|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > GPS > November 2005 > A GPS tracker in every vehicle will bring many changes
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
A GPS tracker in every vehicle will bring many changes
|
|
|
|
|
| Well, I have GPS too, but with the price of gasoline as high as it has
become, my trips will be few and far between. My latest fill-up was $66.00!
The government found a way to kill the Electric Vehicle (EV) program in
2002-2003. Starting around 1999 EVs such as the General Motors EV-1, the
Honda EV-Plus, the Toyota RAV4-EV, The Nissan Ultra, the Ford Ranger EV, the
Chevrolet S-10 EV, and others had been developed to the point where they
were being mass produced, some with a 100+ mile range between charges (at
freeway speeds), and without consuming an ounce of gasoline. By now, with
the rapid improvement of battery technology, that range would have been
doubled. But by 2003 nearly all of them were called back from their leases
(none were sold outright), cut up or otherwise destroyed, and production was
stopped. Do a Google search for a used EV. You will be lucky to find a
single one, and the ones you will find are the 25 MPH so-called
"neighborhood vehicles" that are nothing more than glorified golf carts.
Of course there are a few hybrids being produced now, but the only ones with
any decent fuel mileage is the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight. No
American car manufacturer has anything that compares, not even the Ford
Escort hybrid (whose gas mileage is less than exciting).
Too bad about the lack of planning and foresight, and too bad about the
unfavorable consequences that lack is having on our foreign oil dependence
and new technology such as GPS.
| |
| J. J. Lodder 2005-10-16, 5:48 pm |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote:
> In this article I have summed up several advantages of a GPS tracker in
> Every vehicle:
>
>
>
> http://www.gps-practice-and-fun.com/200510.html#e28
>
>
>
> I would like to see this list as long as possible, so your ideas will be
> welcome.
Does 'I've fallen desperately in love with Big Brother' help?
Jan
| |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk 2005-10-16, 5:48 pm |
| "Papa" <bikingis@my.fun> wrote in message
news:Q1m4f.2196$4O1.413@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Well, I have GPS too, but with the price of gasoline as high as it has
> become, my trips will be few and far between. My latest fill-up was
$66.00!
>
> The government found a way to kill the Electric Vehicle (EV) program in
> 2002-2003. Starting around 1999 EVs such as the General Motors EV-1, the
> Honda EV-Plus, the Toyota RAV4-EV, The Nissan Ultra, the Ford Ranger EV,
the
> Chevrolet S-10 EV, and others had been developed to the point where they
> were being mass produced, some with a 100+ mile range between charges (at
> freeway speeds), and without consuming an ounce of gasoline. By now, with
> the rapid improvement of battery technology, that range would have been
> doubled. But by 2003 nearly all of them were called back from their leases
> (none were sold outright), cut up or otherwise destroyed, and production
was
> stopped. Do a Google search for a used EV. You will be lucky to find a
> single one, and the ones you will find are the 25 MPH so-called
> "neighborhood vehicles" that are nothing more than glorified golf carts.
>
> Of course there are a few hybrids being produced now, but the only ones
with
> any decent fuel mileage is the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight. No
> American car manufacturer has anything that compares, not even the Ford
> Escort hybrid (whose gas mileage is less than exciting).
>
> Too bad about the lack of planning and foresight, and too bad about the
> unfavorable consequences that lack is having on our foreign oil dependence
> and new technology such as GPS.
>
>
EVs certainly contribute much less to polution, especially when the
batteries are charged with electricity coming from wind energy, lowering
foreign dependence on oil. But for road usage and congestion problems they
are not much different than other types.
--
Andreas
| |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk 2005-10-16, 5:48 pm |
| "J. J. Lodder" <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:1h4iutk.3kv5su1ofr9toN@de-ster.xs4all.nl...
> Andreas van Hooijdonk <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote:
>
>
> Does 'I've fallen desperately in love with Big Brother' help?
>
> Jan
No need to fall in love with Big Brother. Being prepared to live with, is
already a big step.
--
Andreas
| |
|
| Correction: Make that Ford Escape Hybrid, not Ford Escort Hybrid.
| |
| J. J. Lodder 2005-10-16, 11:48 pm |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote:
> "J. J. Lodder" <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote in message
> news:1h4iutk.3kv5su1ofr9toN@de-ster.xs4all.nl...
>
> No need to fall in love with Big Brother. Being prepared to live with, is
> already a big step.
"You, Smith, Winston! Yes, that's you! Your driving is sloppy!
Pay more attention to the road and stay in the middle of your lane!
Report for punishment on arrival!"
Jan
| |
| Dale DePriest 2005-10-16, 11:48 pm |
|
Papa wrote:
> Well, I have GPS too, but with the price of gasoline as high as it has
> become, my trips will be few and far between. My latest fill-up was $66.00!
>
> The government found a way to kill the Electric Vehicle (EV) program in
> 2002-2003. Starting around 1999 EVs such as the General Motors EV-1, the
> Honda EV-Plus, the Toyota RAV4-EV, The Nissan Ultra, the Ford Ranger EV, the
> Chevrolet S-10 EV, and others had been developed to the point where they
> were being mass produced, some with a 100+ mile range between charges (at
> freeway speeds), and without consuming an ounce of gasoline. By now, with
> the rapid improvement of battery technology, that range would have been
> doubled. But by 2003 nearly all of them were called back from their leases
> (none were sold outright), cut up or otherwise destroyed, and production was
> stopped. Do a Google search for a used EV. You will be lucky to find a
> single one, and the ones you will find are the 25 MPH so-called
> "neighborhood vehicles" that are nothing more than glorified golf carts.
>
> Of course there are a few hybrids being produced now, but the only ones with
> any decent fuel mileage is the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight. No
> American car manufacturer has anything that compares, not even the Ford
> Escort hybrid (whose gas mileage is less than exciting).
>
> Too bad about the lack of planning and foresight, and too bad about the
> unfavorable consequences that lack is having on our foreign oil dependence
> and new technology such as GPS.
