[handlewanker]

If the truth be really known, the Third World depends entirely on the West for ALL it's money and sales of oil.

Without the Western money to buy the oil (the Arabs don't know what to do with), the Third World would be even "Thirder" than it is now.

I applaud JH for revealing his crystal ball revelations, but B.O'B didn't seem to notice, so another fine mess was avoided for the good 'ol boys in the US, and the Egyptians can do their own thing unaided by Western interference.

What puzzles me is JH forgot to plug his LCD crystal ball in and so missed the opportunity to pre-empt the news media on the Libyan uprising....perhaps there are greater things to be revealed and JH is saving them for another time.

Let's see, there must be dozens if not more of those tin pot "Oil kingdoms" about to follow the lead of THE NEW WORLD ORDER, 'cos with the Middle East boiling up, things just aint gonna be the same ever again.....and the CIA can't claim credit for "liberating" those places either.

If'n the Middle East New Order decides to cut supply of oil to the West to "preserve" it for their own use, maybe, and only just maybe, that will lead to a definite move to go Green by the West and forever cut their reliance on a hostile power that has for many years dictated their terms willy nilly.

We may yet see the glimmer of candles burning in the windows once again, welcoming the men home from toiling in the fields and pastures for a dollar a day, and perhaps a bowl of rice too if'n they're lucky.
Ian.

[jhowelb]

yep, activating the ignore button again. not one ineligible word ever gonna come from there unless it is cut and paste and THEN it would be a freakin' insult of some kind.

no brain, no common sense, no connection and from here out; no attention either.

[LatheMaster]

Everybody doesnt believe in global warming . Thats probly cause it has a stupid name . Global warming means climate change . We , in california , have recieved over 700" of snow this year . It is a new record . We have had 3 tornados touch down and do damage in the past 2 weeks . Had 2 very heavy hail storms which isnt too out of the ordinary but its almost April .

I am probly one of the biggest advocates for using alternative energy . We will always buy oil no matter what . We use it for lubrication , plastic , clothing products and more . We need to start mass producing fully electric cars and natural gas powered vehicles for everyday drivers . We need to be the ones to cut off the middle east not them . Its ignorant people that have stalled the car industry , in its efforts change , with there glass half empty mentality . Luckily companies like Ford and Nissan have seen that some do want a change and are doing something about it .

[infantry11b]

ok i looked it up - nothing about how often the parts need to be replaced, how long the cables last, or - how it will effect fish life. yes i said fish life. you seem to forget that some more loonies think that powerlines in the ocean kill fish and hurt whales; just like some think that windmills actually kill birds.

so you different environmental groups will need to get that straight before you make us spend billions on this one; especially if the reason is the unproved THEORY of man made global warming.

but we know what happens if you shoot electricity into water and to anything in the water - so tell us what happens when one of those breaks and you starting releasing MILLIONS of watts of power at whatever amp's into that water? how far will the kill zone be? does that mean that no people can be in the water for how many miles from the cable or turbine?

we have long since learned that electricity and water are not a good mix - want wind power - keep it dry.

Actually the wind power is a funtion of turbine radius squared, and wind speed cubed.

There are plenty of direct drive turbines already in service and providing commercial returns. And there are plenty of ocean installed turbines in use and providing commercially viable returns. Check out Denmark.

infantry11b-

Man has been developing and using reliable underwater cables since the early days of telegraphy with undersea cabling. The technology these days is MUCH better.

[handlewanker]

I don't think the "kill zone" will extend too far from the cable(s), seeing as how the cable(s) will probably be on the bottom and electricity likes to find it's way to earth by the shortest route.

Power generation under water!!!!!....this is one the electrical engineers are going to shake their heads on.

It's bad enough having power lines above the ground on high pylons, but one of the reasons is the power generated is stepped up to many thousands of volts to cut losses over a distance, (and reduce the diam of cables) and that will get the electrical engineers all hot and bothered when the call for undersea high tension cables is made.

