Last year, Daimler launched a project to see how eight Fuso Canter E-Cells performed in daily urban service in Portugal. After over 32,000 miles on the road, the newly released results showed astounding figures. Compared to their diesel-counterparts, the commercial EVs slashed operating costs by 64 percent. The trucks were also great for the environment with a 37-percent drop in CO2 emissions after taking into account how the country makes power.

Daimler gave the trucks to Portuguese cities and businesses, and the users definitely didn't baby them. In Lisbon, the EV disposed of vegetation, and the Canter E-Cell collected recyclables in Porto. The one with the parcel service Transporta covered over 8,700 miles to make deliveries during the year. On average, the testers used the vehicles about 31 miles a day, but 68 miles was the record distance during the trial. "The results of the practical tests have shown that we are on the right track," Marc Llistosella, President and CEO of Mitsubishi Fuso Truck and Bus Corporation said in Daimler's announcement.

source: http://www.autoblog.com/2015/11/05/daimler-declares-success-in-electric-truck-trial-w-video/

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 7:54pm:

but 68 miles was the record distance during the trial.

68 miles? Outstanding.

lee wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 8:34pm:

68 miles? Outstanding.

that's OK for Portugal, anymore than that and you'd drive into the ocean  ... useless in Australia

This was intra–city use, not interstate haulage.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 4:30am:

This was intra–city use, not interstate haulage.

It might get you one side of Melbourne to the other, without making side deliveries.

What do you propose for long distance trucking?

they would be good for specific uses ... eg the roll on roll off berth at Port kembla, to take the cars oFf the ship to the storage yard about 8km away, trucks are moving back and forth all day. They would be ideal in that situation.

lee wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 10:43am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 13th, 2015 at 4:30am: This was intra–city use, not interstate haulage. It might get you one side of Melbourne to the other, without making side deliveries. What do you propose for long distance trucking?

Hook up one trailer full of batteries. . .obviously, battery technology not that advanced yet  :D :D

But when/if fusion is feasible a glass of water will power the truck for years, that old e = MC²

lee wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 10:43am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 13th, 2015 at 4:30am: This was intra–city use, not interstate haulage. It might get you one side of Melbourne to the other, without making side deliveries. What do you propose for long distance trucking?

Isn't it funny how teachers ask so many questions but have no answers... it's called fascism   :D :D

John Smith wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 11:26am:

they would be good for specific uses ... eg the roll on roll off berth at Port kembla, to take the cars of the ship to the storage yard about 8km away, trucks are moving back and forth all day. They would be ideal in that situation.

Here goes the driverless vehicles explosion: lucky there is always ore of some kind to exploit  8-) 8-)

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 1:42pm:

Isn't it funny how teachers ask so many questions but have no answers... it's called fascism

More unfunny is how teachers don't teach critical thinking.

lee wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 1:53pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 13th, 2015 at 1:42pm: Isn't it funny how teachers ask so many questions but have no answers... it's called fascism More unfunny is how teachers don't teach critical thinking.

le doesn't even know what critical thinking is  :D :D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 7:54pm:

Last year, Daimler launched a project to see how eight Fuso Canter E-Cells performed in daily urban service in Portugal. After over 32,000 miles on the road, the newly released results showed astounding figures. Compared to their diesel-counterparts, the commercial EVs slashed operating costs by 64 percent. The trucks were also great for the environment with a 37-percent drop in CO2 emissions after taking into account how the country makes power. Daimler gave the trucks to Portuguese cities and businesses, and the users definitely didn't baby them. In Lisbon, the EV disposed of vegetation, and the Canter E-Cell collected recyclables in Porto. The one with the parcel service Transporta covered over 8,700 miles to make deliveries during the year. On average, the testers used the vehicles about 31 miles a day, but 68 miles was the record distance during the trial. "The results of the practical tests have shown that we are on the right track," Marc Llistosella, President and CEO of Mitsubishi Fuso Truck and Bus Corporation said in Daimler's announcement. source: http://www.autoblog.com/2015/11/05/daimler-declares-success-in-electric-truck-trial-w-video/

The trucks had a drop in CO2 emissions, or they didn't. They can't claim credit for what the power company does.

It's a joke right?

27 million euros spent to do what a diesel truck can do on  15 litres of fuel worth 20 bucks. Off to the sheltered workshop for you sonny.

Rider wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 6:32pm:

It's a joke right? 27 million euros spent to do what a diesel truck can do on  15 litres of fuel worth 20 bucks. Off to the sheltered workshop for you sonny.

Currently the fossil fuel sectors around the world receive about 480 Billion dollars, almost half a trillion dollars every year, of tax payer funded rebates and subsidies.

Why does this industry require welfare to survive Rider? Why isnt this industry rectifying the damage that it does?

