User avatar
TomT
Posts: 10642
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 12:09 pm
Delivery Date: 01 Mar 2011
Leaf Number: 000360
Location: California, now Georgia
Contact: Website

Re: '16 30 kWh pack - backwards compatibility and warranty?

Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:25 pm

+1
Stoaty wrote:Still doesn't understand how he is using terms incorrectly, yet calls those who are trying to educate him trolls. Simply amazing... but sad.
Leaf SL 2011 to 2016, Volt Premier 2016 to 2019, and now:
2019 Model 3; LR, RWD, FSD, 19" Sport Wheels, silver/black; built 3/17/19, delivered 3/29/19.

nerys
Posts: 699
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2014 10:11 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Sep 2014
Leaf Number: 020441

Re: '16 30 kWh pack - backwards compatibility and warranty?

Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:06 pm

harassment is not education.

I am just going to use * for all electrical units and you guys can figure it out from now on.
2012 SV 4802miles. 1month 2400 miles. 9 weeks 5000 miles. 6 months 13,300 miles. 4/18 15,000 miles.

Stoaty
Posts: 4488
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 9:50 pm
Delivery Date: 12 Jun 2011
Leaf Number: 3871
Location: West Los Angeles

Re: '16 30 kWh pack - backwards compatibility and warranty?

Thu Jun 04, 2015 10:35 pm

nerys wrote:I am just going to use * for all electrical units and you guys can figure it out from now on.
I am just going to use * for all answers to questions, you can figure it out.
2011 Leaf with 62,000 miles given to Nephew
2013 Tesla Model S85 with 251 miles rated range at full charge
Leaf Spy Manual
Battery Aging Model Spreadsheet

nerys
Posts: 699
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2014 10:11 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Sep 2014
Leaf Number: 020441

Re: '16 30 kWh pack - backwards compatibility and warranty?

Thu Jun 04, 2015 11:13 pm

Good for you.
2012 SV 4802miles. 1month 2400 miles. 9 weeks 5000 miles. 6 months 13,300 miles. 4/18 15,000 miles.

User avatar
TonyWilliams
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:48 am
Location: San Diego
Contact: Website

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:16 am

epirali wrote:...It's not installing one or two or ten chargers. I will do my part, by backing hydrogen when given a chance. Just like I have with BEVs. I will also invest in hydrogen tech companies that are innovators.
Really? Installing chargers for EVs is "not good", and promoting hydrogen is "good"? I think your comment on the BEVx thread about EV advocates, like myself and so many on this EV forum, are actually hindering EV adoption, and a really brazen insult to us all.

I think you've shown us all your cards now. Good luck with hydrogen and gasoline hybrids. I'm going to guess you're not making a lot of investments in EV tech or infrastructure, which makes YOU a bit a of a troll on this forum, don't you think?

epirali
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 10:15 am
Delivery Date: 08 Oct 2013
Leaf Number: 418541
Location: Maryland

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:19 am

TonyWilliams wrote:
epirali wrote:...It's not installing one or two or ten chargers. I will do my part, by backing hydrogen when given a chance. Just like I have with BEVs. I will also invest in hydrogen tech companies that are innovators.
Really? Installing chargers for EVs is "not good", and promoting hydrogen is "good"? I think your comment on the BEVx thread about EV advocates, like myself and so many on this EV forum, are actually hindering EV adoption, and a really brazen insult to us all.

I think you've shown us all your cards now. Good luck with hydrogen and gasoline hybrids.
I don't even know what this means. What cards? Feel free to be insulted by people who simply have differing opinions. I personally don't feel insulted by your opinion. I just don't share it. There is a lot of room out there for differing opinions and world views.

Can't you just add me to an ignore list so you don't have to suffer through my opinions?

User avatar
TonyWilliams
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:48 am
Location: San Diego
Contact: Website

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:30 am

epirali wrote:Can't you just add me to an ignore list so you don't have to suffer through my opinions?
Sorry, but, I save the ignore list for people way more special than you... you haven't made the cut! You're just a common troll, and we have lots of those. My time isn't consumed with managing other folk's trolling ability.

If this were a political party site, and you were on the "wrong" side of the political issues, you'd be a troll there, too. Don't forget to make that Fossil Fuel God shrine!