>
>
They were not killed by the government. They were not embraced by the
majority since no infrastructure was built to support them. I own a
Prius and it works fine with the existing infrastructure so I am happy.
The Ford get great mileage for what it is but it isn't a designed from
ground up hybrid. The civic hybrid gets reasonable mileage but you left
it out.
Dale
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
| |
|
|
"Dale DePriest" <Dale@gpsinformation.het> wrote in message
news:11l5vach64pldaf
@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> Papa wrote:
>
>
> They were not killed by the government. They were not embraced by the
> majority since no infrastructure was built to support them. I own a Prius
> and it works fine with the existing infrastructure so I am happy. The Ford
> get great mileage for what it is but it isn't a designed from ground up
> hybrid. The civic hybrid gets reasonable mileage but you left it out.
>
> Dale
>
Hi Dale:
An EV never needs to stop at a gas station, so a complex infrastructure is
not required. With the way batteries have evolved, a range capability of 400
miles could have been achieved by now with modern EVs. I don't know about
you, but driving more miles than that in one day is something my old body
can no longer endure. Even when I need to recharge my vehicle overnight at
some motel, I think (perhaps for a fee) that the motel owner would probably
allow me to plug in because most EVs could recharge from an ordinary 110
volt outlet.
As far as consumer demand is concerned, consider these two opposing opinions
from the year 2000, the first from the automobile industry and the second
from environmentalists:
Despite having long waiting lists and enthusiastic drivers for the EV1, GM
has declared that people do not want the EV1 and that the California Air
Resource Board (CARB) mandates are thus impossible to meet. In 2000 CARB
hearings, GM and Toyota claimed that a study they commissioned showed that
people would only buy an electric car over a gasoline car if it were $28,000
less than a comparable gasoline car. Prof. Kenneth Train of UC Berkeley,
who conducted the study, said that with a RAV4 SUV typically selling for
$21,000, "Toyota would have to give the average consumer a free RAV4-EV plus
a check for approximately $7,000" [Healey 2000].
An independent study commissioned by the California Electric Transportation
Coalition (CalETC) and conducted by the Green Car Institute and the Dohring
Company automotive market research firm found very different results. The
"study the auto industry didn't want to see....used the same research
methodologies employed by the auto industry to identify markets for its
gasoline vehicles" [Moore 2000]. It found the annual consumer market for
EVs to be 12-18% of the new light-duty vehicle market in California,
amounting to annual sales of 151,200 to 226,800 electric vehicles [Green Car
Institute, 2000], approximately ten times the quantity specified by CARB's
mandate [Moore 2000].
By the way, Toyota's RAV4-EV had waiting lists of buyers willing to pay over
$30,000 at the time they were being offered at Toyota dealerships. I have
seen a few used RAV4-EVs (they are very rare) for sale at over $42,000, and
buyers willingly pay the price - despite the fact that they are several
years old.
The US government did indeed take a number of steps to kill off the EV
programs.
For example, on October 9, 2002, the Bush Administration filed a brief in
U.S. Circuit Court charging that California impinged on federal authority in
revising its zero emissions vehicle rule the previous year. This action was
a significant departure from the federal government's long-held practice of
supporting California's efforts to clean up its air. Under California clean
air rules, ten percent of the vehicles sold between 2003 to 2008 would have
been required to be electric or zero-emission vehicles.
Regards.
| |
| Dale DePriest 2005-10-17, 2:48 am |
|
Papa wrote:
> "Dale DePriest" <Dale@gpsinformation.het> wrote in message
> news:11l5vach64pldaf
@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
>
> Hi Dale:
>
> An EV never needs to stop at a gas station, so a complex infrastructure is
> not required. With the way batteries have evolved, a range capability of 400
> miles could have been achieved by now with modern EVs. I don't know about
> you, but driving more miles than that in one day is something my old body
> can no longer endure. Even when I need to recharge my vehicle overnight at
> some motel, I think (perhaps for a fee) that the motel owner would probably
> allow me to plug in because most EVs could recharge from an ordinary 110
> volt outlet.
>
> As far as consumer demand is concerned, consider these two opposing opinions
> from the year 2000, the first from the automobile industry and the second
> from environmentalists:
>
> Despite having long waiting lists and enthusiastic drivers for the EV1, GM
> has declared that people do not want the EV1 and that the California Air
> Resource Board (CARB) mandates are thus impossible to meet. In 2000 CARB
> hearings, GM and Toyota claimed that a study they commissioned showed that
> people would only buy an electric car over a gasoline car if it were $28,000
> less than a comparable gasoline car. Prof. Kenneth Train of UC Berkeley,
> who conducted the study, said that with a RAV4 SUV typically selling for
> $21,000, "Toyota would have to give the average consumer a free RAV4-EV plus
> a check for approximately $7,000" [Healey 2000].
>
> An independent study commissioned by the California Electric Transportation
> Coalition (CalETC) and conducted by the Green Car Institute and the Dohring
> Company automotive market research firm found very different results. The
> "study the auto industry didn't want to see....used the same research
> methodologies employed by the auto industry to identify markets for its
> gasoline vehicles" [Moore 2000]. It found the annual consumer market for
> EVs to be 12-18% of the new light-duty vehicle market in California,
> amounting to annual sales of 151,200 to 226,800 electric vehicles [Green Car
> Institute, 2000], approximately ten times the quantity specified by CARB's
> mandate [Moore 2000].
>
> By the way, Toyota's RAV4-EV had waiting lists of buyers willing to pay over
> $30,000 at the time they were being offered at Toyota dealerships. I have
> seen a few used RAV4-EVs (they are very rare) for sale at over $42,000, and
> buyers willingly pay the price - despite the fact that they are several
> years old.
>
> The US government did indeed take a number of steps to kill off the EV
> programs.
