liveoilfree

Barrick Gold Confirms We've Reached 'Peak Gold'

Peak gold has more reality than peak oil, because we can't make gold from something else, while we can make oil from coal, natural gas, peat or even CO2 in the air -- after all, plants have been doing it for biliions of years.

However, I expect biological harvesting of the gold in seawater to occur at some time, wherein GM bacteria secrete it.

Hummer: Too Dirty Even for the Chinese

China could not support 1 billion Internal Combustion ("IC") cars; but there could be 1 billion EVs powered by solar on the home's rooftop or the space where the car parks at night.

Will GM Abandon Hydrogen Cars?

Dave Barthmuss is a known and proven liar, most evidently on tape in the "Who Killed the Electric car" movie about the EV1 "not being crushed" against backdrops of crushed EV1, and he continues that tradition here. GM was supposed to produce a hydrogen car by 2010, before that by 2005, and so on; in fact, GM is lying about the practicality of a car running on fuel cells.

If GM could produce a practical fuel cell car, one that cost them less than an EV, they would do so; but they can't. The only reason they are fooling with it is regulatory requirements, and then, they are using it to fool gullible regulators like the ever-compliant California Air Resources Bribed.

GM is L-Y-I-N-G because in order to last longer than 3 years, the fuel cell car would have to carry tech-grade Oxygen as well as tech-grade Hydrogen in bottles, as they do in spacecraft. The carbon from the air destroys the fuel cell stack.

If you want a compressed gas car, why not CNG?? It doesn't require a new fuel, there's plenty of it, any IC car or truck can be converted to CNG, it only needs 3600 psi, and it's proven and successful. The reason GM won't do CNG is because they are LYING. They really don't want to make a zero emission car at all, and by saying that the only ZEV possible is fuel cell, they are saying they just aren't going to do it.

And then there's the impossible problem of where do you get the hydrogen?? Sure, electrolyze it; but to get 1 kg of H2, equivalent to 35 kWh of electric, you have to spend 60 kWh of electric to make and compress it. But poor Dave won't mention or answer these, and other, issues.

It's ironic that a proven liar is responsible for GM's envirnomental communication.

The Obama Fast Track for Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs)

Well, the problem with this analysis is that there are different kinds of all batteries: the very best NiMH are not available for sale at ANY price, so the price number you quote does not represent a free market price.

Due to Chevron's squatting on the NiMH patent rights, and their lawsuit against Toyota, Toyota no longer makes the EV-95 superior NiMH battery and, while it is still running strong in the existing fleet of Toyota RAV4-EV (last sold the month before Chevron and Toyota agreed on a settlement, Nov. 2002), the cost numbers are not calculable.

To say $1000 per kWh is just plain fantastical and problematic.

In mass production, the Toyota (superior) version of NiMH would be about $333/kWh, according to the CARB 2000 BTA Workshop; more importantly, the supply of NiMH is not resource-constrained, because after they wear out, at perhaps 200,000 miles (or more, if research improved them) they can be melted down and completely recycled into new batteries.

Nickel, as well as other metals such as Iron, can be mined from the vast quantity in current use; the use of iron scrap to replace iron ore revolutionized the smelting industry with the use of small, super-efficient electric furnaces.

Similarly, 75% of our Ni comes from scrap Monel and Stainless Steel; if there were NiMH batteries, there would be a NiMH recycling industry, and, with time, the cost of NiMH might come down to $100/kWh (to melt down and refresh into new batteries) and the life span might extend beyond 300,000 miles.

As it is, NiMH and lead-acid are equivalently inexpensive; the only difference is that current EV-quality lead-acid need to be replaced every 50,000 miles, while NiMH last far over 100,000 miles (we don't know how long they last, yet; we still have the same range now as we had in 2002).

If new lead-acid technologies, such as Axion or Firefly, extend the life of lead-acid, they will be welcomed; but for now, NiMH is the most cost-effective and longest-lasting battery type in existence. There are over 13,000,000 miles of proven EV driving using NiMH batteries; all of these batteries lasted longer than Lithium ever lasted in an EV.

So far, no Lithium EV has gone more than 50,000 miles on the same set of batteries; I keep hoping that some Lithium battery pack will achieve this milestone. If you hear of one, forward the info to [e-mail] or call 562-430-2495. So far, no car.

Lithium has the disadvantage that it doesn't have a junk value; it's "safely discarded into the landfill", meaning that Lithium EVs are resource-constrained. The only Lithium recycling operations charge for processing the batteries, as I just verified last week in an L.A. interview.

Thus, lead and Ni batteries have an inherent superiority from a resource-constraint viewpoint: either of them in fleet usage can be recycled easily and completely, so none of the metal need be lost.

Axion and Exide: I Love It When a Plan Comes Together

Still no mention of NiMH, the only proven battery technology that lasts longer than the life of the vehicle, and can be recycled.

Lead is fine, the 1999 (and 1997) EV1 which had PSB 1260 lead batteries (not the Delco failure-prone junk) had reliable range over 100 miles.

But Lithium is, so far, a scam; it's not real. The comparison should be between Lead and NiMH, if you are serioius about plug-in cars.

Impact of GM Destroying the EV1

GM belly-up and admitting bankruptcy is imminent.

