Rafbílar 2 samtíningur

Samtíningur

Ég setti þetta á bloggið fyrr á árinu.

Piltar, þið eigið að styðja Landsvirkjun og Rarik, við eigum að eiga orkulindirnar
sjálfir.

Það er mjög athygli vert að öll umræða um rafbílinn er einskorðuð við smábíla og reynt að koma því inn að það vanti rafgeyma.

Ef ég man rétt, þarf aðeins tiltölulega litla virkjun fyrir allan
bílaflotan.

Lesið greinina í Morgunblaðinu,

ÁL - MÁLMUR ORKUNNAR,

Boris Birshtein keypti fyrirtækið og hefur ekki leyft notkun á orku
sellunni.

http://www.mbl.is/greinasafn/grein/609466/?item_num=0&searchid=ad31f09a3a0f2b1be67699136691b567f8a20848

Hér er sæmilegur rafbíll,
http://www.repp.org/discussion/ev/200007/msg00326.html (ónýtur linkur)

http://www.printedmotorworks.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBvOMXDEzQ

*****

http://www.europositron.com/en/background.html (ónýtur linkur)

A good example of the difference the Partanen Technology would have is EV 1 by General Motors. (EV 1, er rafmagns-bíllinn sem GM smíðaði á síðustu öld)

The total weight of the car without batteries is 816 kg.

With the batteries the weight goes to 1550 kg.

The power supply consists of 26 Lead-Acid batteries of 53 Ah each, which weigh 736 kg i.e. almost half of the total weight of the car.

Without recharge the EV 1 runs 145 km on highway and in city traffic about 115 km.

With a Partanen technology battery weighing 60 kg, and with a volume 40 liters it would have a capacity of 80 kWh.

Installed in a 816 kg EV 1 it could run 870 km on highway and 690 km in the city traffic.

Ef við tíföldum stærðina á álgeymnum í 600 kg, (blýgeymirinn var 736 kg), þá tífaldast vegalengdin sem hægt er að fara á rafmagni.

Þá er hægt að aka á rafmagni, 8700 km á þjóðvegi, eða 6900 km í borgarakstri.

****

Hér skin í gegn að General Motors og Toyota gera aðeins það sem
olíulindaeigendur, sem eru eigendur hlutabréfanna segja, að bílarnir eigi að
nota bensín eða olíu. Olíulinda eigendur eiga líka einkaleyfin og fóru í
mál við þá sem ætluðu að nota rafgeyma þar sem einkaleyfin voru í þeirra
eigu. Það eru fjöldi þjóða sem lifir á því að olían sé í háu verði.

*******************

Í dag, 02.01.2009, þekkist það að Toyota Raf 4
rafmagnsbílar framleiddir 1998 til 2002, eru búnir að aka yfir 150.000
mílur, og allt er í besta lagi, bill og rafhlöður

***********************

Hér fyrir neðan eru sýnishorn af umræðu á netinu. hvort ég má sýna þetta veit ég ekki.

******************

8.
21/Jun/2008
[62309] Hardly Toyota's fault crushing them, given the outcome of the
lawsuit by the "large oil company" against Panasonic, which made the
batteries used in both the RAV and Prius. Toyotaprobably had little or no
choice in the matter. The Prius is one thing: all the energy it uses
ultimately comes from oil. A car that does NOT use oil is another thing
entirely...
Posted by: Ben C:

10.
21/Jun/2008
[62311] What did Toyotalearn from the Rav4EV experience? The answer,
apparently, was that Toyotamade the car last too long.

11.
21/Jun/2008
[62313] Don't you just LOVE interviews with corporate shills who obviously
know nothing about that which they blather on and on about? Don't you just
LOVE that they still say batteries aren't here yet, though Henry Ford
himself put his wife in an EV as he thought they were safer and more
reliable than his ICE cars. The only thing that amazes me more than the
reach of the oil industry, is the American public's refusal to believe that
all modern wars are fought for oil. We waste. They profit. Every night I
pray to God for $10/gal. gas as that's obviously the only thing that will
wake Americans up enough to demand the technology that's been sitting on
the shelf for the last forty years. Don't forget GE had a freeway capable
EV in 1965- but their two largest customers convinced them to not bring it
to market. And those two industries were?...the US auto and oil industries.
Posted by: J. Marvin Campbell:

12.