>
> For example, on October 9, 2002, the Bush Administration filed a brief in
> U.S. Circuit Court charging that California impinged on federal authority in
> revising its zero emissions vehicle rule the previous year. This action was
> a significant departure from the federal government's long-held practice of
> supporting California's efforts to clean up its air. Under California clean
> air rules, ten percent of the vehicles sold between 2003 to 2008 would have
> been required to be electric or zero-emission vehicles.
>
> Regards.
>
>
What do you drive? None of the systems I checked into would charge from
110. Some needed a 220 outlet and some needed a special charger that
was mounted in your home. The RAV4 was in that category while the Ford
product was in the former. The 110 devices are only the little Chrysler
35 mph golf carts. I did a lot of research before buying my Prius. None
of the afore mentioned cars got 400 miles on a charge and all of them
required very expensive battery packs which is one reason why they were
only leased.
Your 400 miles in contecture, not fact and yes I do drive that much in a
day often. I have 42,000 miles on my 2004 Prius that is 18 months old.
Requiring electric only sales was not practical and yes I live in CA.
Law makers in CA do a lot of stuff that is not practical such as giving
Enron all our money.
Dale
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
| |
| kashe@sonic.net 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:38:02 +0200, "Andreas van Hooijdonk"
<ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote:
>"Papa" <bikingis@my.fun> wrote in message
>news:Q1m4f.2196$4O1.413@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>$66.00!
>the
>was
>with
>EVs certainly contribute much less to polution, especially when the
>batteries are charged with electricity coming from wind energy, lowering
>foreign dependence on oil. But for road usage and congestion problems they
>are not much different than other types.
There was plenty of public resistance to the low mileage
ranges of pure EVs. Not to mention at least two charger types. My wife
worked for EVAA in San Francisco until it was borged by a similar
outfit in DC. Her director had one and a charger installed in his
garage at home, yet he couldn't use it for a 300 mile trip without a
lot of planning.
In addition, they're advertising hybrids now that don't get
much better mileage than my 86 Toyota Corolla got -- still 33 mpg with
over 200K miles on it. And never failed a CA smog test, for that
matter.
| |
| kashe@sonic.net 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 21:17:57 -0700, Dale DePriest
<Dale@gpsinformation.het> wrote:
>
>What do you drive? None of the systems I checked into would charge from
> 110. Some needed a 220 outlet and some needed a special charger that
>was mounted in your home. The RAV4 was in that category while the Ford
>product was in the former. The 110 devices are only the little Chrysler
>35 mph golf carts. I did a lot of research before buying my Prius. None
>of the afore mentioned cars got 400 miles on a charge and all of them
>required very expensive battery packs which is one reason why they were
>only leased.
>
>Your 400 miles in contecture, not fact and yes I do drive that much in a
>day often. I have 42,000 miles on my 2004 Prius that is 18 months old.
>
>Requiring electric only sales was not practical and yes I live in CA.
>Law makers in CA do a lot of stuff that is not practical such as giving
>Enron all our money.
>
>Dale
Awright, Dale for president. Or is clear thinking still not
allowed east of the Mississippi?
Not to mention, even with the 110 volt charging, if available,
as the previous poster suggested, I think darn few motel operators
would let you have enough electricity to charge up for the speculated
400 miles for free. Hell, they're probably happier if you don't use an
electric hair dryer on their dime.
| |
| kashe@sonic.net 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 23:30:23 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
Lodder) wrote:
>Andreas van Hooijdonk <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote:
>
>
>"You, Smith, Winston! Yes, that's you! Your driving is sloppy!
>Pay more attention to the road and stay in the middle of your lane!
>Report for punishment on arrival!"
>
>Jan
>
Attention, local police -- check out the heavy breathing
sounds coming from the teenagers in the Windstar located at xxx, yyy.
Sorry we can't provide you with full-motion vdeo.
| |
| J. J. Lodder 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| <kashe@sonic.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 23:30:23 +0200, nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J.
> Lodder) wrote:
>
>
> Attention, local police -- check out the heavy breathing
> sounds coming from the teenagers in the Windstar located at xxx, yyy.
> Sorry we can't provide you with full-motion vdeo.
First everybody will get a chip in the neck,
and all car headrests will be equipped with read-out equipment,
so the GPS/GSM will not only report where each car is,
but also who are in it.
Cars will refuse to start for non-identified occupants.
Full video comes next,
Jan
| |
| Vic Fraenckel 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| When electric vehicles (EV) are discussed as the way to the future, I have noticed that there is never any mention of the electrical generation infrastructure that would be needed to supply the charging power for all the vehicles plugging in every night for recharge. Where would all the electricity come from if the EV load is added to the power grid? It is almost impossible to get a license to build new power plants here in the US. More usage = more power plants.
Just my 2 cents.
Vic
--
____________________
____________________
________________
Victor Fraenckel - The Windman
victorf ATSIGN windreader DOTcom
KC2GUI
| |
| Tim C. 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:41:26 GMT, Vic Fraenckel wrote:
> It is almost impossible to get a license to build new power plants here in the US.
....at the moment...while the oil lobby has the government wrapped around
its little finger.
--
Tim C.
| |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| "J. J. Lodder" <nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:1h4ksdc.18r8e4114q5dq6N@de-ster.xs4all.nl...
> <kashe@sonic.net> wrote:
>
tracker in[color=darkred]
with,[color=darkred]
>
> First everybody will get a chip in the neck,
> and all car headrests will be equipped with read-out equipment,
> so the GPS/GSM will not only report where each car is,
> but also who are in it.
> Cars will refuse to start for non-identified occupants.
>
> Full video comes next,
>
> Jan
>
>
Some occupants will have an ear tag. See this article:
http://www.gps-practice-and-fun.com/200510.html#e27
Andreas
| |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| "Vic Fraenckel" <victor522@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message news:qdL4f.71198$7b6.13287@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
When electric vehicles (EV) are discussed as the way to the future, I have noticed that there is never any mention of the electrical generation infrastructure that would be needed to supply the charging power for all the vehicles plugging in every night for recharge. Where would all the electricity come from if the EV load is added to the power grid? It is almost impossible to get a license to build new power plants here in the US. More usage = more power plants.
