Nissan Leaf
Knoxville to be a test market for Nissan’s Coal-Powered Car.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
January 11th, 2010 at 5:12 pm
ahahahaha! You got me there. I went to the link and saw the “Zero Emissions” on the side and went, “Where does the Coal Go?”
Then I went: “OH I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE!”
That’s as good as the “Mas Exodus” headline!
FYI, my Great Grandfather was always a Car buff (back when most people in his part of Maine still used Horses!)
and one of his cars was some form of Steam car powered by a coal burner. Took a good long while to get it started from his stories.
January 11th, 2010 at 5:14 pm
i can’t take credit for it. i read the line somewhere else a bit back about a prius (iirc) but not sure where.
January 11th, 2010 at 6:33 pm
Now, if it was nuke-powered, maybe I’d go for it, but there’s not much of that going on these days. Stupid moonbats seem to think this #### runs on unicorn farts and won’t add to the “carbon footprint”. In fact (as if carbon dioxide mattered) the “efficiency” of burning the liquid fuel right there in the vehicle is far greater than burning “something” in a plant and sending the energy out through a distribution network all the way to a charging station. So many people, so many clues, so few “gotten”.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
These fools really do believe in unicorns and rainbows. Where the hell do they suppose that all that extra electic power needed to charge those stupid “non-polluting” things is coming from?
January 11th, 2010 at 8:27 pm
Coal or Cola? 🙂
January 11th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
The Stanley Steamer was a coal powered, steam driven car developed especially to make the climb into Estes Park, CO, back in the days when a gas powered vehicle was too underpowered to make it at that altitude, or so I have been told.
This looks like a technological advance being sold through smart marketing to people more interested in a social statement than any engineering sense.
January 11th, 2010 at 9:31 pm
@Mr Evilwrench, actually that’s one thing electric vehicles can have an advantage in, electric vehicles that get their energy from the grid can be more efficient than vehicles that burn fuel in a local power source.
Large electric power generators are typically much more efficient, than piston car engines.
The other big advantage is the amount of torque that electric motors generate.
Now if batteries had a reasonable amount of energy density I might actually care about electric cars.
January 11th, 2010 at 10:41 pm
Can’t wait to see one on the Dragon…
January 12th, 2010 at 12:00 am
Another description I’ve seen is “EEV” – Emissions Elsewhere Vehicle.
January 12th, 2010 at 12:37 am
Stanleys were oil burners, not coal, but prodigious vehicles neverthebye. They needed water, though, lots of it, free, and in 1914 they filled in the troughs. Typhoid. That was the end of the big steamers.
Batteries have not changed much since the 1902 Studebaker’s Exides (Edison owned one!), and are unlikely to in the coming decade. There’s not enough electrical capacity on this continent for even a 50% changeover. Strike three, they found out just this morning at the Detroit show that “100 mile” electrics are good for maybe 60 when it’s cold outside. But the Volts just keep on coming. Now, it’s next summer.
Lithium ion, you say, will set us free from our “foreign addiction”? Say hello to Evo Morales, the Lithium King. Oh yeah, what could go wrong?
January 12th, 2010 at 2:23 am
Actually, if you want to be picky, it’s solar powered, as that there energy stored up in the coal came originally from the sun. I’m using the term “originally” loosely here, as the energy originally came from somewhere else, like walmart.