It sure don't look or sound like a Harley, but apparently it is

[GPMAZ]

Seems to me there's a word used to describe someone who rides a motorcycle with one of the largest engines ever stuffed between two wheels, that is one of the most fuel inefficient two wheelers on the road, and at the same time complains about the all the environmental damage from the drilling, transporting and refining of oil.

I just can't think of it at the moment.

 

[Bob R]

At least it makes noise.

bob

 

[ksquared]

20 miles is wildly under the useful commuting range for an EV. Even the most basic ones can do far more than that, and a Tesla with the large power pack has a 265 mile range. Sure, not enough for everyone - just 99% of the population or so I'd guess.

Motorcycles have a size problem to really increase their range - small vehicles can only carry small batteries, but even so the maximum range of a Zero S is 171 miles, easily enough for the commute of almost everyone, especially if one arranges to have charging possibilities while parked at work.

Complex, unsafe, expensive and how do you fire the boiler? Can't burn stuff and pollute with at least. Use electricity to heat the water? Huge efficiency loss compared to using the power directly in an electric motor.

You must own stock in Tesla and Zero. The Zero's range of 171 miles is at a constant 25 MPH. Motorcycle Consumer News (US) did a test and found that it's effective range, which included a loop of roads of 65 MPH and 45 MPH was approximately 85 miles to ZERO function. I DEFY you to demonstrate to me an electric motorcycle with a range of 171 miles at a constant 70 MPH - then we can talk (but only briefly).

As for the Tesla - Oh Goody - a range of 265 miles - at which point I get to charge it for 9 hours (standard) - or one hour, with a $4,500 accessory charger!

The 1924 model Doble Series E steam car could run for 1,500 miles (2,400 km) before its 24-gallon water tank needed to be refilled; even in freezing weather, it could be started from cold and move off within 30 seconds, and once fully warmed could be relied upon to reach speeds in excess of 90 miles per hour (140 km/h). In recent years Doble cars have been run at speeds approaching 120 mph (190 km/h), this without the benefits of streamlining, and a stripped down version of the Series E accelerated from 0 - 75 mph (121 km/h) in 10 seconds.[15][16] Its fuel consumption, burning a variety of fuels (often kerosene), was competitive with automobiles of the day, and its ability to run in eerie silence apart from wind noise gave it a distinct edge. At 70 mph (110 km/h), there was little noticeable vibration, with the engine turning at around 900 rpm. And this is with 1924 technology - a few improvements have been made by then.

 

[cr0ft]

been working in the oilfield for close to 30 years raising my family all I can say is if you don't like the benefits of oil &gas quit using them includes gas/oil for youre bike/cars/heating the house/cooking to start with the extreme basics. let me know if you can make/produce the parts for the thermal/solar energy without the use of any oil/gas

The benefits from oil is what our world is built on, but we can absolutely transition away from a petroleum-based economy. We pretty much have to, because there is now 7.3 billion of us, soon (in a few decades) it will be 9 or 10. The more people who belch carbon and soot into the atmosphere, the lower the chances are that your children and grandchildren will live decent lives.

Though, again respectfully, the argument that "if you don't like it, stop using it" holds no water at all. That's like saying "well, if the air you breathe smells funny, stop breathing". In today's world nobody has a choice of being entirely green because petroleum products are what much of our current activities are built on.

And yes, sure you can produce parts for solar thermal without oil or gas. Just because they're used now doesn't mean they must be, it's just easiest and "cheapest" whatever that means when you're not even counting the cost of the huge damage to our shared world.

 

[cr0ft]

As for the Tesla - Oh Goody - a range of 265 miles - at which point I get to charge it for 9 hours (standard) - or one hour, with a $4,500 accessory charger!

Why would that be any kind of problem, assuming the 265 is enough for your day, as it would be for almost everybody who wasn't wasting their lives by throwing away hours of their day on commuting?

Last I checked, I routinely have 9 hours of downtime every night. We like to call that "sleeping" where I'm from.

Also, you can charge the car in 30 minutes with one of the (currently free) "Superchargers" that Tesla is installing around the countryside. Is 30 minutes as convenient as the 10 minutes it can take to fuel up and pay for the fuel for a giant American SUV? Nope, it's slightly less convenient, but there are still improvements to be made.

The 1924 model Doble Series E steam car.... (snip)... Its fuel consumption, burning a variety of fuels (often kerosene), was competitive with automobiles of the day...

That is very interesting, and I'm sure steam cars are cool.