Just my 2 cents.
Vic
I did some small calculation.
To drive an average middle size car on a horizontal road with 100 km/h you need a power of 40 kW.
A 500 km trip at that speed will ask for 5 x 40 = 200 kWh of energy.
Suppose an engine efficiency of 95% and a battery efficiency of 85%.
For this 500 km trip you have to charge 200 / 0.95 / 0.85 = 250 kWh of electrical energy.
This explains why the motel will NOT let you charge your batteries for free.
If you want to charge your batteries in 5 h time, this means a charger with an outlet power of 250 / 5 = 50kW.
This explains why not many chargers will come with a 110 V plug, as the charging current has to be 50,000 / 110 = 460 A.
Not far from where I live, there are some windmills that produce in our climate (not so much wind) 3,000,000 kWh per year.
So every windmill would be good for 3,000,000 / 250 = 12,000 charges per year.
Andreas
| |
| Dale DePriest 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
|
kashe@sonic.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:38:02 +0200, "Andreas van Hooijdonk"
> <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> There was plenty of public resistance to the low mileage
> ranges of pure EVs. Not to mention at least two charger types. My wife
> worked for EVAA in San Francisco until it was borged by a similar
> outfit in DC. Her director had one and a charger installed in his
> garage at home, yet he couldn't use it for a 300 mile trip without a
> lot of planning.
certainly true.
>
> In addition, they're advertising hybrids now that don't get
> much better mileage than my 86 Toyota Corolla got -- still 33 mpg with
> over 200K miles on it. And never failed a CA smog test, for that
> matter.
The ones that get that low are SUV's. Some are even lower but still more
than 50% higher than the equivalents in non-hybrids. It is not just
about gas mileage anyway. Hybrids are significantly less polluters than
regular gas cars. So good in fact that CA does not require them to even
be tested.
One of the advantages of my Prius is that it includes high mileage tires
on it. Most cars could benefit from better tires that are designed for
better mileage. The question is will the consumer give up the soft ride
or the cool look for better mileage. By the way I run my tires at 42 lbs
in the front and 40 in the back but these tires are designed for this.
Dale
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
| |
| Dale DePriest 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
|
kashe@sonic.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 21:17:57 -0700, Dale DePriest
> <Dale@gpsinformation.het> wrote:
>
>
>
> Awright, Dale for president. Or is clear thinking still not
> allowed east of the Mississippi?
>
> Not to mention, even with the 110 volt charging, if available,
> as the previous poster suggested, I think darn few motel operators
> would let you have enough electricity to charge up for the speculated
> 400 miles for free. Hell, they're probably happier if you don't use an
> electric hair dryer on their dime.
I agree with you. There are many clear thinkers west of the mississippi
either from the number of SUV's I see on the road these days.
Dale
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
| |
|
| Hi Dale:
Have you been following the progress of the Prius "Plus" program being
performed by a group of private individuals in California?
For those who don't know about the Prius "Plus", it is an enhancement to the
factory released Prius in that it has the capability of running in
all-electric mode over an extended range at speeds less than 43 MPH by
employing a larger battery pack and modified electronics. It can be used
just like a regular Prius (which has a very limited all-electric range of
only about a mile), or it can be used for 30 miles or so in all-electric
mode. Then, when the battery pack runs down, either begin using the internal
combustion engine to run the vehicle and recharge the batteries, or plug the
batteries into an electrical outlet overnight. This concept is commonly
called PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle). With such a concept, a Prius
"Plus" owner could run his/her vehicle all week without using a drop of
gasoline as long as his/her trips were confined to local short distance
trips to the mall, school, or wherever. Studies have shown that the average
driver uses his/her vehicle for just those purposes the vast majority of the
time, and for distances in the 15 to 20 mile range.
Toyota has begun to pay very close attention to this concept. Their initial
reaction was to say that such modifications would void the warranty. Now
they are studying the concept much closer and have a more open mind about
it. There is speculation that Toyota could be offering such an option in the
2008 Prius model year. An interesting aside is that the area where the
existing battery pack is located is large enough to accept the larger batter
pack required for the "Plus" version. Soon to be available is an aftermarket
"Plus" kit called "Edrive" from EDrive Systems LLC. This aftermarket kit
consists mainly of the batteries (which will hold about 9 kwh),
re-installation of the "EV-Only" switch (left off the US version of the
Prius), and a series of firmware boards that enable the Prius on-board
computer to "understand" that it has extra battery capacity. The Prius
computer uses the extra batteries well, once it knows it has them; so
really, Toyota, when or if it offers the kit, can build the firmware right
into the on-board computer, saving space and time. And it hardly costs
anything to leave the "Ev-only" switch in place. That circuit suppresses
engine turn-on, but is over-ridden in 4 cases (at least): 1. Low battery; 2.
High torque demand; 3. Cold catalytic converter; 4. Speed greater than 43
mph.
IMO, the Prius "Plus" is a very interesting and exciting concept.
Regards.
| |
| capnron 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
|
"Andreas van Hooijdonk" <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote in message
news:hICdnVBDfazA4sz
eRVnygg@scarlet.biz...
> In this article I have summed up several advantages of a GPS tracker in
> Every vehicle:
>
>
>
> http://www.gps-practice-and-fun.com/200510.html#e28
>
>
>
> I would like to see this list as long as possible, so your ideas will be
> welcome.
>
> --
> Andreas van Hooijdonk
> http://www.gps-practice-and-fun.com
>
>
Will this idea would include an on-off switch? While some of the benifits of
the system might be useful, what we are really dealing with here is just
another way to monitor everyones every move. Can the implantation of
tracking chips at birth be far away? The system is so open to abuse that
only a driver controlled on-off switch would make such a system acceptable.
| |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| "capnron" <capnron@cheerful.com> wrote in message
news:43525b27$1@news
.kos.net...
