Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Government Intrusion (Score 1) 825

by codealot (#49736815) Attached to: Oregon Testing Pay-Per-Mile Driving Fee To Replace Gas Tax

That's part of it. Suspension design also affects wear-and-tear, as does heavy braking or acceleration. And the average number of passengers in a vehicle is probably a bigger factor than anything else in vehicle weight, which doesn't get included into these costs.

Okay, so the "unfair" commentary is a little bit of flame-bait. But I'm astonished at the level of scorn I've seen on EV drivers in public forums. Many EV drivers have already spent far more than other drivers trying to help the environment, paying more for their vehicles (and thus higher sales tax), installing charging stations/solar panels, etc. And some people are fiercely opposed to the $7500 federal tax refunds on ideological grounds. I live in a state where politicians seemingly want us EV drivers not just to pay our fair share for road use, the proposed legislation would have had us pay considerably higher taxes than for other, similar vehicles.

Comment: Are gas taxes solely for road repair? (Score 1) 825

by codealot (#49736597) Attached to: Oregon Testing Pay-Per-Mile Driving Fee To Replace Gas Tax

I got into an ideological debate on another forum over whether fuel taxes exist solely for road maintenance, or also as a disincentive for consumption due to environmental concerns and preservation of natural resources (oil reserves). There are strong arguments on both sides. On the one hand the money today goes to roads (or is supposed to) and not the environment, on the other if we don't care about pollution we may as well tax by miles driven or vehicle weight, or both.

Comment: Re:No. (Score 2) 507

by codealot (#49690577) Attached to: Is Agile Development a Failing Concept?

That's it, exactly. You can use agile to weed out developers who can't think for themselves, who really are of no use in a development team anyway.

The methodology debate kind of misses the point. Agile is no silver bullet. A high-functioning team can be successful with agile, or with various other methodologies for that matter.

A dysfunctional team isn't going to succeed with agile, or with anything else.

Comment: Re:Does This Make Sense? (Score 1) 318

by codealot (#49646729) Attached to: Tesla To Unveil Its $35,000 Model 3 In March 2016

This is where you are dead wrong. Please don't state as fact your opinions that are not based on research.

That's not opinion; it's physics.

Are you ignoring my point or do you really not get it? Of course some efficiency is lost when converting energy from one form to another. What I am telling you is that FAR MORE energy is lost burning gasoline to obtain mechanical energy than storing electricity to drive an electric motor.

The OP was stating the obvious, but the implication was that electrical cars lose more energy than ICE vehicles, which is far from true.

I know this probably doesn't make enough of a difference to matter; but did you know that, as motor windings heat up, the resistance goes up; and as the resistance goes up, the heat goes up.

Yes, all circuits have resistance. But the heat lost in most electrical circuits is far far less than the heat from a gasoline motor.

BTW, since I drive about 42 miles a day to work and back, I would get REAL tired of always worrying about finding an outlet at each end of the journey, especially since it would be basically impossible at the "work" end.

The Chevy Volt is made for drivers like you. Plug in where you can, burn gas if necessary.


Comment: Re:Does This Make Sense? (Score 1) 318

by codealot (#49641891) Attached to: Tesla To Unveil Its $35,000 Model 3 In March 2016

"And worse yet, losing overall efficiency in the process."

This is where you are dead wrong. Please don't state as fact your opinions that are not based on research.

My Volt is about 4x more efficient running on electricity than a similar ICE car. A gallon of gas is equivalent to 33 kWh of energy, and will propel a compact sedan for 30+ miles (let's say one mile per kWh just to round off the numbers).

Driving my Volt around town, I get on average 4 miles per kWh. The battery capacity on a full charge is 11 kWh, good for 40-50 miles of driving.

The reason for this is that the electric motor is far more efficient at converting stored energy into mechanical energy. For one thing, very little energy is wasted as heat.

The power utilities are also much more efficient at converting fossil fuels into stored energy or mechanical than your portable generator or gas-powered vehicle due to efficiencies of scale.

This is why EV's are so compelling--they are literally a breakthrough in efficiency.

Comment: Article is really about hybrids (Score 2) 622

by codealot (#49530723) Attached to: Cheap Gas Fuels Switch From Electric Cars To SUVs

The actual article is titled "Hybrid and Electric Vehicles Struggle to Maintain Owner Loyalty". Shame on Slashdot for not getting even the title correct, since it has little bearing on electric vehicles.

The example in the article claims a 10-year payback at current fuel prices for a Toyota Camry hybrid. It doesn't say how many miles/year that is based on but I've tried to recreate the calculation, and I think it must have been 13,000 miles/year driving, which is far fewer than some people drive. And this is based on 41 MPG combined for the hybrid model compared to 28 MPG for the standard Camry, a difference of just 13. (This gap widens to 18 if you do mostly city driving.)

And worse, no comparable example is quoted for electric vehicles, which can have an effective MPG in triple digits. Given that some EV's are not much more than similar hybrids in cost these days, EV's offer a far better value proposition. Pure hybrids aren't that attractive for either environmental or cost reasons, given that the mileage improvements are modest over their standard counterparts. I wouldn't be surprised if some hybrid owners were trading in for SUV's, but I'd also expect to see hybrid owners trading for pure EV's. Hybrids without charging ability or significant battery storage are going to get squeezed out of the market.

(Disclaimer: I drive a Chevy Volt, and I love my car.)

Comment: Stop worrying about "waste". (Score 2) 370

by codealot (#49424261) Attached to: How the Pentagon Wasted $10 Billion On Military Projects

Oh dear, an economic/political rant on Slashdot...

The US cannot go bankrupt. We are a sovereign nation that issues its own currency. Get over it.

This "waste" creates jobs and spurs R&D. It inflates our money supply at a time when the economy is sluggish, and boosts the private sector. Why are people complaining?

If you think taxpayers are funding this "waste", you're wrong. Taxpayers pay taxes, that's it. Unless the budget is balanced there's no association between federal spending and revenue, they are just two different dollar totals on the books. (And I'm not advocating balancing the budget simply to curtail spending.)

If you think our children (or grandchildren, great-grandchildren etc.) are going to have to pay off this debt, that's also incorrect. Federal debt is always serviced by issuing more currency.

I'm not saying the government can spend without limit, but there are no hard limits. The practical limits are set by inflation rates and real resources. At present, real resources are abundant and inflation is low. So let's raise spending. If we reach 99% employment and inflation sets in, we can curtail government spending.

This isn't solely my view--lookup Modern Money Theory. Many economists understand these principles of a fiat currency. Few politicians do, unfortunately, and they like to throw around words like "debt" and "waste" without understanding their meaning.

E = MC ** 2 +- 3db