posted on August 26, 2001 02:34:36 PM new
Borillar, isn't the hold-up on electric cars due to the lack of servicing terminals? They'd have to be as plentiful as gas stations and that would be costly.
posted on August 26, 2001 02:35:43 PM new
Well the electric car will need some maintenace. There are bearings and suspension, transmission, and working parts that will still wear out and need replaced. The biggest thing is that after 5 years or so you will need a full battery replacemst because they do deteriorate in performance. Same with fuel cells - the electrode materials in those are much like a battery and they slowly get deposits and the surfaces change and get contaminated until you have to replace them and recycle the materials. The cost is similar to having to replace the engine in a piston engine car.
One of the changes to be made is fire department and EMS crews are going to have to learn how to handle a wreck where a battery bus is shorted out that can deliver several hundred amps of electric current. I suspect that after a few years of crashing them they will learn to make a disconnect device right at the battery to isolate the power in case of a crash.
posted on August 26, 2001 02:42:23 PM newFor instance, a generator that produces 100 amps of electricity may only take 60 amps to operate.....patent applie for, its application always turned down. The reason being is that it defies the established laws of physics.
I should hope so. Any 10th grader that didn't fall asleep in class knows better. Perpetual motions machines are frauds.
posted on August 26, 2001 02:45:19 PM newisn't the hold-up on electric cars due to the lack of servicing terminals? They'd have to be as plentiful as gas stations and that would be costly.
Yup. Infrastructure.... Why I think all this will take years to get done.
posted on August 26, 2001 05:00:06 PM new"Borillar - You getting upset with me?"
No, Linda ... I have never been mad at you presonally or at anyone else on here who is member. We have had our different ways of looking at things, but that is not any cause for contention.
Yes, Clinton did nothing, Bush, Sr. did nothing, Ronald Reagan did nothing. Carter did try during the Oil Crisis, although just as soon as Ronald Reragan took office, the Republicans trashed it all -- with the Democrat's help. Ford did nothing, Nixon, Kennedy, etc all did nothing because it was not in the best interests of the energy consortium.
I mention Bush and Cheney for two reasons:
1) They are in office now, not past presidents and vice-presidents.
2) Both belong to the energy consortium that has a stranglehold on us.
If you have some sort of inside connection to learn for yourself why the automobile manufacturers are being stymied, do share it with us when you find out.
GET STARTED NOW to solve the energy/pollution problem!
GIVE US THE CHOICE to make our own minds whether we'd pay for it or not! Don't just TALK about the downside -- allow electric cars to be sold!
Do you realize that nearly every war and action that America has participated in this last century has had to do with OIL and other resources? Are you tired of countries HATING US because we interfere where we are not wanted by installing puppet-dictators to supress the people of those countries? Doesn't it make you shake your head in wonder why we side with certain counties against other countries when it's really none of our business whatsoever? The answer is OH-AYE-EL!
posted on August 26, 2001 06:16:35 PM new
Service terminals would likely be for long road trips. Initially, electric cars are designed to be used as commuter cars in metropolitan areas to cut down on pollution and waste. An electric card would take you to work and back every day. At night, you'd park your car and recharge. Eventually, as the years rolled by, the infrastructure would accomodate long-distance driving. Motels and hotels would have their service early on. Businesses would have theirs sooner too, because they would use it to encourage employees own electric cars and to recharge them while they work. The point is, is that no one needs to wait for a complete infrastructure to be put into place before electric cars can be used. they can be used just fine right now.
Also, where the opening for the gas tank used to be, on electric cars will be a cable that allows the owner to simply park anywhere near a standard electrical outlet and juice up. The Service ones that microbes is talking about are FAST chargers. No reason why you or I can't be offered the choice to own an electric car today.
As far as the battery thing goes, that's just an estimate based upon current technology. At first, the cars will have that drawback. But, as millions of electric cars hit the roads and data pours in and research is demanded for improvements, you can be sure that twenty-year batteries are neither far off or far-fetched. But waiting for twenty year batteries to be offered before being offered the CHOICE to own one is a bad idea.
posted on August 26, 2001 06:23:04 PM new"Perpetual motions machines are frauds."
What I outlined was not a perpetual motion machine. A perpetual motion machine is one that continues to operate within a closed system; that is, no need to keep adding energy to overcome the effects of friction and gravity - wear and tear excluded.
That is different than the energy generator. And I can tell you that it does not defy the laws of physics, as it is more than possible to have an electrical generator produce more energy than it consumes energy. There is nothing stopping anyone from building a generator that only consumes 60 amps to make the generator rotate, while 100 amps are being generated by the motion of the magnets and wiring. The result is more energy produced than consumed in the process of creating the energy. Use it push a 40 amp electric motor for an automobile -- right?
posted on August 26, 2001 06:51:53 PM new. There is nothing stopping anyone from building a generator that only consumes 60 amps to make the generator rotate, while 100 amps are being generated by the motion of the magnets and wiring
Well... I certainly don't want to stop you, go for it.
And I can tell you that it does not defy the laws of physics
And the reason we don't all own one of these machines is because of a conspiracy?
In the picture above, please point out how this would be defying the laws of physics, Microbe?