>
> "Andreas van Hooijdonk" <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote in message
> news:hICdnVBDfazA4sz
eRVnygg@scarlet.biz...
> Will this idea would include an on-off switch? While some of the benifits
of
> the system might be useful, what we are really dealing with here is just
> another way to monitor everyones every move. Can the implantation of
> tracking chips at birth be far away? The system is so open to abuse that
> only a driver controlled on-off switch would make such a system
acceptable.
>
>
The key-contact will be the on/off switch. So, you have a fair choice.
--
Andreas
| |
| Dale DePriest 2005-10-17, 5:48 pm |
| Yes, I have been. 100 mpg is quite possible in this configuration.
Plug-in Hybirds could be the next break through. The best of both worlds.
Dale
Papa wrote:
> Hi Dale:
>
> Have you been following the progress of the Prius "Plus" program being
> performed by a group of private individuals in California?
>
> For those who don't know about the Prius "Plus", it is an enhancement to the
> factory released Prius in that it has the capability of running in
> all-electric mode over an extended range at speeds less than 43 MPH by
> employing a larger battery pack and modified electronics. It can be used
> just like a regular Prius (which has a very limited all-electric range of
> only about a mile), or it can be used for 30 miles or so in all-electric
> mode. Then, when the battery pack runs down, either begin using the internal
> combustion engine to run the vehicle and recharge the batteries, or plug the
> batteries into an electrical outlet overnight. This concept is commonly
> called PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle). With such a concept, a Prius
> "Plus" owner could run his/her vehicle all week without using a drop of
> gasoline as long as his/her trips were confined to local short distance
> trips to the mall, school, or wherever. Studies have shown that the average
> driver uses his/her vehicle for just those purposes the vast majority of the
> time, and for distances in the 15 to 20 mile range.
>
> Toyota has begun to pay very close attention to this concept. Their initial
> reaction was to say that such modifications would void the warranty. Now
> they are studying the concept much closer and have a more open mind about
> it. There is speculation that Toyota could be offering such an option in the
> 2008 Prius model year. An interesting aside is that the area where the
> existing battery pack is located is large enough to accept the larger batter
> pack required for the "Plus" version. Soon to be available is an aftermarket
> "Plus" kit called "Edrive" from EDrive Systems LLC. This aftermarket kit
> consists mainly of the batteries (which will hold about 9 kwh),
> re-installation of the "EV-Only" switch (left off the US version of the
> Prius), and a series of firmware boards that enable the Prius on-board
> computer to "understand" that it has extra battery capacity. The Prius
> computer uses the extra batteries well, once it knows it has them; so
> really, Toyota, when or if it offers the kit, can build the firmware right
> into the on-board computer, saving space and time. And it hardly costs
> anything to leave the "Ev-only" switch in place. That circuit suppresses
> engine turn-on, but is over-ridden in 4 cases (at least): 1. Low battery; 2.
> High torque demand; 3. Cold catalytic converter; 4. Speed greater than 43
> mph.
>
> IMO, the Prius "Plus" is a very interesting and exciting concept.
>
>
> Regards.
>
>
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
| |
| Badger 2005-10-17, 11:48 pm |
| Dale DePriest wrote:
>
> The ones that get that low are SUV's. Some are even lower but still more
> than 50% higher than the equivalents in non-hybrids. It is not just
> about gas mileage anyway. Hybrids are significantly less polluters than
> regular gas cars. So good in fact that CA does not require them to even
> be tested.
>
> One of the advantages of my Prius is that it includes high mileage tires
> on it. Most cars could benefit from better tires that are designed for
> better mileage. The question is will the consumer give up the soft ride
> or the cool look for better mileage. By the way I run my tires at 42 lbs
> in the front and 40 in the back but these tires are designed for this.
>
> Dale
>
How much is a battery pack and how long are they predicted to last?
Clay
| |
| Dale DePriest 2005-10-17, 11:48 pm |
|
Badger wrote:
> Dale DePriest wrote:
>
>
> How much is a battery pack and how long are they predicted to last?
> Clay
I don't know for sure and Toyota hasn't said. The battery packs have
been out since 1999 and not one has been replaced yet to my knowledge.
They can replace individual parts of the battery. I have 28 of those at
about 7 volts each. The guarantee for CA cars is 8 years or 150,000
miles. The predicition is that they should last twice that but time will
tell.
Dale
--
_ _ Dale DePriest
/`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
| |
| Badger 2005-10-17, 11:48 pm |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk wrote:
> "capnron" <capnron@cheerful.com> wrote in message
> news:43525b27$1@news
.kos.net...
>
>
> of
>
>
> acceptable.
>
> The key-contact will be the on/off switch. So, you have a fair choice.
>
| |
| kashe@sonic.net 2005-10-17, 11:48 pm |
| On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:41:26 GMT, "Vic Fraenckel"
<victor522@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
>When electric vehicles (EV) are discussed as the way to the future, I have noticed that there is never any mention of the electrical generation infrastructure that would be needed to supply the charging power for all the vehicles plugging in every night
for recharge. Where would all the electricity come from if the EV load is added to the power grid? It is almost impossible to get a license to build new power plants here in the US. More usage = more power plants.
>
>Just my 2 cents.
>
>Vic
Not to mention that I've never found an unbiased report of the
total pollution budget for EVs. In the end, I believe they just
transfer the pollution to the areas where the electricity is
generated.
| |
| kashe@sonic.net 2005-10-17, 11:48 pm |
| On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:35:34 +0200, "Andreas van Hooijdonk"
<ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote:
>"capnron" <capnron@cheerful.com> wrote in message
> news:43525b27$1@news
.kos.net...
>of
>acceptable.
>The key-contact will be the on/off switch. So, you have a fair choice.
Somehow, using the car for its intended purpose seems to be a
poor choice if you don't want to have your location monitoerd.
| |
| qwerty 2005-10-17, 11:48 pm |
|
"Badger" <badger@dud.com> wrote in message
news:PLU4f.12050$Sg2.999552@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> How much is a battery pack and how long are they predicted to last?
