Electric Vehicle Stupidity - Update Post 288

[BC38]

Hydrogen and the EV's that are using plug in recharging are two different things. Especially when you consider hydrogen combustion engines. When you talk about unlimited fuel supplies, hydrogen is about the only thing that comes close, at least on this planet. That includes lithium. Unless someone can rewrite the laws of physics and comes up with a power source that doesn't consume anything, your EV's are just as dependent on a finite source of fuel as oil driven machines. And we won't even get into the source of power to charge the battery. The problem that we have with EV's now is that a segment of government/business has figured out how to harvest money from the concept. The media has helped to perpetuate the hype, take advantage of a low information population and put forward a narrative that a technology that is not adequate to meet the need is the answer. People buy into it, because, hey, who doesn't want to save the planet and here we are. In the mean time, politicians get richer, business get richer, tax payers get screwed and the problem never really gets fixed.

Hydrogen is pretty darned good as fuel. The only problem is getting it. The only practical technology at this time is by electrolysis of water, and unfortunately, that uses more electrical energy than amount of energy you can get burning the hydrogen it produces. So we're back to the "not enough electricity problem".

Of course there is also the little problem with how explosive hydrogen is, and how hard it is to store....

 

[BC38]

Again, the folks I know who have EVs like them. Experience trumps speculation for me.

The fact that they work well for the people you know doesn't mean diddly.

What works for one person doesn't work for EVERYONE, and in fact simply WILL NOT work for some.

The one-size-fits-all idea is totally false.

 

[BC38]

It's June 2023, with half a year to go…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

OK, so assuming the current trajectory of sales, they sold 750,000 last year and are on track to sell just over 500,000 this year.

So the drop in sales will only be 33%.

Again, compare that to the 20% loss of sales that is about to bankrupt Anhueser Bush.

Doesn't look too rosey...

 

[Secundius]

Nobody said we have an unlimited supply of fossil fuels. But we have proven supplies that will last a couple of hundred years based on our history of consumption. We can develop other technologies during that time. But we DON'T have to try to make the transition in the next 10 years - because that is not technologically feasible.

Maybe we can extend the supply if we start replicating fossil fuels using 3D printers too?

When will it be technically feasible if staying the course with existing technology means kicking the feasible technology down the road for future generations to solve, because current generation simply want to play it safe with what already exists…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[SMSgt]

The fact that they work well for the people you know doesn't mean diddly.

What works for one person doesn't work for EVERYONE, and in fact simply WILL NOT work for some.

The one-size-fits-all idea is totally false.

I wonder how many of them are driving their EVs 600 miles to visit family. The range of most of them won't get me out of Florida.

 

[BC38]

( 3D Printing of Polymer-Bonded Rare-Earth Magnets With a Variable Magnetic Compound Fraction for a Predefined Stray Field | Scientific Reports )

( Just a moment... )


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yup, that is one of the articles I looked at. If you read more than the title (or even if you UNDERSTAND the title when you read it) it is about using 3D printing to manufacture rare-earth magnets. But you still have to HAVE the rare earth metals as raw materials for the 3D printing process.

It isn't about MAKING rare earth metals out of something else (or "replicating" them out of thin air). Like I said before, the article is about a new way to USE the materials (feeding them into a 3D printer) to make magnets, NOT a new way to MAKE rare earth metals.

Good Lord! We're DOOMED!

 

[BC38]

If the European Union aren't mining the materials themselves, then their getting them from somewhere else! How do you thing the US was able to obtain Titanium for the SR-71, when the US didn't produce it, and the Soviets were the only source to the metal…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

...aaaaand now we've come full circle. You're once again advocating that we put ourselves at the mercy of two nation-states that would then be able to hold us hostage.

Getting enough material like Titanium to build a few planes is light years different from getting enough rare-earth-metals (including cobalt and lithium) to put a 1-ton battery pack in every car in every garage in the country.

You need to quit while you're ahead. Absolutely NONE of your arguments work in the real world, and about half of them are science fiction. Frankly, it is embarrassing.

