Yesterday. Would you buy and EV?

[jyoutz]

So, I dropped one of my vehicles off at the dealership for an appointment around noon. Some guy pulled up in a new Rivian truck for a charge. I hadn’t seen a Rivian up close so I went over to take a look and he was more than happy to show me around the vehicle. It was nice…perhaps better executed than a Tesla and he was a super nice guy. I left soon after. I returned at around 4 to pick up my vehicle. He was still there charging….sorry, I refuse to do that.

Mike

I have a nephew who owns a Tesla. He charges at home overnight and doesn’t wait around for a charge.

 

[Hay Dude]

That's just the thing. EV cars are not really progress. They hinder progress toward better alternatives. Hydrogen Fuel Cells are already superior technology, but are ignored because the masses do not understand what they are. Hybrids are a much better interim option as they expand fossil fuel use while we develop real lasting sol. They also do not require a large expenditure of resources on infrastructure. This is especially true because the scientists already know that we cannot do EV in the long term. Nevertheless, we will spend trillions to use them for 30 years or less.

So true. Hybrids were really the ultimate way to give those who worship at the altar of Al Gore something as more research and better ways are developed. I also see this as a multi-trillion dollar boondoggle. It will be forced on us for decades, using the guinea pig method until one day it finally works.

Still doesn’t solve greenhouse gasses one bit since hydrocarbon emitting power plants recharge the cars.

Trillions wasted to transfer the hydrocarbons from millions of tailpipes to thousands of power plant exhaust stacks.

Sign me up!!!

 

[Hay Dude]

There is more to it that just the technology though. Public adoption is a significant factor, and for the most part, the Hydrogen still comes from natural gas, so is still a fossil fuel. On that basis, while *arguably* a superior technology, it does not adequately meet the goals of the buyers.

I disagree that it hinder progress. I think EVs have brought widespread interest and understanding, whereas Hydrogen fuelling is often still seen as Doc from back to the future stuff.

I personally think hybrids are a slightly-better-than-nothing-half-attempt. Charging infrastructure requires very little investment compared to Hydrogen (the power lines are all already there, just need the stations adding).

EVs are FAR better suited to a significant amount of trips by a significant number of people - but not all. If you live within 100 miles of work and commute (rather than drive all day in a work truck say), then an EV will likely work for you. If you do the school run and grocery shopping then head home - perfect!

I'd be interested in a reference for "scientists already know that we cannot do EV in the long term", i haven't heard that.

Problem is, the power lines are woefully inadequate and the power running through them to all the EV charging stations is in the form of a hydrocarbon based power supply.

Nobody has solved the “what if there’s a mile long traffic jam and EV’s start to go dead scenario”? How are they accessed and “jump started”?

 

[Monster5601]

The boys over at Youtube's Fast Lane Truck flew into Detroit from Colorado to pick up their new Ford F150 Lighting and have chronicled their travel from Michigan back home. What is most interesting is the sea of issues recharging the vehicle on the way home and is worth the watch to get a feel of real-world recharging issues.

This is one in the series of videos, this illustrates their first day on the road.

 

[Hay Dude]

If the idea of “green” vehicles is so important in todays climate, then why not create new jobs building an infrastructure for handling them FIRST, then build the vehicles?

Isn’t all this the ultimate demonstration of “the cart before the horse”?

We all know the seizure of taxpayer dollars is required for this mandate, so lets at least get some Americans sitting with no jobs some training and get them to work building the infrastructure?

 

[dodge man]

I’ve got 1600 miles on mine. I guess it’s technically a hybrid because it has no throttle, if you don’t pedal it doesn’t move.

 

[ultrarunner]

The boys over at Youtube's Fast Lane Truck flew into Detroit from Colorado to pick up their new Ford F150 Lighting and have chronicled their travel from Michigan back home. What is most interesting is the sea of issues recharging the vehicle on the way home and is worth the watch to get a feel of real-world recharging issues.

This is one in the series of videos, this illustrates their first day on the road.

Enjoyed the video and found it interesting where rubber meets the road.

 

[Oaktree]

Nothing wrong with it if handled correctly. And would help farmers.

My point was that many here find that ethanol creates as many problems as it solves.

So, I dropped one of my vehicles off at the dealership for an appointment around noon. Some guy pulled up in a new Rivian truck for a charge. I hadn’t seen a Rivian up close so I went over to take a look and he was more than happy to show me around the vehicle. It was nice…perhaps better executed than a Tesla and he was a super nice guy. I left soon after. I returned at around 4 to pick up my vehicle. He was still there charging….sorry, I refuse to do that.

Don't know if they look better in real life than in photos, but man the front end is SO dorky looking. I'd pass on it for that reason alone.

If the idea of “green” vehicles is so important in todays climate, then why not create new jobs building an infrastructure for handling them FIRST, then build the vehicles?