A cable, 1 kilometre offshore, would resist so much low tension voltage that the windmill (whatever) would be hard pressed to make any power worth transmitting.
Ian.

[LatheMaster]

You know we were talking over hardwire line for years with Europe . Telephone lines carry voltage . We were hardwired to europe in 1866 to comunicate via telegraph . I see no great level of difficulty in underwater power harvesting . Its already being done anyhow . If I remember correctly they were doing some testing on the Hudson River too .

Wave energy generation moves toward underwater grid link - UPI.com

[infantry11b]

a phone line carries a lot less energy than a 10 million watt power plant.

You know we were talking over hardwire line for years with Europe . Telephone lines carry voltage . We were hardwired to europe in 1866 to comunicate via telegraph . I see no great level of difficulty in underwater power harvesting . Its already being done anyhow . If I remember correctly they were doing some testing on the Hudson River too .

Wave energy generation moves toward underwater grid link - UPI.com

[RomanLini]

...
but we know what happens if you shoot electricity into water and to anything in the water - so tell us what happens when one of those breaks and you starting releasing MILLIONS of watts of power at whatever amp's into that water? how far will the kill zone be? does that mean that no people can be in the water for how many miles from the cable or turbine?
...

I'm not an expert in underwater cabling but from the small amount I do know;1; they monitor all 'leakage" of electricity into the water, which should be zero at all times, and 2; in the event of a catastrophic cable failure with a large energy dump they always protect the hardware with circuit breakers so all power would be turned off within a fraction of a second.

Not necessarily to protect the poor fish, but to protect millions of dollars worth of equipment.

Don't think these undersea cables are like anything you have seen, they are very sophisticated and among the most reliable of cables ever devised.

Sorry for the long list, but here is a snip from Wiki about undersea power cables;

Alternating current cables

Alternating-current (AC) submarine cable systems for transmitting lower amounts of three phase electric power can be constructed with three-core cables in which all three insulated conductors are placed into a single underwater cable. Most offshore-to-shore wind-farm cables are constructed this way.

