On Saturday 09 April 2005 11:36, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Standing Bear wrote:
The legal problems were caused by the Three Mile Island accident. It was
the most expensive industrial accident in history by far. It nearly
bankrupted the power company. The detractors never cause 0.01% as much
Standing Bear wrote:
and half truths. The detractors of nuclear power in this case deliberately
caused financial and legal problems for the industry . . .
The legal problems were caused by the Three Mile Island accident. It was the
most expensive industrial accident in history by far. It
On Tuesday 29 March 2005 13:59, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I wrote:
The biggest problem with charging stations would be lack of customers. I
think most people would find it more convenient to recharge at home
overnight, rather than interrupt their commute.
In other words, charging stations would
On Friday 08 April 2005 18:13, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to Standing Bear's message of Fri, 8 Apr 2005 11:42:28
-0400:
Hi,
[snip]
mirror fusion engine for main power. It is powered by a nuclear reactor.
If these things can get us to the moon where we can mine the tritium, then
Mike Carrell wrote:
MC: I said *at the wheels*. I
don't have the exact numbers at hand, but
there are a lot of losses between the engine crankshaft and the wheels.
One
is the power necessary for the hydraulic system.
Good point. The NREL Hydrogen Program Plan cites a JPL study
from 1985 showing
Steve wrote:
snip
I understand that this is how they work but I've never understood why.
Why is it not better to use a gutsy electric motor, a small gasoline or
diesel engine, and a battery pack? That always seemed like the
reasonable way to build a hybrid -- take a tip from diesel electric
At 1:39 PM 3/29/5, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Horace Heffner wrote:
This is a significant development provided the price is right. It means
vehicles can be charged in a manner similar to filling up on gas, and that
home charging is also
Horace wrote:
snip.
There also schemes to use high-capacity capacitors for urban buses. Every
bus stop would be equipped with power mains to recharge the bus while the
passengers get on and off. This seems impractical to me.
Not so. In Europe there have been bus systems with flywheel energy
The quote below, seemingly attributed to me, is actually from Jed.
At 6:59 AM 3/30/5, Mike Carrell wrote:
Horace wrote:
snip.
There also schemes to use high-capacity capacitors for urban buses. Every
bus stop would be equipped with power mains to recharge the bus while the
passengers get on
- Original Message -
From: Horace Heffner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 3:21 AM
Subject: Re: New battery technology
Batteries are not a source of energy. True, some energy is recovered from
regenerative breaking, but transportation is only
Michael Foster wrote:
Wouldn't such a quickly
chargeable battery be
able to store much more energy from regenerative
braking than is currently possible?
These batteries are apparently more efficient (meaning they generate less
waste heat when they recharge) so they would do a better job of
I would speculate that Toshiba headquarters knowing that their RD teams were
working on the promising nano battery designs made the decision to discontinue
the more conventional lithium-ion technology more than a year ago. They knew
that if their RD teams proved successful conventional
Horace Heffner wrote:
At 10:05 AM 3/30/5, Jed Rothwell wrote:
30 hp, by the way, seems a little low even for a lightweight electric car,
based on the performance of my 40 HP Geo Metro. I think you need more like
70 to 100 HP, even with a light, aerodynamic car. The Honda Insight has a
73 hp
Jed wrote:
snip
The point that Mike Carrell has made about a very rapid recharge is that it
would require the batteries to absorb energy much faster than they ever
discharge it. Suppose you have a car with a 200 mile range that recharges in
six minutes. The batteries have to absorb enough energy
Now THAT'S an important breakthrough. Something like this
quick recharge battery could revolutionize transportation, and greatly
reduce the need for oil.
- Jed
At 10:34 AM 3/29/5, R. Wormus wrote:
Press Release:
New battery offers unsurpassed recharge performance and high energy density
TOKYO -- Toshiba Corporation today announced a breakthrough in lithium-ion
batteries that makes long recharge times a thing of the past. The company's
new battery can
wow. its a battery capacitor! definately increase the effectiveness
of solar vehicles.
