep end.

best quip this thread has to offer.

Re: New cars are shit

We will never be a space traveling race untill we can launch a rocket in the rain....

Re: New cars are shit

Blaine- The artist formerly known as Plumber Crack "(OFMC)" /

> Ken Roff Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> More stupid scientists even though they killed many and themselves they

> got a Noble prize!

>

>

If you wanna make an omelette, you gotta break some eggs.

Re: New cars are shit

> Stephen Keller Wrote:

> -------------------------------------------------------

> We will never be a space traveling race untill we can launch a rocket in

> the rain....

LOL! Good one,Stephen!

Re: New cars are shit

Always made me laugh, this thing can take the stress of terminal velocity, the temperature extremes of space, but one little lighting strike and "poof"

Re: New cars are shit

Man will always be irrelevant to Creation.

Great scriptures in the Book of Job about lightning and how fast it is.

Re: New cars are shit

Blaine- The artist formerly known as Plumber Crack "(OFMC)" /

I’ve been waiting on this electric vehicle stuff for a long time. Did some training on GM hybrids years ago, but all i ever see are Priuses. ? Preii? Have to get kev to give us the correct spelling for more than one Prius.

I miss Geo Metros. I had 2 of them. Both were the 1.0L 3 cylinder engine. The 5 spd was definitely more spirited than the 3spd auto, but i liked them both. Easy 40+mpg with the a/c on. Hauled a few mopeds home in the back of them.

I bought the 89 5spd for $25. Replaced #2 exhaust valve and 1 hubcap. Ran it for 2yrs until some girl decided to make a left turn in front of me. Totaled the metro, but her bronco 2 had diamond in the frame. The metro drove her passenger side frame rail back about 6”. It broke all of the motor mounts in the metro. Engine and trans was hanging by the half shafts. Insurance gave me $2200 for it. :)

In 99 I bought a 94 high mileage 4 door for $250. The guy said it didn’t have any power but would eventually get up to speed. When i test drove it, I instantly realized the auto trans was pulling out in high gear. I pulled the shifter to low, i had low, 2nd was 2nd. Sold. I figured if I couldn’t fix the trans, i’d just shift it manually.

Got it home. Found a blown fuse. It fixed the trans. Two days later the fuse blew. Found a wire rubbed through and grounding out on the transmission harness that was blowing the fuse. Ate a valve about 5 yrs later on cyl#2. It actually broke the valve off and crushed it in to the piston. Destroyed the cylinder wall.

Bought a junkyard “parts” motor for $40. He said it had piston noise. I tore it down. Number 2 Piston skirt was missing and the cylinder was oval. Tossed a good piston in from the blown motor and ran it for 3 more years, with a rattling piston. Sold it that way too for $400

Once the head is off, you can reach down and lift the motor out with your hands. You can lift a bare block with one hand.

I think all of the metros suffered from the same problem. Clogged EGR passages in the intake to number 1 and 3. All the EGR would flow in to number 2, then overheat and burn the valve, or the valve would seize in the guide and poke a hole in the piston.

I bought a 1962 beetle (40hp 1200cc) when i was 18. I abused it, swapped motors in it probably 6 or 8 times in the 2 yrs i had it. I broke a piston on one, locked one up, broke a crank in half, oh i had to replace the trans too. They don’t hold up well if you side step the clutch in reverse. Loved that car.

The 52hp Metro was made as light as possible and fitted with an engine just big enough to propel it down the road at highway speed. I think the Metro was as close to an early beetle as we’ll ever see again. Emissions standards killed the air cool beetle, and now US safety standards is the prohibiting factor to going back to light weight efficiency. Sure, they weren’t super safe, but much safer than a moped. I totaled a Metro with no air bags and walked away, and I wasn’t wearing a seat belt.

I just want a real 55mph electric bike with a 60 mile range, but i’d settle for 45mph and 40 mile range. Or George Jetson’s ride.

As far as hazardous toxic waste, we should ship all of it to the great tyrannical state of New Jersey.

Re: New cars are shit

Blaine- The artist formerly known as Plumber Crack "(OFMC)" /

Don said...................

—————————————————-

“You should at least investigate how the prophetic book of Daniel gave the prophecy of the 50 weeks of years that were to expire 3.5 yrs. after Jesus' sacrifice for us.”

@Don. I took your advice the other night and spent some time “investigating” the pathetic book of daniel. Turns out it was 70 weeks of years, not 50. If you’re wandering, it equated to almost 500 year years, as in a 365 day year.

It started as a 70 year prophecy, yes, just 70 years, not weeks of years, but it didn’t pan out, so they managed to stretch it out for a few centuries, which roughly happened around 200-600 BCE, which was before jesus obviously. How they arrived at 70 weeks of years?.........who cares really, it’s not even real history. It was a prediction, and a poor one to boot.

So what happened then? Nothing really. Basically is was just saying don’t pack up the kids and move to jerusalem, but everybody already knows that already, oh and Onias III was murdered. The book of daniel also mentions a fictional king, Darius the Mede. Why?

Sorry don, I just don’t do prophecies, or forture tellers, or have my palms read.

Investigation closed.

Want to post in this forum? We'd love to have you join the discussion, but first:

Login or Create Account