Isn’t all this the ultimate demonstration of “the cart before the horse”?

Like most of your anti-EV posts, that makes no sense. Why would anyone build charging stations, etc. for vehicles before they exist? I wasn't around then, but I don't imagine there was a gas station on every corner when the Model T was introduced either. Seems to me that you're the one advocating putting the cart before the horse.
As demand increases, assuming it does businesses will do what they need to do to accommodate.

 

[Hay Dude]

My point was that many here find that ethanol creates as many problems as it solves.

Don't know if they look better in real life than in photos, but man the front end is SO dorky looking. I'd pass on it for that reason alone.

Like most of your anti-EV posts, that makes no sense. Why would anyone build charging stations, etc. for vehicles before they exist? I wasn't around then, but I don't imagine there was a gas station on every corner when the Model T was introduced either. Seems to me that you're the one advocating putting the cart before the horse.
As demand increases, assuming it does businesses will do what they need to do to accommodate.

I guess the “what came first the chicken or the egg” can be argued all day.

If you comprehended my post properly, you’d see my points were:

1. if we are trying to put Americans to work and get people out of poverty, those could be valuable new jobs to go along with your “green new deal“ fantasy. That way the infrastructure would be in place.

and more importantly,

2. Since EV’s are mandated then wouldnt it reason that the infrastructure HAS to be put in place? So where’s the risk of an EV infrastructure if states like CA are mandating EV’s (more states WILL follow) and big auto is cancelling ICE vehicles?

Anyone can see we are being forced into EVs, so whats the point of acting like the trillions of dollars of infrastucture wont be needed to support them???

 

[Rdrcr]

I have a nephew who owns a Tesla. He charges at home overnight and doesn’t wait around for a charge.

He was traveling. I guess he should just buy multiple homes everywhere he drives and he would no longer have to use public charging stations. Just a thought.

Mike

 

[hornett22]

The boys over at Youtube's Fast Lane Truck flew into Detroit from Colorado to pick up their new Ford F150 Lighting and have chronicled their travel from Michigan back home. What is most interesting is the sea of issues recharging the vehicle on the way home and is worth the watch to get a feel of real-world recharging issues.

This is one in the series of videos, this illustrates their first day on the road.

Ford can't get normal vehicles right after decades and decades. I'm definitely not buying this technology from them.

 

[CloverKnollFarms]

Are EVs really “green” considering the materials they use, and the fact that we need to use fossil fuels to create the electricity to power them?

I’m not an expert. Just curious.

How would they play into the already mounting warnings about rolling blackouts?

Im no expert.

 

[bnold]

Still doesn’t solve greenhouse gasses one bit since hydrocarbon emitting power plants recharge the cars.

Trillions wasted to transfer the hydrocarbons from millions of tailpipes to thousands of power plant exhaust stacks.

Sign me up!!!

You do comprehend the efficiency difference between KW produced by a power plant and by a small ICE correct?

And not all electricity is hydrocarbon derived.

20k+ mikes on my EV, never a public station required to charge.

 

[Hay Dude]

You do comprehend the efficiency difference between KW produced by a power plant and by a small ICE correct?

And not all electricity is hydrocarbon derived.

20k+ mikes on my EV, never a public station required to charge.

Counting the mining & manufacturing costs of EV’s with lithium batteries and the dramatically increased output of hydrocarbon burning power plants to repeatedly charge them, that EV’s are not much better than existing ICE vehicles.
Also, EV’s batteries and parts are mainly produced in China, which has little to zero pollution regs. They don’t care how many millions of tons of hydrocarbons they release into the air to make their billions in EV profits.
One could also see that a tremendous amount of additional mining for copper & aluminum for infrastructure improvements will be needed to upgrade our electrical grid, just to charge EV’s without collapsing the electric grid.
This will release millions more tons of hydrocarbons into the atmosphere.

I won’t even talk about the storage of spent lithium batteries and that impact on the enviroment.

Comprehend on all that a while…..

 

[AndyMA]

4 Years & 60,000 miles on my Tesla Model 3. Never an issue charging.
Usually at home from solar.
Cost to operate and maintain less than $100 per year.

As i've said earlier I'll never buy an ICE again

Andy

 

[Hay Dude]

4 Years & 60,000 miles on my Tesla Model 3. Never an issue charging.
Usually at home from solar.
Cost to operate and maintain less than $100 per year.

As i've said earlier I'll never buy an ICE again

Andy

Compare & contrast your ownership experience to what the typical American earning a salary less than the average cost of a new EV will experience. Now to that, add the additional cost of a dramatic electricity bill increase (think people who can’t afford or dont have a yard for solar panels). Now to that, add what it will be like 10 years now, if they are mandated and we have to spend trillions to upgrade our infrastructure in additional payroll or EV vehicle taxes.

Thats what it looks like to the average schlub living in “cling to your guns & bibles, USA”.