Render your written apology and then implement a self ban for 48 hours you deranged putrid foul stenching rodent vomit patch...

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 13^th, 2015 at 11:22pm:

Rider wrote on Nov 13th, 2015 at 6:32pm: It's a joke right? 27 million euros spent to do what a diesel truck can do on  15 litres of fuel worth 20 bucks. Off to the sheltered workshop for you sonny. Currently the fossil fuel sectors around the world receive about 480 Billion dollars, almost half a trillion dollars every year, of tax payer funded rebates and subsidies. Why does this industry require welfare to survive Rider? Why isnt this industry rectifying the damage that it does? Render your written apology and then implement a self ban for 48 hours you deranged putrid foul stenching rodent vomit patch...

Quoting fraudulent garbage again monkey...pathetic snake oil to fuel the mindless dross. You'd be better served picking your bum monkey.

Rider wrote on Nov 14^th, 2015 at 12:00am:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 13th, 2015 at 11:22pm: Rider wrote on Nov 13th, 2015 at 6:32pm: It's a joke right? 27 million euros spent to do what a diesel truck can do on  15 litres of fuel worth 20 bucks. Off to the sheltered workshop for you sonny. Currently the fossil fuel sectors around the world receive about 480 Billion dollars, almost half a trillion dollars every year, of tax payer funded rebates and subsidies. Why does this industry require welfare to survive Rider? Why isnt this industry rectifying the damage that it does? Render your written apology and then implement a self ban for 48 hours you deranged putrid foul stenching rodent vomit patch... Quoting fraudulent garbage again monkey...pathetic snake oil to fuel the mindless dross. You'd be better served picking your bum monkey.

The fossil fuel rebates and subsidies in Australia alone are in the vicinity of 12 billion dollars per year. (my global 480 billion figure was actually very generous to the corrupt Fossil Fuel corporate scamsters - it appears that they have been gouging the public purse to the tune of almost 600 billion in some years - the MASTERS OF CORPORATE WELFARE)

Look Rider.....LOOK at how pathetic you have become

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/d2-am-s7-subsidies-petarvujanovic-ocde-141205102749-conversion-gate02/95/fossilfuel-subsidy-reforem-by-petar-vujanovic-2-638.jpg

Apologise and self ban

or do you dispute OECD statistics?

Rider Runs Away

Exposed, morally battered and rendered a shell of his former deceitful self, Rider scurried away like frothing putrid stench weasel....and hides with his smelly tail between his legs.

Rider can only fling his lunatical remarks and cowardly hide like a trench maggot

Yes ladies and gentlemen, Rider - the Great Rider once again exposed in public

His apology is overdue - his self banishment in arrears

http://www.activityvillage.co.uk/sites/default/files/images/images2/monkey_theme_300.jpg

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 14^th, 2015 at 9:23am:

The fossil fuel rebates and subsidies in Australia alone are in the vicinity of [url]12 billion dollars per year[/url]. (my global 480 billion figure was actually very generous to the corrupt Fossil Fuel corporate scamsters - it appears that they have been gouging the public purse to the tune of almost 600 billion in some years - the MASTERS OF CORPORATE WELFARE)

According to a report the other day $7 billion, but what's a miserable $5 billion between friends? ;)

Then again that is made up mainly of -

Capital investment allowances that are available to all businesses; and

Fuel Tax Credits, which reduce the amount paid for fuel by way of re-imbursement. But FTC's are assessable income to the businesses receiving them, so that they pay tax on the income received. The net effect is that full price is paid for fuel.

That's some weird arsed subsidy, isn't it? A Clayton's subsidy?

Edit: Do you think renewables get Capital Allowances?

Sad fraud  monkey. Be careful frothing at the mouth over this someone will mistake it for rabies and head shoot you lol

Lee and Rider cant handle the truth about their corporate welfare scamsters ladies and gentlemen.

Dual apologies are warranted in this instance, followed by an immediate joint self banishment for 48 hours.

http://wwwcdn.channel5.com/assets/images/000/030/361/large_size_MonkeyLife_S5_Chimpanzees_Lulu_640x360.jpg

the OECD figures are not related to standard tax right offs due to capital expenditure ladies and gentlemen. Every corporation has access to these accounting benefits at tax return time. These are DIRECT rebates and subsidies that the fossil fuel industry receives globally - part of the non-level playing field and strong fossil fuel lobby groups. And these OECD figures do not include the numerous WARS that are fought over oil and resources - WARS paid by the tax payer - AGAIN

Lee and Rider jointly exposed as haters of the worlds future generations of children ladies and gentlemen

