Electric Vehicles a Flop?

[jj3jordan 2,053]

22 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Animals have done the requisite trace co2 for a billion years. It’s the +500million cars and industry that’s kinda new to the planet. I’m not sure you’ll find many more co2 is our friend scientists.

Of course not. It’s a dangerous poisonous emission that needs to be reduced. Less humans obviously would be better. With all those cars and industry still trace. 

[auburnatl1 4,920]

9 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

Of course not. It’s a dangerous poisonous emission that needs to be reduced. Less humans obviously would be better. With all those cars and industry still trace. 

No point in having a “trace” debate. I simply submit that as a society we struggle with long term problems that require discipline and tough decisions. Ie the deficit and climate. Easier to say it’s not going to ruin my weekend and argue about bud light.

[jj3jordan 2,053]

9 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

No point in having a “trace” debate. I simply submit that as a society we struggle with long term problems that require discipline and tough decisions. Ie the deficit and climate. Easier to say it’s not going to ruin my weekend and argue about bud light.

Deficit is a big problem. With you there. Routine historical weather fluctuations are not. 

[JMWATS 93]

This seems high to me but it is factual according to USA Today…

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/08/30/fact-check-dealer-gave-30-000-estimate-replace-volt-battery-electric-car-hybrid/7935230001/

Edited October 31, 2023 by JMWATS

[I_M4_AU 7,838]

4 minutes ago, JMWATS said:

This seems high to me

I bet the trade-in value is really low as time passes.  I wonder if they are just disposable when the battery runs low and will not charge?

I don’t think the EV experiment was thought out, just thrown out as saving the planet.  What could go wrong.

[AU9377 4,931]

21 hours ago, Son of A Tiger said:

FWIW, I have a grandson who works for General Motors in the battery area. He said some progress is being made on the life and cost of lithium batteries but there is a ways to go to make them economical. He said he wouldn't buy one now.  Then there is the disposal problem.

Hydrogen is a whole different ball game. I have my doubts it will ever be used in cars  for several reasons. Hydrogen fuel cells have a real safety problem and a hydrogen distribution system is not in the cards for a long time. Ford has admitted they are not likely to ever recover their investment in EVs so that may end up being the case for others.

I was as skeptical as anyone at first.  GM and Ford have both been embarrassingly ineffective in their R&D, especially considering the amount of money they have spent in that area.  But for Tesla technology, they would still be struggling.  GM is now developing a new battery platform, the Ultium, that they claim will out perform Tesla's latest design.  More importantly, it supposedly uses 70% less cobalt to produce the Ultium battery. Even with this new platform, they have announced that they will adopt Tesla charging connectors as the standard.

It may not be in our lifetime, but within 40 years, the majority of personal transportation will be powered by something other than traditional fuel.  The benefits are simply too great for that to not occur.  Yes, the energy still has to be generated, but improvements in transmission of electrical energy, along with many other factors, will make that the more efficient route.  It isn't only about pollution. 

There are a lot of issues that have to be dealt with, but that is the case with any tech innovation.  Price must come down.  Battery replacement has to be affordable.  Today, someone can purchase a fuel efficient vehicle, even with $3 to $4 dollar a gallon gas, and still spend less in the long run.  Of course, many Americans seem to be eager to spend $60k plus for vehicles that burn thru $100 tanks of gas with ease.

Edited October 31, 2023 by AU9377

[homersapien 11,373]

On 10/31/2023 at 8:37 AM, jj3jordan said:

Don’t forget co2 is the life giving gas for plants to grow. How much less? You have to be careful messing with nature. Kill off plants=less oxygen for animals. Vicious cycle caused by us could be our ultimate demise.

Pray tell us what happens when you have too much in our atmosphere oh CO2 expert.

Then explain what the concentration of CO2 in the air is required for plants to thrive and why that can't be easily sustained by animal life that has existed on earth for over 800 million years?