 

[Torvy]

4 Years & 60,000 miles on my Tesla Model 3. Never an issue charging.
Usually at home from solar.
Cost to operate and maintain less than $100 per year.

As i've said earlier I'll never buy an ICE again

Andy

The entire state of Massachusetts is only 190 miles across. So, it is no surprise that someone in MA can operate that way. I would ask that you take your Tesla and tour the country. See how the rest of us live. 870 miles across Texas alone. I would have to stop for gas once in my car for about 10 minutes or less. Best case in a "long range" Tesla is 2 stops. 30 minutes only gets you from 10%-80% on the fastest charger. A minimum of 50 minutes lost, just across 1 western state.

Your initial outlay for the Tesla and the solar power system is considerably more money than I would spend on gas in 4 years. 20k miles a year, worst case 40mpg., call it 500 gallons at $5 to make the math easy...$2500 in gas per year x 4 years = $10k. The long range model 3 cost $30k more than my Prius. I'm still ahead by $20k not even counting the solar power system.

 

[meackerman]

Counting the mining & manufacturing costs of EV’s with lithium batteries and the dramatically increased output of hydrocarbon burning power plants to repeatedly charge them, that EV’s are not much better than existing ICE vehicles.
Also, EV’s batteries and parts are mainly produced in China, which has little to zero pollution regs. They don’t care how many millions of tons of hydrocarbons they release into the air to make their billions in EV profits.
One could also see that a tremendous amount of additional mining for copper & aluminum for infrastructure improvements will be needed to upgrade our electrical grid, just to charge EV’s without collapsing the electric grid.
This will release millions more tons of hydrocarbons into the atmosphere.

I won’t even talk about the storage of spent lithium batteries and that impact on the enviroment.

Comprehend on all that a while…..

not to mention the rare earth minerals needed (not rare like gold). one estimate is with current technology, there's not enough of all the rare earth minerals for every vehicle in England to be an EV. Not to mention the countries that the majority of the minerals come from...which may or may not be friendly with us sometime in the near future.
now technology is improving, lessening the need for some rare earth minerals and switching to more common minerals for somethings. so long term its might not be a problem, but in the next few years if we were to switch everything to EV's it could be huge problem....

 

[ultrarunner]

You may not be an expert, but your instincts are correct. "The consensus" is we need to stop driving ICE vehicles to stop global warming, or pollution, or anxiety, or something. Solar, wind and pixie dust will save the day--coal and natural gas are evil--and nuclear power is off the table, based on a different "consensus".

As you implied, solar energy is so diffuse that it will never provide even 20% of the electricity we need, particularly if 100 million EVs need charging--can you say blackout? Someone will screech "But my house has solar panels and we produce 100% of our power!" If it's true (probably not), the screecher lives in Arizona and he spent $60,000 for panels and batteries for $4000 worth of electricity per year. After 20 years his system is worn out and he spent all that money up front (actual cost $108,000 over 20 years). Dumb. Centralized generation is efficient. Individual systems are primarily toys for those with energy guilt or money to burn. Wind power is even less effective--might produce 20% of our needs with 10 million wind turbines. And they look so nice covering the horizon.

Transitioning to EVs will accomplish exactly zero--except diverting money and natural resources away from other pursuits.

The people who claim "consensus" are environmentalists, not engineers. The environmentalists told the politicians, and off we went. Meanwhile, the engineers are shaking their heads, saying "No No NO!".

Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.--Michael Crichton

I do pause as to how quick things change...

In the 70's it was patriotic to install a wood stove even backed by tax credits.

After that Natural Gas was the lovechild as it was seen as clean and abundant and home grown...

As with wood natural gas is now persona non grata...

Solar and wind emerging tech and it does provide payback in the right application...

Guess I'm on borrowed time as my solar is now 14 years old with only 25% life left before it's kaput.

Batteries have been around forever and electric modes such as golf carts viable for a very long time.

Today's EV vehicles are truly remarkable and they don't have to be for everyone as modern ICE is also remarkable too.

Maybe the problem is expecting a single one size fits for all?

I tend to think a mix is the way forward... and if I could afford a steam car I would add one to the collection!

 

[meackerman]

As you implied, solar energy is so diffuse that it will never provide even 20% of the electricity we need, particularly if 100 million EVs need charging--can you say blackout? Someone will screech "But my house has solar panels and we produce 100% of our power!" If it's true (probably not), the screecher lives in Arizona and he spent $60,000 for panels and batteries for $4000 worth of electricity per year. After 20 years his system is worn out and he spent all that money up front (actual cost $108,000 over 20 years). Dumb. Centralized generation is efficient. Individual systems are primarily toys for those with energy guilt or money to burn.

Not Arizona, but Central California and my solar has cut my electricity bills down to almost nothing. Return on investment about 6-7 years. Course California has stupid electricity prices so that helps the ROI. Solar systems are not "worn out" after 20 years.