For larger amounts of transmitted power, the AC systems are composed of three separate single-core underwater cables, each containing just one insulated conductor and carrying one phase of the three-phase electric current. A fourth identical cable is often added in parallel with the other three, simply as a spare in case one of the three primary cables is damaged and needs to be replaced. This damage can happen, for example, from a ship's anchor carelessly dropped onto it. The fourth cable can substitute for any one of the other three, given the proper (and complicated) electrical switching system.
Mainland British Columbia to Nelson Island to Texada Island to Vancouver Island, the destination of the power. This is a high-capacity 500 kilovolt (kV) three-phase system.
Mainland Sweden to Bornholm Island, Denmark (110 kilovolts, but some sources state 72 kV).
Under the Strait of Messina, connecting southern tip of the mainland of Italy with the large island of Sicily (380 kV). This submarine cable replaced an earlier, and very long overhead line crossing (the "Pylons of Messina")
Negros Island to Panay Island, in the Philippines (138 kV)
[edit]
Direct current cables
Baltic-Cable - between Germany and Sweden beneath the Baltic Sea
Basslink - between the mainland State of Victoria and the island of Tasmania, Australia, 500 kilovolts (kV), with a length of 290 kilometers beneath the Bass Strait[citation needed]
BritNed - between the Netherlands and Great Britain beneath the North Sea
Cross Sound Cable - between Long Island, New York, and the State of Connecticut beneath Long Island Sound[citation needed]
Estlink - between northern Estonia and southern Finland beneath the Gulf of Finland
Fenno-Skan - between Sweden and Finland beneath the Baltic Sea
HVDC Cross-Channel - very high power cable between the French mainland and the island of Great Britain beneath the English Channel
HVDC Gotland - the first HVDC submarine power cable (non-experimental) - between the Swedish mainland and the Swedish island of Gotland beneath the Baltic Sea
HVDC Inter-Island - between the power-rich South Island (much hydroelectric power) of New Zealand and the more-populous North Island beneath the Cook Strait
HVDC Italy-Corsica-Sardinia (SACOI) - between the Italian mainland, the Italian island of Sardinia, and its neighboring French island of Corsica beneath the Mediterranean Sea[citation needed]
HVDC Italy-Greece - between Italy and Greece beneath the Adriatic Sea[citation needed]
HVDC Leyte - Luzon - between Leyte Island and Luzon in the Philippines, beneath the Pacific Ocean[citation needed]
HVDC Moyle - connecting Scotland with Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom, and thence to the Republic of Ireland, beneath the Irish Sea
HVDC Vancouver Island - between Vancouver Island and the mainland of the Province of British Columbia, beneath the Strait of Juan de Fuca
Kii Channel HVDC system - now (2010) the world's highest-capacity long-distance submarine power cable (rated at 1400 megawatts). This power cable connects the large islands of Honshu and Shikoku beneath the Kii Channel in the Japanese Home Islands
Kontek - between Germany and Denmark beneath the Baltic Sea
Konti-Skan - between Sweden and Denmark beneath the Baltic Sea[citation needed]
Neptune Cable - between the State of New Jersey and Long Island, New York - 64 miles beneath the Atlantic Ocean[2]
Swepol - between Poland and Sweden beneath the Baltic Sea
[edit]
Longest
NorNed (between Eemshaven, Netherlands and Feda, Norway), HVDC, 700 MW, 580 km (360 mi)[4]
[edit]
Proposed submarine power cables
Champlain Hudson Power Express, 335-mile line. The Transmission Developers Company of Toronto, Ontario, is proposing "to use the [ Hudson River ] for the most ambitious underwater transmission project yet. Beginning south of Montreal, a 335-mile line would run along the bottom of Lake Champlain, [and then] down the bed of the Hudson all the way to New York City."[3]
Power Bridge, Hawaii[1]
Power Bridge, State of Maine[1]
Puerto Rico to the Virgin Islands[4]
400 kV HVDC India to Sri Lanka[5]
Atlantic Wind Connection between Delaware and New Jersey, potentially between Virginia and New York[6]
100 megawatts 165 km Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador and province of Nova Scotia[7]
200 megawatts 95 km Magħtab (Malta) and Marina the Ragusa (Sicily)[8]

[infantry11b]

Thank you for the information, and I imagine that the odds of having a short and shoot 10 million watts into the surrounding environment would be a lot more than having one of the largest recorded earthquakes in the last 300 years hit your nuke plant, followed by a wave 77.4 feet hight which knocks out your back up systems so that water does not flow through the cooling system.

ocean water is very corrosive and that is the way it goes.

and if it was cost effective we would be doing it now.

I'm not an expert in underwater cabling but from the small amount I do know;1; they monitor all 'leakage" of electricity into the water, which should be zero at all times, and 2; in the event of a catastrophic cable failure with a large energy dump they always protect the hardware with circuit breakers so all power would be turned off within a fraction of a second.

Not necessarily to protect the poor fish, but to protect millions of dollars worth of equipment.

Don't think these undersea cables are like anything you have seen, they are very sophisticated and among the most reliable of cables ever devised.

Sorry for the long list, but here is a snip from Wiki about undersea power cables;

Alternating current cables

Alternating-current (AC) submarine cable systems for transmitting lower amounts of three phase electric power can be constructed with three-core cables in which all three insulated conductors are placed into a single underwater cable. Most offshore-to-shore wind-farm cables are constructed this way.

