Connect with us

90 amps for electric car charge!

Discussion in 'Electrical Engineering' started by Bill, Feb 15, 2010.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. krw

    krw Guest

    When we were younger, out "second car" was an old version of the
    "first car". IOW, we kept the old one. Now they're quite different
    vehicles (one car, one truck) for different purposes, in addition to
    commuting. A "second car" costing as much as an electric car is a
    non-starter.
    If you're foolish enough to buy an *expensive* new car as just a
    commuter.
     
  2. Bob F

    Bob F Guest

    LOL! You really just can't figure this out, can you. Well, lots of others are
    telling you the same thing.
     
  3. That glosses over a very important issue. Organic carbon is taken from
    the atmosphere in the form of CO2 converted by plants into sugars,
    cellulose, etc. The key fact is that it's CO2. Convert it to methane,
    and it becomes 20 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than when it was
    CO2.
     
  4. Han

    Han Guest

    wrote in
    Later on in this listing, it states that since 1750, CH4 has almost
    doubled, CO2 has gone up 25%. Therefore, while still a minor fraction
    (and likely to remain so) CH4 is still a gas whose releases probably
    should be controlled. Since the use of natural gas will increase out of
    proportion to other energy sources and that of animal husbandry too,
    let's try at least.
     
  5. [SMF]

    [SMF] Guest

    1) CO2 is given in PPM
    2) CH4 is given in PPB
    3) Thermal conductivity is relative to concentration.
    4) At higher concentrations CH4 can be 70 times as conductive
    5) CO2 is a crappy forcing agent.
    6) CO2 is at an excessivly low concentration, regardless, and used
    to be at levels many times current.
    7) AGW is a fraud. Always has been, always will be.
     
  6. daestrom

    daestrom Guest


    I'll see your wiki article...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential
    (see table of Global Warming Potentials)

    And raise you two EPA citations...
    http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html
    (put in 1 metric ton of methane and the results are 19.1 ton of CO2)

    http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/glossary.html#GWP
    The table to the right of the definition of Global Warming Potential.

    Followed by a chapter of IPCC paper...
    http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch02.pdf
    (see pg 212 for Table 2.14 for Global Warming Potential of methane)


    Your citation only shows the radiative forcing due to the current levels
    of each gas, not the GWP.

    The marginal increase in RF from a unit mass (not molar) release of
    methane versus CO2 is closer to the 20x number than you thought.

    daestrom
     
  7. James Sweet

    James Sweet Guest



    The depressing thing about it all is that whether or not humans are
    responsible for much of the climate change, which I personally believe
    they are, most of what I've heard indicates that even the most dramatic
    things we've done to reduce our impact are but a tiny drop in the bucket
    and it would seem the situation is essentially hopeless. I try to
    minimize my negative impact on the environment in general, not so much
    greenhouse gases but pollution in general, anyone living near a major
    city can see and smell many forms of that. A lot of this "green"
    movement is just token "feel good" stuff that like those various ribbon
    magnets people stick on their car, make people feel like they're part of
    the solution without having to actually *do* anything.
     

  8. The Mayan gods are coming to get you, and there is nothing any of you
    can do about it.
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-