[meadandale]

“Do any of you think we’ll get to the point where electric cars are a viable alternative?”

Electric cars are already an alternative in most cases in that they have produced cars that get 100+ miles to a charge which is sufficient for round trip commuting for most people.

However, there are a number of things to consider with electric cars.

Electric cars are NOT non-polluting, they just move the pollution source to the power plant. Most power plants in the US are still using coal and natural gas. While power plants are more efficient and cleaner than car engines, they STILL pollute, especially the dreaded GW pollutant of choice–carbon dioxide.

There is also a real threat of a lithium shortage in the next few decades and since most EV’s currently use lithium batteries, well you do the math.

Finally, remember the power shortages a few years ago in California? With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?

In the long run (at least with current technology) we should be developing a hydrogen economy. Hydrogen allows us to effectively store electricity without the need for batteries. Since all electricity in the US is typically generated and used immediately, this allows us to capture wave, solar, geothermal, wind and any other renewable power source and use it to drive electrolysis of water to generate the hydrogen.

Electric vehicles, hybrids..these are just delaying the inevitable.

[meadandale]

“Do any of you think we’ll get to the point where electric cars are a viable alternative?”

Electric cars are already an alternative in most cases in that they have produced cars that get 100+ miles to a charge which is sufficient for round trip commuting for most people.

However, there are a number of things to consider with electric cars.

Electric cars are NOT non-polluting, they just move the pollution source to the power plant. Most power plants in the US are still using coal and natural gas. While power plants are more efficient and cleaner than car engines, they STILL pollute, especially the dreaded GW pollutant of choice–carbon dioxide.

There is also a real threat of a lithium shortage in the next few decades and since most EV’s currently use lithium batteries, well you do the math.

Finally, remember the power shortages a few years ago in California? With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?

In the long run (at least with current technology) we should be developing a hydrogen economy. Hydrogen allows us to effectively store electricity without the need for batteries. Since all electricity in the US is typically generated and used immediately, this allows us to capture wave, solar, geothermal, wind and any other renewable power source and use it to drive electrolysis of water to generate the hydrogen.

Electric vehicles, hybrids..these are just delaying the inevitable.

[meadandale]

“Do any of you think we’ll get to the point where electric cars are a viable alternative?”

Electric cars are already an alternative in most cases in that they have produced cars that get 100+ miles to a charge which is sufficient for round trip commuting for most people.

However, there are a number of things to consider with electric cars.

Electric cars are NOT non-polluting, they just move the pollution source to the power plant. Most power plants in the US are still using coal and natural gas. While power plants are more efficient and cleaner than car engines, they STILL pollute, especially the dreaded GW pollutant of choice–carbon dioxide.

There is also a real threat of a lithium shortage in the next few decades and since most EV’s currently use lithium batteries, well you do the math.

Finally, remember the power shortages a few years ago in California? With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?

In the long run (at least with current technology) we should be developing a hydrogen economy. Hydrogen allows us to effectively store electricity without the need for batteries. Since all electricity in the US is typically generated and used immediately, this allows us to capture wave, solar, geothermal, wind and any other renewable power source and use it to drive electrolysis of water to generate the hydrogen.

Electric vehicles, hybrids..these are just delaying the inevitable.

[meadandale]

“Do any of you think we’ll get to the point where electric cars are a viable alternative?”

Electric cars are already an alternative in most cases in that they have produced cars that get 100+ miles to a charge which is sufficient for round trip commuting for most people.

However, there are a number of things to consider with electric cars.

Electric cars are NOT non-polluting, they just move the pollution source to the power plant. Most power plants in the US are still using coal and natural gas. While power plants are more efficient and cleaner than car engines, they STILL pollute, especially the dreaded GW pollutant of choice–carbon dioxide.

There is also a real threat of a lithium shortage in the next few decades and since most EV’s currently use lithium batteries, well you do the math.

Finally, remember the power shortages a few years ago in California? With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?

In the long run (at least with current technology) we should be developing a hydrogen economy. Hydrogen allows us to effectively store electricity without the need for batteries. Since all electricity in the US is typically generated and used immediately, this allows us to capture wave, solar, geothermal, wind and any other renewable power source and use it to drive electrolysis of water to generate the hydrogen.

Electric vehicles, hybrids..these are just delaying the inevitable.

[meadandale]

One thing I’ve always liked about Temecula is that you can be in the ‘sticks’ after a 10 minute drive.

I grew up in the Santa Ynez Valley north of Santa Barbara and I’ve always liked a semi-rural atmosphere.

[meadandale]

One thing I’ve always liked about Temecula is that you can be in the ‘sticks’ after a 10 minute drive.

I grew up in the Santa Ynez Valley north of Santa Barbara and I’ve always liked a semi-rural atmosphere.

[meadandale]

One thing I’ve always liked about Temecula is that you can be in the ‘sticks’ after a 10 minute drive.

I grew up in the Santa Ynez Valley north of Santa Barbara and I’ve always liked a semi-rural atmosphere.

[meadandale]

One thing I’ve always liked about Temecula is that you can be in the ‘sticks’ after a 10 minute drive.

I grew up in the Santa Ynez Valley north of Santa Barbara and I’ve always liked a semi-rural atmosphere.

[meadandale]

One thing I’ve always liked about Temecula is that you can be in the ‘sticks’ after a 10 minute drive.

I grew up in the Santa Ynez Valley north of Santa Barbara and I’ve always liked a semi-rural atmosphere.

[meadandale]

Based on the original post, it didn’t sound like you had more than about $100k ‘liquid’. I don’t see any situation in which, even with cash, you are going to be able to buy anything for $100k even in a distressed sale.

Double or triple that and you might have a case. Of course, at that point, you are basically paying a mortgage payment on your money.

Good luck with that….

[meadandale]

Based on the original post, it didn’t sound like you had more than about $100k ‘liquid’. I don’t see any situation in which, even with cash, you are going to be able to buy anything for $100k even in a distressed sale.

Double or triple that and you might have a case. Of course, at that point, you are basically paying a mortgage payment on your money.

Good luck with that….

[meadandale]

Based on the original post, it didn’t sound like you had more than about $100k ‘liquid’. I don’t see any situation in which, even with cash, you are going to be able to buy anything for $100k even in a distressed sale.

Double or triple that and you might have a case. Of course, at that point, you are basically paying a mortgage payment on your money.

Good luck with that….

[meadandale]

Based on the original post, it didn’t sound like you had more than about $100k ‘liquid’. I don’t see any situation in which, even with cash, you are going to be able to buy anything for $100k even in a distressed sale.

Double or triple that and you might have a case. Of course, at that point, you are basically paying a mortgage payment on your money.

Good luck with that….

[meadandale]

Based on the original post, it didn’t sound like you had more than about $100k ‘liquid’. I don’t see any situation in which, even with cash, you are going to be able to buy anything for $100k even in a distressed sale.

Double or triple that and you might have a case. Of course, at that point, you are basically paying a mortgage payment on your money.

Good luck with that….

[meadandale]

“I think that word “equity” is the key here. Without equity, there’s no line of credit.”

Which essentially means that you are borrowing against your house.

Dave Ramsey, who’s advice can be good and bad, implores people to pay off their house rather than use the money for investments. He asks, “Would you borrow money against your house to play the stock market?”. Most people immediately respond in the negative. Apparently a couple of people here haven’t gotten the memo.

Hopefully ocrenter won’t be posting about them in the near future.

[Author]

Posts