For larger amounts of transmitted power, the AC systems are composed of three separate single-core underwater cables, each containing just one insulated conductor and carrying one phase of the three-phase electric current. A fourth identical cable is often added in parallel with the other three, simply as a spare in case one of the three primary cables is damaged and needs to be replaced. This damage can happen, for example, from a ship's anchor carelessly dropped onto it. The fourth cable can substitute for any one of the other three, given the proper (and complicated) electrical switching system.
Mainland British Columbia to Nelson Island to Texada Island to Vancouver Island, the destination of the power. This is a high-capacity 500 kilovolt (kV) three-phase system.
Mainland Sweden to Bornholm Island, Denmark (110 kilovolts, but some sources state 72 kV).
Under the Strait of Messina, connecting southern tip of the mainland of Italy with the large island of Sicily (380 kV). This submarine cable replaced an earlier, and very long overhead line crossing (the "Pylons of Messina")
Negros Island to Panay Island, in the Philippines (138 kV)
[edit]
Direct current cables
Baltic-Cable - between Germany and Sweden beneath the Baltic Sea
Basslink - between the mainland State of Victoria and the island of Tasmania, Australia, 500 kilovolts (kV), with a length of 290 kilometers beneath the Bass Strait[citation needed]
BritNed - between the Netherlands and Great Britain beneath the North Sea
Cross Sound Cable - between Long Island, New York, and the State of Connecticut beneath Long Island Sound[citation needed]
Estlink - between northern Estonia and southern Finland beneath the Gulf of Finland
Fenno-Skan - between Sweden and Finland beneath the Baltic Sea
HVDC Cross-Channel - very high power cable between the French mainland and the island of Great Britain beneath the English Channel
HVDC Gotland - the first HVDC submarine power cable (non-experimental) - between the Swedish mainland and the Swedish island of Gotland beneath the Baltic Sea
HVDC Inter-Island - between the power-rich South Island (much hydroelectric power) of New Zealand and the more-populous North Island beneath the Cook Strait
HVDC Italy-Corsica-Sardinia (SACOI) - between the Italian mainland, the Italian island of Sardinia, and its neighboring French island of Corsica beneath the Mediterranean Sea[citation needed]
HVDC Italy-Greece - between Italy and Greece beneath the Adriatic Sea[citation needed]
HVDC Leyte - Luzon - between Leyte Island and Luzon in the Philippines, beneath the Pacific Ocean[citation needed]
HVDC Moyle - connecting Scotland with Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom, and thence to the Republic of Ireland, beneath the Irish Sea
HVDC Vancouver Island - between Vancouver Island and the mainland of the Province of British Columbia, beneath the Strait of Juan de Fuca
Kii Channel HVDC system - now (2010) the world's highest-capacity long-distance submarine power cable (rated at 1400 megawatts). This power cable connects the large islands of Honshu and Shikoku beneath the Kii Channel in the Japanese Home Islands
Kontek - between Germany and Denmark beneath the Baltic Sea
Konti-Skan - between Sweden and Denmark beneath the Baltic Sea[citation needed]
Neptune Cable - between the State of New Jersey and Long Island, New York - 64 miles beneath the Atlantic Ocean[2]
Swepol - between Poland and Sweden beneath the Baltic Sea
[edit]
Longest
NorNed (between Eemshaven, Netherlands and Feda, Norway), HVDC, 700 MW, 580 km (360 mi)[4]
[edit]
Proposed submarine power cables
Champlain Hudson Power Express, 335-mile line. The Transmission Developers Company of Toronto, Ontario, is proposing "to use the [ Hudson River ] for the most ambitious underwater transmission project yet. Beginning south of Montreal, a 335-mile line would run along the bottom of Lake Champlain, [and then] down the bed of the Hudson all the way to New York City."[3]
Power Bridge, Hawaii[1]
Power Bridge, State of Maine[1]
Puerto Rico to the Virgin Islands[4]
400 kV HVDC India to Sri Lanka[5]
Atlantic Wind Connection between Delaware and New Jersey, potentially between Virginia and New York[6]
100 megawatts 165 km Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador and province of Nova Scotia[7]
200 megawatts 95 km Magħtab (Malta) and Marina the Ragusa (Sicily)[8]

[Boltz]

and if it was cost effective we would be doing it now.