The battery supplies the 60 amps necessary to turn the motor. The motor turns an electric generator that produces 100 amps. The generator puts 60 amps back into the battery to continue the cycle. That leaves 40 amps left over for other uses.
This is not a Perpetual Motion Machine because it is not a closed system. And why do we not have this alrwady, minus a massive conspiracy? Would it surprize you to learn, Microbes, that the electric automobile designers did try to apply this design for a patent and were turned down on the grounds that it defies the laws of physics? Did you know that the patent reviewers do not have the slighest training in physics, yet they made that determination?
UBB
[ edited by Borillar on Aug 27, 2001 01:40 PM ]
posted on August 27, 2001 05:32:43 PM new
This is what our schools turn out.
It is so easy - build me a small one that generates a net gain and I have $1,000 waiting for you.
posted on August 27, 2001 05:37:46 PM new
gravid, I don't think your money is in any danger
please point out how this would be defying the laws of physics
It's simple.... A generator turns free only when there is no "load" on it. Place a load (use current) and it has a "drag" (resistance to movment). The greater the load on the generator, the greater the drag. In your illustration, the the battery would eventualy go dead.
If you try to draw 100 watts out of the generator, there would be more drag than a 60 watt motor could over come.
Amps isn't the correct term to use.
One ampere is the rate of flow of electric current when one coulomb of charge flows past a point in the circuit in one second.
One volt causes a current of one amp through a resistance of one ohm.
Watt: The unit of power. One watt equals one joule per second, 1/746th horsepower.
Amps X Voltage = Watts (which equals power)
Notice that watts can be converted to horsepower. A 1/4 horsepower motor isn't going to spin a 1/2 horsepower generator to full capacity
why do we not have this alrwady, minus a massive conspiracy?
If it was this simple, no one could keep it a secret. Since you think you know how to do this, is your house powered this way????
Would it surprize you to learn, Microbes, that the electric automobile designers did try to apply this design for a patent and were turned down on the grounds that it defies the laws of physics?
Nope, doesn't surprize me at all. I didn't major in physics in College, but I did take a couple of classes. I also used to be certified as an electronic technician.
Did you know that the patent reviewers do not have the slighest training in physics, yet they made that determination?
That's a pretty broad statement. I would imagine there are people in the patent office with training in physics. But perhaps not the pencil pusher that has to tell someone there patent has been turned down.
If you can make this work, don't worry about patents, just sell the things
posted on August 27, 2001 06:16:51 PM new
Microbes, I also have a college degree and work history as an electronic technicain -- that is, until nearly all electronics became disposeable. Typically, generators are not rated in watts output, but in Amps output since the voltage is already established.
Now, the problem with your quaint dismissal is something I'd like to point out to you. I think that you are not too familiar with generators and windings and magnets used to produce electricity in such a crude fashion -- right? To reeducate: a magnet or magnets are passed across a wire or wires and electricity is generated. The greater the number of wires (windings), the higher the voltage and amperage generated. The more powerful the magnets are, the greater the output as well. Lastly, the speed at which the generator turns affects its output. Correct so far?
Now, the load placed on the motor equals the force necessary to turn the mass of the generator windings -- right? That has nothing at all to do with the strength of the magnets. The physical load that the motor has to turn is the same for either a weak magnet or a strong magnet. Right?
By increasing the strength of the magnets to produce more power output -- which has nothing to do with the requirements of the motor, then it is possible to generate more power than the process can consume.
You see, the generation of power is seperate from the energy required to power the process. This is why I keep saying that tis is not a closed system -- a perpetual motion machine.
But, chalk it all up to a big put-on by Borillar if you feel you want to.
posted on August 27, 2001 06:33:03 PM new? To reeducate: a magnet or magnets are passed across a wire or wires and electricity is generated.
One thing you are forgetting... the windings in the generator, when energized, also produce a magnetic field of their own.
Remember, it works both ways, a coil of wire, when energized, creates a magnetic field.
This is where the "drag" comes from. The more load, the greater this feild is, and the greater the drag.
The physical load that the motor has to turn is the same for either a weak magnet or a strong magnet. Right?
If there is no load on the generator, yes. Place a load on it, the windings energize, creating a magnetic feild of their own (that "resist movement" ). bigger magnets will energize the winding more (like you said), and the windings will create a greater magnetic field of their own.
This is why a 2500 watt generator can be powered by a 5 hp motor, but a 10kw generator takes a big motor.
posted on August 27, 2001 06:34:23 PM new
If you put more magnets or increase the strenth of them it takes more force to push a conductor loop through the field - the drag does not stay constant.
Otherwise you would not need more steam or more water flow to turn a big generator for a city than a little one for your bicycle light. Once you have them up to speed there is very little friction drag in any generator.
As you increase the load on the external circuit it changes the drag also. That is why you hear a gas engine throttle up and burn more gas to maintan speed and voltage when you turn on an appliance connected to a generator.
If these utilities could avoid buying more gas or more coal they sure would in a second.
posted on August 27, 2001 06:42:11 PM new
Borillar, I have design enhancment for you to consider, since the rotational direction is the same on the generator and the motor, couple them together. Basically have the two coupled together in the same housing, then you could market them as direct replacements for original motors. This will surely be a finacial success, ponder the idea of running your refrigerator running off a flashlight battery!
Hey, we're human.