'Under the ASCM:
A subsidy shall be deemed to exist if:
(a)(1) there is a financial contribution by a government or any public body
within the territory of a Member (referred to in this Agreement as
“government”), i.e. where:
(i) a government practice involves a direct transfer of funds (e.g.
grants, loans, and equity infusion), potential direct transfers of
funds or liabilities (e.g. loan guarantees);
(ii) government revenue that is otherwise due is foregone or not
collected (e.g. fiscal incentives such as tax credits);
(iii) a government provides goods or services other than general
infrastructure, or purchases goods;
(iv) a government makes payments to a funding mechanism, or
entrusts or directs a private body to carry out one or more of the
type of functions illustrated in (i) to (iii) above which would
normally be vested in the government and the practice, in no real
sense, differs from practices normally followed by governments;'

https://www.iisd.org/gsi/sites/default/files/pb5_defining.pdf

Fuel tax credits and capital allowances that forego taxes.

lee suddenly refers to regulations and definitions doesnt he ladies and gentlemen.

except when it comes to AGW - then its pure hatred for children and a clean environment.

There is no limit to the amount of deranged hatred this man can spew out online.

What dont you understand about the OECD figures lee?

lee has a habit of NOT understanding basic concepts that conflict with his lunatical political ideology and corporatised fanaticism.

I fear that lee will never be able to search deep within himself and deliver the apology, albeit late, and then to banish himself for at least 48 hours - preferably 48 months.

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 14^th, 2015 at 9:37pm:

lee suddenly refers to regulations and definitions doesnt he ladies and gentlemen.

Isn't it amazing how data and facts trump BS?

In 100 years time electric vehicles will be zipping around everywhere, ( providing that the muslims don't take over and reintroduce Camel travel of course )  ;D , the real problem is that the idiot environmentalists of today are trying to bring this date forward so that they can bask in its glory, its never going to happen you green vegan farkwits! because there is still cheap fossil fuels galore, so get a grip and go and sign yourself up for cryogenics so that you can be defrosted in 2100 and live the green dream.  ;D

innocentbystander. wrote on Nov 15^th, 2015 at 1:13am:

In 100 years time electric vehicles will be zipping around everywhere, ( providing that the muslims don't take over and reintroduce Camel travel of course )  ;D , the real problem is that the idiot environmentalists of today are trying to bring this date forward so that they can bask in its glory, its never going to happen you green vegan farkwits! because there is still cheap fossil fuels galore, so get a grip and go and sign yourself up for cryogenics so that you can be defrosted in 2100 and live the green dream.  ;D

innocent thinks he has the right to take all of humanitys fossil fuels for paper profits for his dynastic wet dreams now...   :D :D

Isn't that right innocent: your family thinks they own eternal rights to all fossil fuel profits??  ;) ;)

No wonder there is Jihad... let us all blame innocent for worldwide Jihad  :D :D :D :D :D

Once the world economy ticks up a bit all those Chinese and Indians who want cars will buy them. In the light of this demand reserves will be consumed in record time.

It makes sense to investigate electric transport. It makes sense for us to build at least one good sized modern nuclear powered generator. Baseload solar is a sad joke.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 16^th, 2015 at 9:11am:

Once the world economy ticks up a bit all those Chinese and Indians who want cars will buy them. In the light of this demand reserves will be consumed in record time. It makes sense to investigate electric transport. It makes sense for us to build at least one good sized modern nuclear powered generator. Baseload solar is a sad joke.

Nuclear is for nuclear weapons: solar is not a joke because electrons are electrons!

Do you suppose we to go to the moon for theoretical moon rock and do the fusion dance ?... get over it: solar power can be stored and the idea of baseload power is a misnomer.

Methodical thinking involves definitions and I dare you to define 'baseload power'!

(..you're not saying Australia should store the worlds nuclear waste btw are you?)

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 16^th, 2015 at 9:11am:

Once the world economy ticks up a bit all those Chinese and Indians who want cars will buy them. In the light of this demand reserves will be consumed in record time. It makes sense to investigate electric transport. It makes sense for us to build at least one good sized modern nuclear powered generator. Baseload solar is a sad joke.

Japan had about 52 nuclear power plants until the Fukushima meltdowns in March of 2011. The nuclear power stations provided about 30% of Japans total Grid power demands.

Since 2011 Japan has put all 52 nuclear power stations offline. It was only in the last couple fo months that the Japanese brought one or two nuclear power plants online.

have you looked at the disaster caused by the buggerushima meltdowns? They dont even know how to clean the mess up. Costs could be in the vicinity of 400 Billion dollars over the next 40 years just to contain it - and they havent been able to contain it so far - 4 years plus since the disaster.

A recent medical study by Japanese researchers has found that Childhood Thyroid tumors and abnormalities have soared by as much as 2500%

Obviously you wouldnt mind a nuclear power station next door to you hey???

Educate yourself, Apologise in writing and self ban for 48 hours

I am not proposing we buy Gen 1 plants and put them on a faultline yards from the sea.