Those guys at Google might know a thing or two. Just 'cuz they all got PHD's don't necessarily make 'em smart, but they sure do know how to make money.

[handlewanker]

Cost effective......the price you put on something you must have at any price.

Down in OZ we're currently paying $1.47 per litre for petrol, and the indications are that it "could" go to $3 a litre or more, which still makes it "cost effective" when the alternative is public transport to rub shoulders with the smelly great unwashed or walk to the shops, work.... wherever.

This came home with a bang recently, when the water suddenly stopped flowing at 10PM one night.....not toilets, no shower, no late night cup of tea.

We were without water for 4 hours, came back on about 4AM.....leak in the pipline probably being fixed.

The last thing you want is no toilet access before going to bed.

Lucky for me I had 4 litres of filtered water in my fridge, so I got a few cups of tea, but no toilet and that's painfull when the tea works it's way through your system.

Now if that was bought in water, what price is "cost effective"?

I read on the 'net today, that it requires a MINIMUM of 100 litres a day for the average person's requirements.....drinking, washing, flushing waste etc.
In America the average consumption is 375 litres a day per person.

My last water bill was for 95 days and cost me $140, (two people), that is for a daily useage of 411 litres which is 205 litres per person, so I might just make it OK if the water ever becomes rationed....(I also have a 5,000 litre rain water tank for the garden).

I reckon the price I pay of $1.47 per day is very cost effective for clean water, and as soon as I get the water tank plumbed up to the toilet, washing machine and evaporative air conditioner, the bill will probably be halved.
Ian.

[infantry11b]

since you mentioned it - let's look at costs of oil. at $100.00 us a barrel. a barrel is 42 gallons - US. so the price is actually $2.38 a gallon. but they need work to break it into components. Mexican oil is like tar, libian is what they call sweet, very high quality. oil is everywhere but the problem is price control through a monopoly, which is illegal in the US and may be in your country, but we seem to accept it being done to contol oil prices.
other countries, like the marxist president of America think we use too much so he intends to prevent drilling anywhere, because like all communists it is better to drag everyone down than it is to lift them up.
if we pumped our own oil, we have billions of barrels in America. Billions of barrels are in the gulf of mexico, but America limits drilling, only letting us drill in a mile or so of water, making repairs impossible, when drilling closer to land would be safer. safer to drill, cheaper to drill, and darn easy to get to if you need to fix something.

no oil is darn cheap and in America the government makes more in gas taxes than the oil companies make, and the companies do all the work. and they have to make a profit and still drill dry wells.

the problem with the price of oil actually has little to do with the oil, it is politics and the dollar. the fool with his neck on the bill is a man raised as islamic in indonesia, and from ages 5-10 - his most formative years - he learned to hate America and he sure acts like it now.

the price of oil will go higher because the FED is buying reserve notes with their own paper, which will kill the dollar and the price of oil for the entire world will go even higher.

so making a profit is essential or the product does not get off the ground. profit allows for development, so that it can produce more, provide jobs and create wealth, and when the unions get to greedy, or the bosses get to greedy, and they cant reach an agreement, well they die and someone else buys the business free of past contracts and starts all over.

the only group that cant create jobs is government - because, unlike business who have to have stockholders to obtain funds, the government just steals it and gives it to unproven ideas.

windmills are great, as long as the wind is blowing, but i dont like the idea of thousands of miles of mega watt high power wires sitting in oceans of corrossive materials.

but oil is the best we have.

i think we need to develope everything but NOT THE GOVERNMENT, private enterprise.

if you are paying 1.47 a liter your government is screwing you - it's not the price of gas, it's the price your government puts on it for payment of services to employ government. if the cost of items subject to tax is going up, especially oil, take a look and you will see the number of workers in government going up; the amount of wages going up; the retirement plans going up, the years working to retire going down, the longer the periods that you pay workers when they don't work. and retirement is usually based not on the average pay, or median pay, it can be as high as 90% of their last paycheck for the rest of their lives = which is 25-30 years, plus health coverage.

if the cost of goods and services is too high take a look at how many politicians and their minions in the form of government workers there are.

that is why costs go up.