> Clay
Toyota isn't really saying, but I believe they're currently about $2,000 but
are guaranteed for 8-10 years & 100K miles. There have been a handful,
about 5, replaced and all under warranty. Prices should drop considerably
by the time current warranties expire. That's probably why Toyota is
reluctant to give a precise price for their replacement because the current
price is far higher than what a consumer is expected to pay 10+ years from
now.
| |
| qwerty 2005-10-17, 11:48 pm |
|
"qwerty" <nospam@all.noway.com> wrote in message
news:39Y4f.3173$tV6.835@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Badger" <badger@dud.com> wrote in message
> news:PLU4f.12050$Sg2.999552@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
>
> Toyota isn't really saying, but I believe they're currently about $2,000
> but are guaranteed for 8-10 years & 100K miles. There have been a
> handful, about 5, replaced and all under warranty. Prices should drop
> considerably by the time current warranties expire. That's probably why
> Toyota is reluctant to give a precise price for their replacement because
> the current price is far higher than what a consumer is expected to pay
> 10+ years from now.
I just found a link:
"The Prius battery (and the battery-power management system) has been
designed to maximize battery life. In part this is done by keeping the
battery at an optimum charge level - never fully draining it and never fully
recharging it. As a result, the Prius battery leads a pretty easy life. We
have lab data showing the equivalent of 180,000 miles with no deterioration
and expect it to last the life of the vehicle. We also expect battery
technology to continue to improve: the second-generation model battery is
15% smaller, 25% lighter, and has 35% more specific power than the first.
This is true of price as well. Between the 2003 and 2004 models, service
battery costs came down 36% and we expect them to continue to drop so that
by the time replacements may be needed it won't be a much of an issue. Since
the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single battery for
wear and tear.”
http://www.hybridexperience.ca/Reliability.htm
| |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk 2005-10-18, 5:48 pm |
| "qwerty" <nospam@all.noway.com> wrote in message
news:39Y4f.3173$tV6.835@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Badger" <badger@dud.com> wrote in message
> news:PLU4f.12050$Sg2.999552@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
>
> Toyota isn't really saying, but I believe they're currently about $2,000
but
> are guaranteed for 8-10 years & 100K miles. There have been a handful,
> about 5, replaced and all under warranty. Prices should drop considerably
> by the time current warranties expire. That's probably why Toyota is
> reluctant to give a precise price for their replacement because the
current
> price is far higher than what a consumer is expected to pay 10+ years from
> now.
>
>
In 10+ years from now, hydrogen fuel cells will replace the batteries. Late
last night I saw on TV prototypes that are test-driven in Berlin, Germany.
These are very comfortable cars with automatic transmission and an
impressive acceleration power. They have a tank with liquid hydrogen, which
is transformed into electricity in a fuel cell. The only exaust gas
component is water (vapor and some drops). The biggest obstacle for a fast
penetration in the market seems to be the need to build out a dense
distribution channel for the hydrogen, not the cars themselves, although
stiil very expensive now.
--
Andreas van Hooijdonk
http://www.gps-practice-and-fun.com
| |
|
|
"Andreas van Hooijdonk" <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote in message
news:jtydnWLxiI9wIMn
eRVnyiQ@scarlet.biz...
> "qwerty" <nospam@all.noway.com> wrote in message
> news:39Y4f.3173$tV6.835@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
> but
> current
>
> In 10+ years from now, hydrogen fuel cells will replace the batteries.
> Late
> last night I saw on TV prototypes that are test-driven in Berlin, Germany.
> These are very comfortable cars with automatic transmission and an
> impressive acceleration power. They have a tank with liquid hydrogen,
> which
> is transformed into electricity in a fuel cell. The only exaust gas
> component is water (vapor and some drops). The biggest obstacle for a fast
> penetration in the market seems to be the need to build out a dense
> distribution channel for the hydrogen, not the cars themselves, although
> stiil very expensive now.
>
> --
> Andreas van Hooijdonk
> http://www.gps-practice-and-fun.com
>
>
>
Could be, but as has been shown repeatedly, the automobile industry really
likes to drag it's feet when it comes to anything that separates the car
from the gasoline or diesel consuming ICE (internal combustion engine).
| |
| qwerty 2005-10-18, 5:48 pm |
|
"Andreas van Hooijdonk" <ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote in message
news:jtydnWLxiI9wIMn
eRVnyiQ@scarlet.biz...
> "qwerty" <nospam@all.noway.com> wrote in message
> news:39Y4f.3173$tV6.835@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
> but
> current
>
> In 10+ years from now, hydrogen fuel cells will replace the batteries.
Can fuel cells be recharged from the conventional gas engine & other hybrid
technology like regenerative braking? This is apples vs. oranges.
BTW, I found the actual link to the Toyota Press release describing the
batteries and other hybrid concerns:
[url]http://pressroom.toyota.com/Releases/View? id=TYT2004062345528[
/url]
| |
| Robert Peffers 2005-10-18, 5:48 pm |
|
"Dale DePriest" <Dale@gpsinformation.het> wrote in message
news:11l69fq6se84903
@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> Papa wrote:
>
>
> What do you drive? None of the systems I checked into would charge from
> 110. Some needed a 220 outlet and some needed a special charger that was
> mounted in your home. The RAV4 was in that category while the Ford product
> was in the former. The 110 devices are only the little Chrysler 35 mph
> golf carts. I did a lot of research before buying my Prius. None of the
> afore mentioned cars got 400 miles on a charge and all of them required
> very expensive battery packs which is one reason why they were only
> leased.
>
> Your 400 miles in contecture, not fact and yes I do drive that much in a
> day often. I have 42,000 miles on my 2004 Prius that is 18 months old.
>
> Requiring electric only sales was not practical and yes I live in CA. Law
> makers in CA do a lot of stuff that is not practical such as giving Enron
> all our money.