21/Jun/2008
[62317] Gary Smith, And ALL of the Toyota officer / directors. SHAME on
you for mearly following GM: 1) Suing CARB (as did GM), so you that you
didn't have to build EV's anymore. Just think how far of a lead you'd have,
if you hadn't simply followed GM's processes. 2) Not even researching you
own owner's experiences so you'd learn more about your own EV product (just
like GM). Poor Gary Smith has to give inaccurate interviews, on your
behalf, because of this silliy policy. It's as though you're ASHAMED of
your own great product, simply because GM never wanted to build the EV1.

****

3) Letting ownership of the best deap cycle battery in these EV's
(Panasonic E95) be snapped up by GM, so that (patents) they'd ultimately
end up being sold to / owned by Chevron, who'd rather SUE Toyota if they
try to make more E95's for the RAV4-EV, rather than let them compete with
their oil product(s). Chevron's action, rather than being branded as a
criminals, just sits on the patent, doing NOTHING with it ... even as their
oil products become more and more scarse.

****

4) Had it not been for GM
claiming they were trying to perfect hybrids over 10 years ago, Toyota
likely wouldn't have bothered to enter the game, and managing somehow
(dispite Toyota's 'follow GM, what ever they do' mentality) to end up being
the world-dominant leader of the hybrid product. So COME ON Toyota, you're
getting a 'free-pass' due to hybrids, but if the oil crisis hadn't begun
yet, you'd still be mimicing GM. Don't waste the free pass! BRING BACK EV's
before GM wakes out of its stupid mode.
Posted by: Gary Hill:

13.
22/Jun/2008
[62327] What a bunch of LIES! The price of Nickel is higher, but Nickel
RECYCLES for high price, too. Most Ni is used in stainless steel, monel and
other common metals, so there's a LOT of it. Toyota stopped making the EV-
95 battery after Chevron acquired control of the worldwide patent rights
(from GM) on Oct. 10-16, 2000, and sued Toyota, extracting $30 million in
penalties and forcing Toyota to stop making the RAV4-EV and the EV-95
batteries. The last 328 RAV4-EV were sold to the public, ENDING in Nov.,
2002, so ALL RAV4-EV are more than 5 years old! To say that they stopped
making it because the battery is too expensive is just a blatant lie!
Lithium is MUCH more expensive than the EV-95; and Toyota, if it were
honest, would sell more of these batteries, because after perhaps 200,000
miles the RAV4-EV will be needing a replacement pack. Thus, the RAV4-EV
battery lasts longer than the life of the vehicle, even a Toyota vehicle.
Why so many lies? Toyotajust lies, like GM?
Posted by: Doug Korthof:

******************

Í dag, 19.09.2009 eru Toyota Raf 4
rafmagnsbílar búnir að aka yfir 150.000 mílur

Og allt er í besta lagi, bill
og rafhlöður

*******************

Flestum af þessum ca. 8000 til 10000 rafbílum, Fordum, GM, Chrysler og Toyotasem voru framleiddir 1998 til 2002 var eytt.

Upp úr 1980 framleiddi GM rafbíl sem mengaði ekkert.

Þessar fréttir urðu til að í Californiu voru sett lög um að 2% af bílum framleiddum 2002 skildu vera mengunarlausir, svo kom hærri prósenta nokkrum árum seinna og svo framvegis.

Hagsmunaaðilum, eigendur olíulinda, tókst að fella þessi lög úr gildi 2002, þeir einfaldlega fóru í þingmenn og spurðu, ætlar þú að styðja okkur eða eigum við að hjálpa Jóni að fella þig.

Ég er ekki viss um hvað ég má sýna frá öðrum.

Egilsstaðir, 19.09.2009 jg