Guess they were right, GM told CARB if you force us to make the EV1, we'll go bankrupt. CARB forced them to make the EV1, and they went bankrupt.

Stupid GM sockpuppets probably think that's a serious statement, instead of a commentary on their stupidity.

GM Liquidates Two Employee Benefit Plans

If you expect to pay slave-labor prices for goods, you will only earn slave-labor wage rates.

Tariffs and a "misery tax" on slave-labor goods are the only answers to saving our economy.


On Apr 26 12:00 PM redperk wrote:

> BOTTOMLINE: cars should cost 5 to 8 thousand dollars, credit cards
> should never be above 6.5 percent, a house should never be above
> 3.5 percent, and the list goes on and on. Salaries and benies are
> way out of whack. If we don't wake up and fly right-- China, Japan,
> Mexico and other third world countries will roll over all of us.
> He__ ! were already being rolled over.

Who Will Supply the Batteries for Plug-In Cars?

Idiot. The ONLY proven battery technology for Electric cars is Nickel Metal Hydride, not Lithium. Auto makers can't use NiMH because GM and Chevron colluded to stop their use in plug-in cars.

On Oct 10, 2000, GM sold control of the worldwide patent rights to NiMH to Texaco. Six days later, on Oct. 16, 2000, Texaco announced it would merge into Chevron. So it wasn't Standard Oil of California (Chevron) and GM directly, there was a dummy intermediary.

In Dec., 2002, Toyota reached an agreement with Chevron, and stopped prodution of the successful Toyota RAV4-EV; no more batteries can be made because Chevron extracted a $30,000,000 settlement from Toyota, and reputedly can only use the batteries for hybrids that can't plug in.

That's why you are deluded into thinking that Lithium is "the most promising". Sure, it's promising, but Toyota RAV4-EV are REAL, not merely promising.

We don't need "research", we need PRODUCTION!

Time for GM to Declare Bankruptcy?

If you're going to keep GM alive only to keep the workers employed, then it's true that you should dictate that the type of cars made must be in the public interest.

That is, plug-in Electric cars, like the EV1, many and different types.

To do this, you have to get rid of failed GM management, losers like Wagoner and Lutz, and implement some directives that new management must keep people working designing the cars that America needs.

No bailout for Wagoner, no bonus, just FIRE WAGONER.

You can't fix a broken company with broken-down failed managers.

Will GM's Volt Change History?

169775: The VOLT battery must be 16 kWh of A123, in order to yield 8 kWh of energy.

This is wasteful, as well as expensive.

The estimate of the Lithium pack for the VOLT is $30,000, that's why it's so expensive.

NiMH would only cost $3000, and you only would need 8 kWh.

Lead-acid would only cost $1600, but it wouldn't last quite as long.

Will GM's Volt Change History?

CORRECTION about the Prius battery: the RETAIL cost of the 78 lb. box is $3000, but the actual battery only costs $700 (not including fan, computer, handshake firmware, case).

Toyota could add 8 kWh of NiMH to the Prius for $3,500, enough to go 40 miles in all-electric mode.

Will GM's Volt Change History?

The VOLT Lithium battery is too heavy and too expensive.

The same weight, 400 lbs., of NiMH would yield 12 kWh, enough to go 60 miles. GM's insistence on using unproven Lithium while ignoring proven NiMH, which still powers the Toyota RAV4-EV over 100 miles, augers ill for the VOLT's future.

It's not "new and revolutionary", there have been 40-mile-range EVs around for a hundred years. All GM did was add a small genset, nothing difficult except anything GM does is wastefull, roundabout and doomed.

Grid-based Energy Storage: Birth of a Giant

Very interesting article. The author made some important errors, but also some important points.

I like the "can-do" attitude, so different from Bush's "save-me" crap.

More thinking like this, start a dialogue on energy!

Impact of GM Destroying the EV1

Miken: GM, Standard Oil and Firestone formed North American Transportation to buy up and dismantle 55 of America's small urban railroads. It's true that they were fined only $5,000 in XI Dist. Court, but it's also true that it's almost impossible to prove restraint of trade, which is what they were really guilty of. If the government had pursued the issue, they could have proved intent to cripple an opposing technology; but they accepted an end to the case with the guilty plea to "failing to provide spare parts" or some such.

The fact that they got away without signifiant legal entanglements is a measure of how successful their campaign was. Certainly, destroying the right-of-way alone was worth their investment; also true, the rail companies didn't do much to fight off the impact of auto and truck traffic, they over-financed their rail units, crippling them with debt (e.g., P.E. and other L.A. lines) and bought oil stocks.

The rail barons, such as Huntington, found more money in OIL.

Impact of GM Destroying the EV1

Juan, to correct your ERRORS: While the EV1 production line stopped in 1998, GM refused to lease them until CARB finally force the first 200 of the "1999" model out in Dec., 1999.

By January, 2000, they had moved about 240 of them. GM still had the rest of the 465 "1999" model left, including both NiMH (140 miles range) and lead (100 to 110 miles range).

GM dribbled them out, a few per month, telling one would-be lessee that he could add his name to the list, but would never get a car since they would run out before they got to his name on the list.

GM finally leased the last of them in 2002; with the election of Bush in 2000, GM was freed from the force of law, and was able to destroy the program. It was, indeed, BUSH and CHENEY who enabled California and the EPA to kill the EV1.