Finally, explain how reducing the level of CO2 emissions to something that existed before the industrial age (which began in the mid 1700s) is going to deplete the level of CO2 required for plants?

The forum is waiting......

 

Edited November 1, 2023 by homersapien

[AU9377 4,931]

29 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I bet the trade-in value is really low as time passes.  I wonder if they are just disposable when the battery runs low and will not charge?

I don’t think the EV experiment was thought out, just thrown out as saving the planet.  What could go wrong.

The company that can mass produce a vehicle that is not reliant on fossil fuels and combustion that is also affordable will have done what Henry Ford did when the Model T was mass produced. It will change the world.  That is what they are attempting to accomplish.  As of today, hybrid vehicles are much more feasible, but you have to start somewhere.  I have no doubt that an engineer somewhere will figure it out.

[AU9377 4,931]

42 minutes ago, JMWATS said:

This seems high to me but it is factual according to USA Today…

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/08/30/fact-check-dealer-gave-30-000-estimate-replace-volt-battery-electric-car-hybrid/7935230001/

That vehicle has been a failure from the start.  At one time, they recalled every one that they had sold.

[auburnatl1 4,920]

it is amazing that for over a hundred years we’ve relied on the international combustion engine powered by decayed hydrocarbons from before the dinosaurs.

[AU9377 4,931]

1 hour ago, jj3jordan said:

Deficit is a big problem. With you there. Routine historical weather fluctuations are not. 

EVs are not just about the climate.  That said, nobody can argue that more emissions is a good thing.

[jj3jordan 2,053]

1 hour ago, AU9377 said:

EVs are not just about the climate.  That said, nobody can argue that more emissions is a good thing.

How about emissions creating the increase in electricity charging stations? How about the thousands of cubic yards of earth raped for the rare earth minerals required for just one car battery?  Ugly truths not even acknowledged by the left pushing us all to EVs. EVs are absolutely all about the climate/weather. Otherwise no one would want one. The just don't perform. 

[auburnatl1 4,920]

19 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

How about emissions creating the increase in electricity charging stations? How about the thousands of cubic yards of earth raped for the rare earth minerals required for just one car battery?  Ugly truths not even acknowledged by the left pushing us all to EVs. EVs are absolutely all about the climate/weather. Otherwise no one would want one. The just don't perform. 

FYI 

https://electrek.co/2023/03/01/tesla-is-going-back-to-ev-motors-with-no-rare-earth-elements/#:~:text=The rare earth elements in,as additives in Neodymium magnets.

[I_M4_AU 7,838]

4 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The company that can mass produce a vehicle that is not reliant on fossil fuels and combustion that is also affordable will have done what Henry Ford did when the Model T was mass produced. It will change the world.  That is what they are attempting to accomplish.  As of today, hybrid vehicles are much more feasible, but you have to start somewhere.  I have no doubt that an engineer somewhere will figure it out.

I’m sure they will, but why start out with a dud?  The EU is mandating all new vehicles will be EV’s by as early as 2030.  Why not hybrids by then?  Not thought out.

The cost of the battery replacement is as much as a good used car.

[AU9377 4,931]

4 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

How about emissions creating the increase in electricity charging stations? How about the thousands of cubic yards of earth raped for the rare earth minerals required for just one car battery?  Ugly truths not even acknowledged by the left pushing us all to EVs. EVs are absolutely all about the climate/weather. Otherwise no one would want one. The just don't perform. 

Perform?  You have clearly never driven a Tesla.  I wouldn't buy it over my Acura, but that is mainly about initial price and cost to maintain.  They perform well.  They are powerful machines.  Nobody is pushing anyone.  For God's sake, we should all agree that there isn't a limitless supply of crude oil and that alternatives need to be developed.

My best friend and his wife have one.  They live and work in Columbus, GA.  She commutes about 20 minutes each way to and from work each day and they use it on the weekends .  He estimates that charging costs them around $25 a month on their power bill.  That is much less than what he pays to gas up his vehicle.