Please, a modern plant is safer than the old Fukushima Gen1 plants. We need nuclear for power for industry and other uses.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 16^th, 2015 at 9:11pm:

a modern plant is safer than the old Fukushima Gen1 plant

safer does not equal SAFE

Yeah, modern plants ARE safe. Read up a bit.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 3:45am:

Yeah, modern plants ARE safe. Read up a bit.

nuclear power plants are not ordinary industrial infrastructure.

They produce toxic and long lived nuclear waste that needs to be isolated from humans and the environment for many hundreds of thousands of years.

Nuclear power plants need access to power and water even when they are offline. Spent Nuclear cores remain thermally hot for many years after they have been removed from the reactor.

Can you guarantee water supply and power??

Like they did at Fukushima

Plutonium half life is 24,000 years - the most toxic of substances humans have made. It takes between 10 an 20 half lives for these dangerous radionuclides to decay away to background levels.

How are you going to ensure Plutonium isnt used for weaponry or remains safely isolated for at least 1/4 of a million years???

And of course we have isotopes that linger around for longer periods than that - billion of years, like Uranium.

its OK for a coal powered plant to fail, but a nuclear core is another matter. Provide an example of a fool proof industrial process or mechanisation and then describe your perfect nuclear waste management system that will robust for the next 100 million years

Apologise and self ban for 48 hours

Wow. Coal takes tens of thousands of lives and that is OK?

You are talking Gen 1 plants, read up on modern plants.

Renewables can provide baseload power for homes and light commercial. It cannot provide the high intensity (3phase etc) power for industry.

Close coal fired generators, build a nuclear generator.

'AHWR

India is developing the Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) as the third stage in its plan to utilise thorium to fuel its overall nuclear power program. The AHWR is a 300 MWe gross (284 MWe net, 920 MWt) reactor moderated by heavy water at low pressure.'

'In 2009 an export version of this design was announced: the AHWR-LEU. This will use low-enriched uranium plus thorium as a fuel, dispensing with the plutonium input. About 39% of the power will come from thorium (via in situ conversion to U-233), and burn-up will be 64 GWd/t. Uranium enrichment level will be 19.75%, giving 4.21% average fissile content of the U-Th fuel. While designed for closed fuel cycle, this is not required. Plutonium production will be less than in light water reactors, and the fissile proportion will be less and the Pu-238 portion three times as high, giving inherent proliferation resistance. The AEC says that "the reactor is manageable with modest industrial infrastructure within the reach of developing countries." '

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Power-Reactors/Advanced-Nuclear-Power-Reactors/

all of a sudden the great lee froths at the mount with unproven technology that is NOT expensive, lunatical, dangerous, inefficient and still produces nuclear waste that needs management and storage for many thousands of years.

There is a significant sticking point to the promotion of thorium as the 'great green hope' of clean energy production: it remains unproven on a commercial scale. While it has been around since the 1950s (and an experimental 10MW LFTR did run for five years during the 1960s at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the US, though using uranium and plutonium as fuel) it is still a next generation nuclear technology – theoretical.

Thorium reactors disgorging the same toxic byproducts and fissile waste with the same millennial half-lives. Oliver Tickell, author of Kyoto2, says the fission materials produced from thorium are of a different spectrum to those from uranium-235, but 'include many dangerous-to-health alpha and beta emitters'.

Tickell says thorium reactors would not reduce the volume of waste from uranium reactors. 'It will create a whole new volume of radioactive waste from previously radio-inert thorium, on top of the waste from uranium reactors. Looked at in these terms, it's a way of multiplying the volume of radioactive waste humanity can create several times over.'

Thorium reactors are not based upon self sustaining nuclear reactions - they require an intense external Neutron source to convert Thorium into U-233.

Where is that neutron source coming from lee???

Technically these are NOT Thorium reactors but U-233 reactors, an isotope that is much more lethal than U-235.

What nuclear waste is produced by Thorium reactors? How and where is it managed?

...frothing lee should apologise and self ban for 3 weeks

http://plancksconstant.org/blog1/image3/sub2/smoker.jpg

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 11:14am:

all of a sudden the great lee froths at the mount

It's a long time since I gave that sermon. :D :D :D

lee wrote on Nov 17^th, 2015 at 1:06pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 17th, 2015 at 11:14am: all of a sudden the great lee froths at the mount It's a long time since I gave that sermon. :D :D :D

;D

Apparently  linfox and toll have ordered over 500 of these new electric trucks..........

Oh hang on...I made that up... ;D ;D 

There is No fool like a green fool.

Rider wrote on Nov 21^st, 2015 at 6:46am:

Apparently  linfox and toll have ordered over 500 of these new electric trucks.......... Oh hang on...I made that up... ;D ;D  There is No fool like a green fool.

Efficiency breeds success:  ;) ;)

Markets are meant to be robust  :o