Also, completely irrelevant if we put the most important factor first - sustainability. If you have to burn as much kerosene to fuel them as you have to burn gasoline to power a normal car, you're still doing just as much eco damage with the steam cars.

The only tech we can entertain for the future starts with the question "Is it clean?" and goes from there. Steam doesn't seem to pass that most basic criterion.

 

[Idaho Red Rocket 3]

WHAT ! No more Potato - Potato ? I'm from Idaho. Now it is going to be silent woosh - woosh. Can H-D patent that sound too ?

 

[Idaho Red Rocket 3]

WHAT ! No more Potato - Potato ? I'm from Idaho. Now it is going to be silent woosh - woosh. Can H-D patent that sound too ?

 

[Idaho Red Rocket 3]

WHAT ! No more Potato - Potato ? I'm from Idaho. Now it is going to be silent woosh - woosh. Can H-D patent that sound too ?

 

[cr0ft]

Seems to me there's a word used to describe someone who rides a motorcycle with one of the largest engines ever stuffed between two wheels, that is one of the most fuel inefficient two wheelers on the road, and at the same time complains about the all the environmental damage from the drilling, transporting and refining of oil.

I just can't think of it at the moment.

You mean "hypocrite", and I don't think I am. Sure, the Rocket sucks up a lot of gas, but still less than the average car. But also, like many others I'm not willing to give up my main hobby or the ability to do longer touring simply because there is no clean technology yet that can do it.

As I said, there are no motorcycles yet that you can go touring on, because the infrastructure that is there for gas vehicles is not there for battery vehicles.

That's why I think it's crucial that change comes from the top down. Replace roads with maglev based PRT systems, or at least add those as well so public transit becomes convenient and faster than cars. Push on making electric vehicles more and more practical and so on.

Motorcycles and cars are horrible things for our shared planet. Even so, I love mine and like so many others won't give it up until I have to. Which is why the notion that people will voluntarily change to something less convenient is nonsense, the only way to clean up our act is to make it more convenient to not pollute. We have a long way to go there yet, and the fact that huge oil and coal interests and greedy swine like the Koch brothers are actively preventing that progress isn't helping.

 

[ksquared]

Why would that be any kind of problem, assuming the 265 is enough for your day, as it would be for almost everybody who wasn't wasting their lives by throwing away hours of their day on commuting?

Last I checked, I routinely have 9 hours of downtime every night. We like to call that "sleeping" where I'm from.

Also, you can charge the car in 30 minutes with one of the (currently free) "Superchargers" that Tesla is installing around the countryside. Is 30 minutes as convenient as the 10 minutes it can take to fuel up and pay for the fuel for a giant American SUV? Nope, it's slightly less convenient, but there are still improvements to be made.



That is very interesting, and I'm sure steam cars are cool.

Also, completely irrelevant if we put the most important factor first - sustainability. If you have to burn as much kerosene to fuel them as you have to burn gasoline to power a normal car, you're still doing just as much eco damage with the steam cars.

The only tech we can entertain for the future starts with the question "Is it clean?" and goes from there. Steam doesn't seem to pass that most basic criterion.

I can't be sure if you are really this dense or if you're doing it just for the sake of argument and desire to pull our collective chain.

Going back to the Tesla, IF one assumes that it has a usable range of 260 miles, that means that your operating radius is only 130 miles at 65 MPH, that is, if you plan to get back to where you began in the same day. So, you can operate your Tesla for only 4 hours per day before having to spend 9 hours per day charging it for use the next day.

The only person who would dismiss the length of time it take to charge a Tesla is one who has never had to place a value on his or her time (or have it placed there by others, say, employers). Time is a more important resource that energy, even "green" energy, as once expended you cannot obtain more of it. I don't have 30 minutes to waste every time I want to refuel my car.

And as for these "superchargers" that Tesla is installing ". . . around the countryside . . ." - it's going to be interesting to see how many Tesla can install in order to satisfy demand. Its one thing to install them around the countryside of a country the size of Finland - but quite another to dot the landscape of the US with enough of them to permit the 30 minute recharging you rhapsodize about. And we both know that once they're installed - NO ONE is going to allow them to be used for free; investments have to be recouped. You're living in a frigging dream world if you think that a majority of drivers are going to give up their cars and hop into Teslas anytime soon, absent the kind of battery breakthrough necessary to make such vehicles practical.

Regarding steam - you don't seem to "get it". A steam boiler doesn't care a lick about what is being burned to heat its boiler. One could use straight grain alcohol and not bother with petroleum distillates at all. Or a battery operated heating element. Both are completely renewable and "green".