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 09:14:25 -0900, Horace Heffner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 10:34 AM 3/29/5, R. Wormus wrote:
Press Release:
New battery offers unsurpassed recharge performance and high energy
Horace Heffner wrote:
This is a significant
development provided the price is right. It means
vehicles can be charged in a manner similar to filling up on gas, and
that
home charging is also feasible.
Home charging of electric vehicles is already feasible. I cannot imagine
an electric car design
I wrote:
The biggest problem with
charging stations would be lack of customers. I think most people would
find it more convenient to recharge at home overnight, rather than
interrupt their commute.
In other words, charging stations would only be economically viable on
highways where people
Before we divide the bear into all of its succulent parts it might be wise to
verify the source of the news.
So far I can't verify it. On top of that, according to Toshiba they were
planning on getting out of the rechargeable lithium ion battery business
See:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=enned=usq=toshiba+battery[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before we divide the bear into all of its succulent parts it might be wise to verify the source of the news.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
From: Terry Blanton
http://news.google.com/news?hl=enned=usq=toshiba+battery
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Before we divide the bear into all of its succulent
parts it might be wise to verify the source of the news.
Thanks, Terry!
I love it when my suspicions can be proven wrong!
Regards,
in a few minutes rather than hours.
-DonW-
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 12:11 PM
To: vortex-list
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: New battery technology
Before we divide the bear into all of its succulent parts
They are now available for your human transporter:
http://segway.com/segway/lithium_ion.htmlMike Carrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume lithium ion batteries can be designed for automotiveservice.__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has
I wrote:
That's pretty hot, but with a
good radiator and exhaust fan it would not vaporize the battery or cause
a fire. With a lead-acid battery, which is 70% efficient, it would
produce 200 or 300 kW, which *would* cause a
fire.
I should have said: If a lead acid battery could recharge this
and you are makeing a big assumption. that everyone would do a full
charge everytime. do people fill the tank every time? so for ten
cents on your order, or maybe even free, mcdonalds will charge your
car as you go through the drive through. 2 minutes of charging, last
you a couple hours
Jed Rothwell
If gasoline goes up to $4 or $5 per gallon, you will see
this kind of thing implemented with lightning speed -- much
faster than anyone has predicted or imagined lately.
even as things stand now, one wonder how long it will
take...
In trying to equate battery recharge costs
A lot of fascinating Vortexian discussion has been generated on this topic, as
it well should.
Meanwhile, I performed an unscientific Reality Check and noticed that CNN.COM
has yet to report on this apparent technological breakthrough, particularly in
the Technology section. We are instead
Jed made some good comments:
Mike Carrell wrote:
delivered to the battery in 1/12 hour, at a rate of (75)(12) = 900 kW, which
will vaporize the battery.
Obviously if these batteries can charge 10 times faster than normal
batteries, as advertised, they must be remarkably efficient so they do
supply. We simply don't have enough.
Jeff
- Original Message -
From: Mike Carrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: New battery technology
Jed made some good comments:
Mike Carrell wrote:
delivered to the battery in 1/12 hour
]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: New battery technology
Jed made some good comments:
Mike Carrell wrote:
delivered to the battery in 1/12 hour, at a rate of (75)(12) = 900 kW,
which
will vaporize the battery.
Obviously if these batteries can
Jeff writes:
It's not vaporized batteries we need to worry about, it is the power grid
and generating stations. The combined output of all of our automotive
engines may be more than the combined output of all our generating
facilities.
It is much more than all of our generating facilities,
Mike Carrell writes:
MC: To which I add, yes, of course, if they had to.
When gasoline hits $5 per gallon they will have to. Many people cannot afford
that.
Battery cars were used
locally in the 30s.
They had a huge problem: they were much slower than gasoline cars. I think
their max
--- Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So... which announcement is the April Fool's joke?
http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?art=1221
Let me repeat once again (let's cut out those
enquiring emails right now) it is NOT an early April
FoolÂ’s (I hate those) and besides Toshiba said it
Wouldn't such a quickly chargeable battery be
able to store much more energy from regenerative
braking than is currently possible?
M.
___
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
35 matches
Mail list logo