>
> Dale
>
> --
> _ _ Dale DePriest
> /`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
> o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
Just in case you guys don't know the USA jurisdiction actually stops at the
USA's borders, even if G.W.Bush does not seem to know this well known fact
as witnessed by the fact that he illegally keeps prisoners captured in a
foreign country in another foreign country but cannot charge them with any
crime as they were not inside USA borders when their imagined crimes took
place. If the World wishes to have EVs they will not require USA sanction to
do so.
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots word for Honestly),
Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
Web Site, "The Eck's Files":- http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk
| |
| Robert Peffers 2005-10-18, 5:48 pm |
|
"Dale DePriest" <Dale@gpsinformation.het> wrote in message
news:11l7b03mu9b35c8
@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> kashe@sonic.net wrote:
>
>
> I agree with you. There are many clear thinkers west of the mississippi
> either from the number of SUV's I see on the road these days.
>
> Dale
> --
> _ _ Dale DePriest
> /`) _ // http://users.cwnet.com/dalede
> o/_/ (_(_X_(` For GPS and GPS/PDAs
Just what do you clear thinkers think the power sources are to generate all
that electric power for charging battery powered vehicles? What gains could
there be if those fuel sources are not environmentally friendly?
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots word for Honestly),
Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
Web Site, "The Eck's Files":- http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk
| |
| Robert Peffers 2005-10-18, 5:48 pm |
|
<kashe@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:k5c8l11bkdvekja
gg193nfv0ksfegjhbiu@
4ax.com...
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 10:41:26 GMT, "Vic Fraenckel"
> <victor522@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> Not to mention that I've never found an unbiased report of the
> total pollution budget for EVs. In the end, I believe they just
> transfer the pollution to the areas where the electricity is
> generated.
Bingo! Give that man a coconut. Mind you nuclear power does not add CO2 to
the environment. If there is to be a way forward then that way must be by
using some form of fuel cell for hydrogen storage is both difficult, bulky
and dangerous.
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots word for Honestly),
Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
Web Site, "The Eck's Files":- http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk
| |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk 2005-10-18, 5:48 pm |
| "Robert Peffers" <bob@peffers50.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:dj3ko8$q3q$1@ne
ws8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> <kashe@sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:k5c8l11bkdvekja
gg193nfv0ksfegjhbiu@
4ax.com...
have[color=darkred]
> Bingo! Give that man a coconut. Mind you nuclear power does not add CO2 to
> the environment. If there is to be a way forward then that way must be by
> using some form of fuel cell for hydrogen storage is both difficult, bulky
> and dangerous.
> --
>
Oil and gas combustion will relatively fast come to an end. The problem is
that there will be a lot of coal left for those who really want to
chanllenge our planet.
--
Andreas
| |
| Ken Levitt 2005-10-18, 11:48 pm |
| "capnron" <capnron@cheerful.com> wrote in message
> The system is so open to abuse that
> only a driver controlled on-off switch would make such a system
> acceptable.
You don't really believe that moving the switch to "OFF" will actually
disable it do you?
Ken
===
| |
| Mark Sprague 2005-10-18, 11:48 pm |
| Robert Peffers wrote:
><kashe@sonic.net> wrote in message
> news:k5c8l11bkdvekja
gg193nfv0ksfegjhbiu@
4ax.com...
>
>
>Bingo! Give that man a coconut. Mind you nuclear power does not add CO2 to
>the environment. If there is to be a way forward then that way must be by
>using some form of fuel cell for hydrogen storage is both difficult, bulky
>and dangerous.
>
Actually, it's worse than that. If you do a quick study of the
transformation losses as you go from generating station, to the power
grid, through the utility transformers, through the charger, into the
battery, back out of the battery, and finally to the wheels, you will
find that you deliver less than 20% of the energy that you started with.
It's worse if you have to generate the electricity with petroleum.
There, you end up with a net loss of over 90% of the energy, compared to
simply burning the fuel in the car.
As for hydrogen, the only pilot program that I have looked at HOPES to
reach the point where the hydrogen production process is 25% efficient.
Even that would mean that you are putting four times as much energy into
the production of the hydrogen as you could get out of it as fuel.
At this time, the only VIABLE sources of electricity in the quantities
that would be required for widespread deployment of electric cars are
petroleum and nuclear. The others simply don't have the capacity. Of
course you can always use coal. :)
| |
|
|
Andreas van Hooijdonk (NoZ) wrote:
> So every windmill would be good for 3,000,000 / 250 = 12,000 charges per year.
>
> Andreas
Thanks for the calculations Andreas; There is also one other 'small'
detail to consider: Most (not all) of those re-charges will be wanted
at nite. In many climates, nite breezes are calm or at least very
light! Therefore, to use wind power for charging ALSO requires storage
- a problem!!!
| |
| Andreas van Hooijdonk 2005-10-19, 5:48 pm |
| "DickT" <richard.k.thomas@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1129728036.378784.6300@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Andreas van Hooijdonk (NoZ) wrote:
>
per year.[color=darkred]
>
> Thanks for the calculations Andreas; There is also one other 'small'
> detail to consider: Most (not all) of those re-charges will be wanted
> at nite. In many climates, nite breezes are calm or at least very
> light! Therefore, to use wind power for charging ALSO requires storage
> - a problem!!!
>
Richard, the storage is kind of done in the utility grid. Normally, the
demand for electric energy is lower at night, when offices and most
industries are closed. Therefor some power plants are shutdown at night. If
there would be enough windmills, one or more plants could be off during the
day and at night they could deliver the power for a lot of chargers. A much
bigger problem will be the transport of this kind of electrical energy, as
the currents will be much more important than the actual cable sections to
the end users will allow for.
Andreas
| |
| kashe@sonic.net 2005-10-21, 5:48 am |
| On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 22:36:33 +0200, "Andreas van Hooijdonk"
<ahooijdz@scarletz.bez(NoZ)> wrote:
>"Robert Peffers" <bob@peffers50.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:dj3ko8$q3q$1@ne
ws8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>have
>Oil and gas combustion will relatively fast come to an end. The problem is
>that there will be a lot of coal left for those who really want to
>chanllenge our planet.