Cost effective......the price you put on something you must have at any price.

Down in OZ we're currently paying $1.47 per litre for petrol, and the indications are that it "could" go to $3 a litre or more, which still makes it "cost effective" when the alternative is public transport to rub shoulders with the smelly great unwashed or walk to the shops, work.... wherever.

This came home with a bang recently, when the water suddenly stopped flowing at 10PM one night.....not toilets, no shower, no late night cup of tea.

We were without water for 4 hours, came back on about 4AM.....leak in the pipline probably being fixed.

The last thing you want is no toilet access before going to bed.

Lucky for me I had 4 litres of filtered water in my fridge, so I got a few cups of tea, but no toilet and that's painfull when the tea works it's way through your system.

Now if that was bought in water, what price is "cost effective"?

I read on the 'net today, that it requires a MINIMUM of 100 litres a day for the average person's requirements.....drinking, washing, flushing waste etc.
In America the average consumption is 375 litres a day per person.

My last water bill was for 95 days and cost me $140, (two people), that is for a daily useage of 411 litres which is 205 litres per person, so I might just make it OK if the water ever becomes rationed....(I also have a 5,000 litre rain water tank for the garden).

I reckon the price I pay of $1.47 per day is very cost effective for clean water, and as soon as I get the water tank plumbed up to the toilet, washing machine and evaporative air conditioner, the bill will probably be halved.
Ian.

[RomanLini]

Thank you for the information, and I imagine that the odds of having a short and shoot 10 million watts into the surrounding environment would be a lot more than having one of the largest recorded earthquakes in the last 300 years hit your nuke plant, followed by a wave 77.4 feet hight which knocks out your back up systems so that water does not flow through the cooling system.

ocean water is very corrosive and that is the way it goes. ...

I posted that to show that undersea power cables are not a new "whacky" invention. Wind power itself is a fairly new technology that relies on composite blades and other high tech materials, but some of those undersea power cables have been in service for a very long time.

They use stainless steel jackets so it can't be cut or gouged, multiple layers of protective systems including self-sealing tars and gels, and other safety systems. The undersea cabling is probably the most reliable aspect of the entire offshore wind power system.

... and if it was cost effective we would be doing it now.

In many places in the world it IS cost effective and they ARE doing it now.

[handlewanker]

I personally don't think the Government is screwing anyone intentionally, perhaps having an efficiency of about 10%....whatever....that is after all the billls and boys are paid the left over 10% is what the Gov uses to fund the next project, and makes up the shortfall but not by raising the taxes, taxes always stay more or less the same.....30% income tax for average wage earners etc...and a range of other taxes to cover the Gov needs to run the country.

What does change is the cost of living and the wages, and you can only get out of the pot what you put into it, so no taxes get raised, otherwise you'd have by now 150% income tax just for starters....LOL.

The real culprits are the retailers.....who puts up the prices?....the retailers, so the workers demand more wages to pay the bills etc, and who puts up the prices again? ....the retailers etc etc, the Gov still just gets 30% of your new earnings by way of income tax to pay the bills the retailers and suppliers charge on an ever increasing rate as the money flow, in the form of wage increases, becomes available.
Ian.

[handlewanker]

If anyone out there thinks the Government's prime purpose is to fleece you, try and exist without a ruling body, as the Anarchists would like, and see who you have to pay then.