With us EV advocates actually HINDERING the adoption of EVs (according to you), I'm going to build a stack of used AA batteries into a shrine and see if I can get my mojo back.


:ugeek:
Last edited by TonyWilliams on Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

epirali
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 10:15 am
Delivery Date: 08 Oct 2013
Leaf Number: 418541
Location: Maryland

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:55 am

TonyWilliams wrote:
epirali wrote:Can't you just add me to an ignore list so you don't have to suffer through my opinions?
Sorry, but, I save the ignore list for people way more special than you... you haven't made the cut! You're just a common troll, and we have lots of those. My time isn't consumed with managing other folk's trolling ability.

If this were a political party site, and you were on the "wrong" side of the political issues, you'd be a troll there, too. Don't forget to make that Fossil Fuel God shrine!

With us EV advocates actually HINDERING the adoption of EVs (according to you), I'm going to build a stack of used AA batteries into a shrine and see if I can get my mojo back.


:ugeek:
Well I'll disregard the un-needed insults and imagery and ask that you simply ignore my posts. I don't really feel I need to "prove" myself to you or anyone else. This is not a political issue, it is a real life issue. Reducing CO2 emissions isn't an exercise in politics, it is a crisis.

I guess this is where I actually come out and say that my personal research and opinion says the real way to change our society is by use of nuclear power to generate electricity without carbon/coal/gas and to change transportation by using nuclear/wind/solar power to charge FC/electrical batteries. Yeah, I'm building my shrine to fossil fuel right there!

User avatar
TonyWilliams
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:48 am
Location: San Diego
Contact: Website

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:20 pm

epirali wrote:Well I'll disregard the un-needed insults and imagery and ask that you simply ignore my posts.
No thanks.
I don't really feel I need to "prove" myself to you or anyone else. This is not a political issue, it is a real life issue. Reducing CO2 emissions isn't an exercise in politics, it is a crisis.
Really? None of we EV advocates knew that, Andy. We're all just muddling around, playing with hydrogen or whatever strikes our fancy. I didn't realize that human existence was at stake, that is until you, a hydrogen advocate, pointed that out to us.

Thanks, Andy.
I guess this is where I actually come out and say that my personal research and opinion says the real way to change our society is by use of nuclear power to generate electricity without carbon/coal/gas and to change transportation by using nuclear/wind/solar power to charge FC/electrical batteries. Yeah, I'm building my shrine to fossil fuel right there!
Ya, that nuke stuff has worked out GREAT for mankind. I guess it makes sense that a guy devoted to hydrogen with all its failings for transport, would also be attracted to nuclear, with body count associated with that.

So, my position is that there is enough sun light, wind and waves already on planet earth that can be harvested for electrical energy without any fossil fuels or nuclear. Same for transport. Crazy stuff, I know.

epirali
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 10:15 am
Delivery Date: 08 Oct 2013
Leaf Number: 418541
Location: Maryland

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:32 pm

TonyWilliams wrote:Ya, that nuke stuff has worked out GREAT for mankind. I guess it makes sense that a guy devoted to hydrogen with all its failings for transport, would also be attracted to nuclear, with body count associated with that.

So, my position is that there is enough sun light, wind and waves already on planet earth that can be harvested for electrical energy without any fossil fuels or nuclear. Same for transport. Crazy stuff, I know.
Actually, if we were to use facts and not hyperbole, there has been almost no body count associated with nuclear power. And even the accidents that have happened have been in older designs, and some with massive events. All of which doesn't even register compared to just basic accidents with fuel/coal plants.

We do not have enough wind/sun available 24/7 to power the planet. There are places where this is true, but places like Germany, when they can have excess of wind power, either need to shut the turbines down or use storage. And they are starting to lean towards hydrogen as a better storage medium than just batteries to store/use the power later.

Anywhere where there is not enough wind/sun available there needs to be another clean energy source. Shockingly nuclear is just that. If people can get past the fear factor of the word "nuclear" we have had the solution to our carbon problems and we have just chosen not to use it. So we just go down a bad path because of fear and hyperbole.

Batteries are good for local storage. Hydrogen can store more/denser and can be transported. I'll say again because you don't want to just ignore me: its not an and/or solution. Its not nuclear vs wind. Its not battery vs fuel cell. That is just irrational thinking.

Return to “Politics & Other Controversial Topics”