Groundbreaking Automotive startup destined to change the world.

[ducpainter]

We already do:

Hydroelectric
Wind
Nuclear (especially if someone figures out cold fusion)

Admittedly we should tray to do better though...from Wiki:

in 2005, it was estimated that 40% of the nation's energy came from petroleum, 23% from coal, and 23% from natural gas. The remaining 14% was supplied by nuclear power, hydroelectric dams, and miscellaneous renewable energy sources

Let me clarify...

It might work when 86% of our electricity comes from the alternative sources you mentioned and 14% from fossil fuels.

[A.duc.H.duc.]

So he, and all his supporters realize when you charge a car from the power grid, you're just burning oil right?

I mean, it may be coal, or oil (in fact some plants just burn diesel fuel), or natural gas, but it's still a fossil fuel.

In order for his answer to work we have to reduce the beurocracy associated with building and operating a nuclear plant. Here in Detroit, DTE Energy has been hoping to build an aditional nuke to take dependancy off of fossils (and save people a lot in energy costs in the process), but it's about a 5 year process just get their plan approved by the government, so they can start working on the logistics of their plan. Additionally the permiting/etc. process will cost them $4-6 Billion before they even can break ground.

Even at such steap cost DTE, and other utilities nationwide,  are willing to swallow that for the massive benefits of nuclear power. I can tell you environmental concerns are pretty high on their list of priorities too. Even from a buisness sense, the amount of cost involved in cleaning the pollution from fossil fuel plants is exorbitantly high, with even higher fines for not meeting standards. On top of that, these systems break constantly and are a logistical nightmare to keep functional. The real rub is this: right now, many states have energy regulation laws requiring that the energy producers sell that energy to aggragators for discounted rates, allowing for "competition" in the industry. Of course the producers are stuck maintaining the transmission system, meeting all regulations, stuck with clean air fines, liable for injuries in storms (as well as the repair bills), and more recently responsible for negligent death or injury cases of criminals killing themselves trying to steal copper power lines from the live grid. The energy companys are winning these cases, but defense costs are high. These regulation laws make it so a decently large energy producer like DTE has about a 30 year turn around on becoming profitable on the new nuke plant.

If you want to stop the worlds dependancy on fossil fuels, you have to change the real fossil fuel consumers. All making non-solar electric cars does is shift who burns the dead dinosaurs. Sure the utility is a bit more efficiant than any motor that GM or Toyota builds, but that's all we're talking about there, just a few percent of efficiency; and as Yergin said the world is becoming more and more energy hungry. The need for energy will continue to grow, and those few percent of efficiency will be absorbed in more growth.

The only answer I can see, until there's a major breakthrough in solar, is Nuclear.

[Grappa]

   I must be stupid.  I read the article and I just don't get it.  There is nothing new about the idea of electric cars.  I think the only new idea I see is that Agassi's cars can only be charged at his special charging stations.  And why is this a good idea?  Why is this better than a car that can be charged at any outlet?  And how does the company expect to make money?  Will they charge a premium for their electricity?  Why wouldn't the consumer just buy an electric car that could be charged at home, paying less for the electric?  What am I missing here?  Perhaps the idea is that the consumer will need to charge up before they get home, but I would think/hope that by the time this company can attain a large enough infrastructure of charging stations (at least 10 years?) that electric cars will have a much larger range than they do today.  The only good idea I see in this article is the ability to swap out batteries quickly.  Having the patent on a system to do that would be where the money is.  Maybe instead of hoping to give the cars away and making money on the electricity, they should just give away the batteries.  Then when you do the battery swap you don't have to worry about anything. 

So where is the monumental idea it this article?  How is this man going to change the world?   

   

[SKOM]

I'm holding out for the tubes like on Futurama.

[somegirl]

http://www.bart.gov/news/barttv/?&cat=27&id=429

Oh, and see if you can spot me in the video, I appear a few times

(hint I am wearing yellow and riding a yellow bike)

[triangleforge]

http://www.bart.gov/news/barttv/?&cat=27&id=429

Oh, and see if you can spot me in the video, I appear a few times

(hint I am wearing yellow and riding a yellow bike)

Yeah, I assumed you weren't the big fella with the full Amish beard...