It's interesting to read your posting within half an hour of
watching a program about how the coal industry (in the US, at least)
is in trouble for lack of labor.
One interviewee attributed this to young men finally listening
to their fathers and grandfathers who advise them against going into
the mines as a career. In the past, lots of young men went into the
mines because, in Applachia, there were few other worthwhile jobs
which would allow them to support a family and have medical benefits.
Currently you can start in the mines at ~$55K per year, about twice
the wages outside the industry in Appalachia. This includes very good
medical benefits.
Granted mining is no longer pick and shovel work and is hugely
mechanized and computerized, it remains a very dangerous occupation.
Anyone have anything on how industry conditions in other
countries compare?
| |
|
| On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:02:24 GMT, "Papa" <bikingis@my.fun> wrote:
>Well, I have GPS too, but with the price of gasoline as high as it has
>become, my trips will be few and far between. My latest fill-up was $66.00!
>
>The government found a way to kill the Electric Vehicle (EV) program in
>2002-2003. Starting around 1999 EVs such as the General Motors EV-1, the
>Honda EV-Plus, the Toyota RAV4-EV, The Nissan Ultra, the Ford Ranger EV, the
>Chevrolet S-10 EV, and others had been developed to the point where they
>were being mass produced, some with a 100+ mile range between charges (at
>freeway speeds), and without consuming an ounce of gasoline. By now, with
that electricity doesn't come out of nowhere. It needs to be
generated. electricity is (mainly)generated by .....polluting
powerplants !
You're just moving the pollution to a different spot. Add to that all
the losses in transport/storage of the electricity and it might not be
such a good deal after all.
>the rapid improvement of battery technology, that range would have been
>doubled. But by 2003 nearly all of them were called back from their leases
>(none were sold outright), cut up or otherwise destroyed, and production was
>stopped. Do a Google search for a used EV. You will be lucky to find a
>single one, and the ones you will find are the 25 MPH so-called
>"neighborhood vehicles" that are nothing more than glorified golf carts.
>
>Of course there are a few hybrids being produced now, but the only ones with
>any decent fuel mileage is the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight. No
>American car manufacturer has anything that compares, not even the Ford
>Escort hybrid (whose gas mileage is less than exciting).
>
>Too bad about the lack of planning and foresight, and too bad about the
>unfavorable consequences that lack is having on our foreign oil dependence
>and new technology such as GPS.
>
| |
| GSV Three Minds in a Can 2005-11-13, 5:48 pm |
| Bitstring < 4d8dn1lqbamv2iq4f1au
2kp6c0pt35fbd0@4ax.com>, from the
wonderful person RT <noyabusiness@yahoo.com> said
>On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:02:24 GMT, "Papa" <bikingis@my.fun> wrote:
>
>
>that electricity doesn't come out of nowhere. It needs to be
>generated. electricity is (mainly)generated by .....polluting
>powerplants !
But =can be= generated by Nuclear, wind, water, etc.
--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.
| |
| Robert Peffers 2005-11-13, 5:48 pm |
|
"RT" <noyabusiness@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4d8dn1lqbamv2iq
4f1au2kp6c0pt35fbd0@
4ax.com...
> On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 06:02:24 GMT, "Papa" <bikingis@my.fun> wrote:
>
Exactly what does the poster mean by, "The Government"? In spite of what the
USA portion of, "Americans", may think the USA borders see the end of USA
jurisdiction.
As the World does not have a unified government could the poster make clear
just what government they refer to as the only clue is that they wrote the
post in American English.[color=darkred]
>
> that electricity doesn't come out of nowhere. It needs to be
> generated. electricity is (mainly)generated by .....polluting
> powerplants !
> You're just moving the pollution to a different spot. Add to that all
> the losses in transport/storage of the electricity and it might not be
> such a good deal after all.
>
>
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots word for Honestly),
Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
Web Site, "The Eck's Files":- http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk
| |
| Andrew 2005-11-13, 5:48 pm |
| On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 14:02:00 -0000, "Robert Peffers"
<bob@peffers50.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>As the World does not have a unified government could the poster make clear
>just what government they refer to as the only clue is that they wrote the
>post in American English.
Could someone explain that to Dubya please?
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
| |
| Robert Peffers 2005-11-13, 5:48 pm |
|
"Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost.> wrote in message
news:nthen19q824tdbq
e06kmefsm1beo23girr@
4ax.com...
> On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 14:02:00 -0000, "Robert Peffers"
> <bob@peffers50.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Could someone explain that to Dubya please?
> --
> Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
> Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
> please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
> Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.
What would be the point? He is either incapable of understanding it or the
guy,(s), who have their hand up his rear and operate the functions are
unable to understand them.
--
Aefauldlie, (Scots word for Honestly),
Robert, (Auld Bob), Peffers,
Kelty,
Fife,
Scotland, (UK).
Web Site, "The Eck's Files":- http://www.peffers50.freeserve.co.uk
| |
| kashe@sonic.net 2005-11-16, 5:48 am |
| On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 14:02:00 -0000, "Robert Peffers"
<bob@peffers50.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"RT" <noyabusiness@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4d8dn1lqbamv2iq
4f1au2kp6c0pt35fbd0@
4ax.com...
>
>Exactly what does the poster mean by, "The Government"? In spite of what the
>USA portion of, "Americans", may think the USA borders see the end of USA
>jurisdiction.
>As the World does not have a unified government could the poster make clear
>just what government they refer to as the only clue is that they wrote the
>post in American English.
Actually, once Toyota produced the government-mandated number
of EVs, they shut down production.
| |
| kashe@sonic.net 2005-11-16, 5:48 am |
| On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 14:04:24 +0000, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost.>
wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 14:02:00 -0000, "Robert Peffers"
><bob@peffers50.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>Could someone explain that to Dubya please?
Not possible to explain anything to him.
|
|
|
|
|