You only have yourselves to blame for Government incompetancy, for it is YOU who put THEM into power, be they Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Monachist, or Socialist or some other wacky form of corporate body ruling, and the Plebs are not noted for their intelligence when it comes to putting crosses on bits of paper to elect someone who is given a blank sheet of paper as a mandate to control you.

Down in the Lucky Country of OZ we just had an election in one of the states, New South Wales, and the swing against the labour party was the biggest in OZ history....which means those that voted as Labour supporters last time are now voting Liberal/National/Democrat this time, with a very few voting for the Greens and Independents.

How can you have Labour orientated ideals one moment and switch your party preferences the next....TO A LIBERAL CANDIDATE, but some do, and they don't know what time of day it is generally, going with the flow as the herd mills around.

If the party of your choice or ideals is defaulting, shake up the core body by not voting them into office...... by not supporting the candidature put up for your choice.....so simple.....but still maintain your party preference as a way of Government.
Ian.

[Boltz]

Current estimates are that eliminating subsidies for oil exploration and production would save taxpayers somewhere around 60 billion over the next 10 years. Whattaya think guys, should we cut the cord and let oil stand on it's own in the free marketplace?

[jhowelb]

Cars will be banned from London and all other cities across Europe under a draconian EU masterplan to cut CO2 emissions by 60 per cent over the next 40 years.

The European Commission on Monday unveiled a "single European transport area" aimed at enforcing "a profound shift in transport patterns for passengers" by 2050.

The plan also envisages an end to cheap holiday flights from Britain to southern Europe with a target that over 50 per cent of all journeys above 186 miles should be by rail.

Top of the EU's list to cut climate change emissions is a target of "zero" for the number of petrol and diesel-driven cars and lorries in the EU's future cities.

EU to ban cars from cities by 2050 - Telegraph

[infantry11b]

exactly where in the world are they cost effective?

In many places in the world it IS cost effective and they ARE doing it now.

[handlewanker]

Who pays for the exploration then?....Perhaps the Chinese would step in and supply the "ready" to the oil companies......that would make the Chinese whole and total owners of the company store, and seeing as how yo'all work for and owe your hearts and souls to the company store, how much more punishment can you take?

There is no power on Earth more powerfull than oil, not even King Coal or Nuke.

Casting that bread on troubled waters in the hope that a friendly fish will take a nibble is like gold prospecting on Mars, you might find tons of the stuff but getting it home is a bit iffy.

Now for something entirely different......I'm a big fan of the elecric car brigade, and by all accounts by 2020 the electric buggy might be a common sight on most roads, but not until they do something about the battery problem, that is.... extending the range and reducing the charge time.

Well Jaguar have just revealed at the Paris show a new concept car, not destined for production, but a concept with state of the art techno goodies that make it all very feasible, like 0 to 60 mph in as little as 3.4 seconds.

The car is the Jaguar C-X75, a gas turbine electric drive car of tomorrow.

The main drive train is 4 electric motors, one in each wheel and a lithium ion battery pack, charged by twin gas turbines that run on a diesel type fuel.

The range is 60 miles on the batteries alone, and the gas turbines drive the generator to charge the batteries and extend the range to 500miles +.

The axial flow gas turbines are a newly developed miniature type by Bladon Jets in the UK, and develop 70KW while revving at 80,000 rpm, weighing only 35KG, and have few moving parts, and with a constant speed run at optimum efficiency without the need to rev up and down for acceleration and decalleration.

Each electric motor develops about 195 BHP, have air bearings so no lubrication or water cooling needed.

Now that's what I call a fast mover, and green too...emmissions of CO2 are just 28grams running on turbines.

You can see the specs on Netcarshow.com or just surf the net for Jaguar C-X75.
Ian.

[LatheMaster]

Our oil prices haven't gone up so much because of demand and speculation . Our dollar is becoming worthless yet the feds keep printing more and more money . Our economy is going to come to a halt in the next couple years . You think unemployment is bad now you ain't seen nothing yet . I just hope my gas gusseler is paid off by then.