Edited October 31, 2023 by AU9377

[AU9377 4,931]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

I’m sure they will, but why start out with a dud?  The EU is mandating all new vehicles will be EV’s by as early as 2030.  Why not hybrids by then?  Not thought out.

The cost of the battery replacement is as much as a good used car.

I'm certain that date will be pushed back.  More than anything, they are pushing innovation in the marketplace. 

[Cardin Drake 1,828]

EV's will ultimately be successful, but it will take much longer than initially projected. The market is simply saturated for expensive luxury EV's.  I'm all for EV's, not because of the environment, but because anything that can get the world to quit lining the pockets of our enemies in the middle east is a good thing.  Right now, the initial cost is too high, and anybody who has owned a laptop knows lithium ion batteries lose a great deal of their capacity after a few years.  You can add in that insuring EV's is more costly as well, and that cost is still rising.  They are frightfully expensive to repair, and their propensity to burst into flames is spooking the insurance industry.  It's almost like the government doesn't have any actual science behind their mandates.  But companies like Toyota, who has avoided rushing into the market, will ultimately put out electric cars that are cheaper to own than ICE cars.  And that's when I'll buy one. For now, the government needs to quit subsidizing the toys of the wealthy and mandating a fantasy that doesn't exist yet and let the free market do it's work.

Edited November 1, 2023 by Cardin Drake

[homersapien 11,373]

22 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

How about emissions creating the increase in electricity charging stations? How about the thousands of cubic yards of earth raped for the rare earth minerals required for just one car battery?  Ugly truths not even acknowledged by the left pushing us all to EVs. EVs are absolutely all about the climate/weather. Otherwise no one would want one. The just don't perform. 

Yeah, who would want a vehicle with an engine that produces maximum torque as soon as it starts turning.

[jj3jordan 2,053]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Yeah, who would want a vehicle with an engine that produces maximum torque as soon as it starts turning.

Residents of the Villages?

[icanthearyou 4,463]

35 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

Residents of the Villages?

Yes.  Most of those golf carts are electric.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/is-it-cheaper-to-refuel-your-ev-battery-or-gas-tank-we-did-the-math-in-all-50-states/ar-AA1eX28s?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=14a73de657054e748ec92b52bb3284ce&ei=38

[autigeremt 6,629]

On 11/1/2023 at 12:35 PM, homersapien said:

Yeah, who would want a vehicle with an engine that produces maximum torque as soon as it starts turning.

The problem with EV is a grid that needs massive overhauls. There's also the cost of getting rid of/recycling all of those battery packs. The cart is being thrown ahead of the horse.

Edited December 1, 2023 by autigeremt

[homersapien 11,373]

4 hours ago, autigeremt said:

The problem with EV is a grid that needs massive overhauls. There's also the cost of getting rid of/recycling all of those battery packs. The cart is being thrown ahead of the horse.

Those are hardly the only problems.

As for the cart horse analogy, what exactly is the "horse" and how do you execute it? 

I submit that -in our economic system - the horse is market demand.

[AU9377 4,931]

6 hours ago, autigeremt said:

The problem with EV is a grid that needs massive overhauls. There's also the cost of getting rid of/recycling all of those battery packs. The cart is being thrown ahead of the horse.

It is one of the few areas where there is real innovation occurring that isn't the result of pure necessity.  I don't think anyone would argue that we won't need an alternative to the combustion engine at some point. I don't doubt that when that alternative is settled on, it will be, in part, due to a lot of attempts that failed along the way.

[autigeremt 6,629]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Those are hardly the only problems.

As for the cart horse analogy, what exactly is the "horse" and how do you execute it? 

I submit that -in our economic system - the horse is market demand.

The horse is alternative transportation that doesn’t utilize fossil fuels. The cart is the lack of a grid that can support it in the first place, combined with a lack of innovation in the reclamation process of the batteries. 

Edited December 2, 2023 by autigeremt