Bensch’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Why should a vehicle take all night to recharge?

  The one in that picture in the article didn't. The batteries were swapped out when they ran out, and then the batteries were charged separately. This silly nonsense about having to charge the vehicle would be solved by a battery standard - in fact, using a system like this, it takes LESS TIME THAN FILLING A GAS TANK.

  I'd love to know where we're going to get all this electricity, though.On Umbra on electric cars posted 3 years, 2 months ago 12 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Edit:

  Cars, darn it, not cards! :)On Umbra on electric cars posted 3 years, 2 months ago 12 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Changes in expected range.

  The first electric cards were products of service - actually taxicabs, not privately owned. You took the train from city to city, and then used one of these for the last segment of your travel. Of course, this wasn't for everyone; most couldn't afford the service.

  The range limitations then were about the same as they are today - battery technology really hasn't come that far, and it can't! It's more limited by physics than design, just like the amount of energy necessary to create a given number of lumens has been the same for fluorescent light technology ever since Tesla came up with it in the first place.

  We expect the car, a single solution, to meet all of our needs. This is ridiculously inefficient - cars are bad for short trips, and also bad for very long ones. But we expect the car to take us 100-200 miles regularly, when those trips would be more efficiently made by rail in any other first world country.

  This will change - in Washington, for instance, we're slowly ramping up our Amtrak Cascades service, now primarily funded by the state, rather than federal, government. California's High Speed Rail Authority has completed an environmental impact statement as well as other necessary documents to move forward with 220mph electric rail service similar to the Japanese Shinkansen, French TGV or German ICE. That service will be time and cost competitive with air travel.

  With public support for new highways eroding and our existing systems largely at capacity, longer distance transit systems are beginning to see a new renaissance. With them comes a shift in expectations for private passenger vehicles, and a shift in our land use back toward more compact communities.

  The real issues for electric vehicles do come in the form of electrical generation. With California's new solar mandate, wind farm construction at an all time high, and more efficient appliances and lights coming to many consumers, you'd expect to see a surplus of power - but these are being met by forced closure of coal and oil-fired plants as well as the potential demolition of hydroelectric dams on major fish runs. With the concept of peak oil also translating to our uranium supplies, I don't think we're going to be able to generate the kind of power necessary for everyone to drag 3,000 pounds of steel on inefficient rubber tires - especially when our communities adapt to lend themselves to walking and bicycling.On Umbra on electric cars posted 3 years, 2 months ago 12 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I disagree with Jason's approach.

  That was my point - that we've raised the question he's raised for thirty years, and that there are answers to it. Honestly, all else being equal, he's right - a teeny, tiny minority of us are not going to change the world quickly enough or effectively enough. We do have to accept that as reality today.

  People have been faced with the realities of global climate change. Those realities are not locusts, they're slow shifts. They are not making the changes necessary to create sustainable systems. You can ask anyone ont he street what they think about global climate change, and they have already formed an opinion. In order to change that opinion, we have to do what Gore's doing - simple, elegant presentations of information, often disguised as solutions to everyday problems.

  Commute time is a great example - that's one of the examples I use to support sustainable transportation. It isn't about going out of your way to be green, it's about using systems more effective and efficient than cars to get where you need to go. Green is a side benefit, and it will have to be a side benefit until people start discovering it as a common thread in solutions to problems they care about.

  Stewart Brand and Paul Hawken recognize this - "The Clock of the Long Now" is about promoting long-term thinking, because it favors ecologically sustainable solutions. "The Ecology of Commerce", logically followed by "Cradle to Cradle", both explore the economic benefits of sustainable business systems. These are successful. As long as we raise questions that appear not to have answers over and over again, we will not be.

  The point of my comment was that change will occur only if we get people involved. Kaela, you illustrate my point - people who read Grist now are mostly already very aware of the issues and both capable of and interested in making changes in their lives to support change. While being vegetarian and buying organic, using a bicycle and mass transit are necessary, they do not create sustainable systems in and of themselves - they only support those systems.

  If we want to change the trends that already exist in society, in order to combat climate change, we will have to find ways to involve more people - and that means focusing on solutions now, instead of whinging and wringing our hands the way this article does.On The most inconvenient truth posted 3 years, 2 months ago 11 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I don't think there's much of a question.

  No, those in first world countries will not choose to pay more for products that are more energy intensive, will not pay more for meat, and will not choose to buy organic over non-organic for any energy use reasons.

  The questions you've just raised are where the concept of "think globally, act locally" originated. Trying to effect change on even a national scale is usually impossible - but changing a community, even an entire city, is much more likely.

  I live in Seattle, and it has a few examples. While it failed, the Seattle Monorail Project was an attempt to improve transit and reduce car use in the city - it was largely grassroots, and enjoyed strong popular support until it was mismanaged into the ground.

  A hard part of discussing issues this big on a site that's not geographically linked, like Grist, is that most of these discussions have been taking place in the same form they are now since the late 60s and early 70s.

  If Grist wants to be able to effect change, it will have to pick a topic (not necessarily just one) and engage its readers in more than simply commenting on a blog. It's all too easy to read an article like this and wring your hands. Maybe we could talk about methods of bringing people who don't read the site already into these paradigms?On The most inconvenient truth posted 3 years, 2 months ago 11 Responses