 

[BC38]

They've been saying that since after Apollo 17 in 1972, and 50 years later we're as a Space Faring Nation are no closer to mining the asteroid belt and/or the Moon as we were when it was first proposed in 1972…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

EXACTLY! But that is only 50 years ago, and until recently there hasn't been much of a reason or need to mine the asteroids.

Too many people opposed space exploration 50 years ago, because it was too big of a drain on tax resources, and as a result the space program almost ended up completely dead.

Now we have SpaceX revitalizing our space program by making it a PRIVATE industry, and moving towards actually making it profitable.

If we continue on the current path it may be possible to actually realize the dream of mining space. Maybe. Given time. It is going to take more than 10 years though.

You seem to have the idea that we are all against EVs. Personally I'm not. I'm all for continuing to develop them. What I am adamantly against is their being FORCED on us all as "the" only solution, IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS, when there are so many technological reasons why that simply isn't possible.

That is the part that is complete NONSENSE.

 

[BC38]

If I've understood anything about EVs, the rare earths go in the motors. The batteries don't contain anything that exotic. The rare earths might make the motors more efficient, but I sincerely doubt any improvement will make up for the present limits on battery capacity and charge rate.

Correct. BUT the current battery technologies require huge amounts of lithium and cobalt. Not quite rare earth metals, but not exactly plentiful, and not something we can supply enough of for ourselves during this forced 10-year transition period.

 

[BC38]

I'm expecting that at some point in the future all these free charging stations are going to start charging for the service. Wonder what that's going to cost?

I don't think most of the public charging stations are "free".
I put together a proposal for the local hospital to add a few of them and they all had a credit card reader on them.

 

[BC38]

Fuel Efficiency - CSX.com

That's not how they figure it. It is measured across the whole system so inefficiency is factored in.

EXACTLY. Some people don't get the simplest of math...
Train carries XXX tons cargo, travels YYY number of miles, uses ZZZ gallons of diesel.

ZZZ/YYY/XXX = gallons per mile per ton of cargo...

For example: 10 gallons of diesel, to go 5 miles, and haul 4 tons cargo gives you 10 / 5 / 4 = 0.5 gallons per mile per ton.

 

[riverrat38]

The maintenance mentioned is keeping the charge between 20% and 80% for maximum life.

Since I don't have a crayon to write this, know that EVs do not need oil changes/filters, transmission fluid drain/refill, differential drain/refill, fuel filter R&R, engine air filter R&R, engine radiator/anti-freeze service.

But those maintenance-heavy EVs need you to look at the charge occasionally and check air in the tires. And maybe a battery pack sometime in the 2030s.

My next vehicle will be the Ford EV pickup.

Don't forget the service brakes; my 2018 Leaf has an E pedal setting. When its engaged, there is no need to use the service brakes, other then an emergency stop. Regenerative braking works very well, about the same as I would use the brake pedal on my ICE vehicle when coming to a stop sign. I don't ever need to replace my rotor discs or pads. Just keep good fluid in the master cylinder, etc. I have probably had to spend well over $2000 on brake work in my 2004 Forester. It has 215,000 miles on it. I still use it on trips over about 100 miles round trip.

73,
Rick

 

[BC38]

None of what you mention are common problems requiring attention every 4000-6000 miles like current gas-or-diesel vehicles. None. Factory tires should take you 50k miles. Just like other cars. Brake wear depends on your driving habits, just like other cars.

With its Ni-Co-Mn (Nickel, Cobalt, Manganese) positive electrode material and laminated cell structure, Nissan LEAF batteries are highly durable and reliable. On top of that, Nissan offers new LEAF owners a limited lithium-ion battery warranty, which includes coverage for defects in materials or workmanship for 100,000 miles or 8 years (whichever comes first). But, with proper maintenance and care, your LEAF's battery could outlast its warranty and exceed 10 years. So much so that Nissan is looking at ways it can create second-use demand for the LEAF's battery packs, given how long they're lasting. Nissan LEAF Battery Life: Your Guide to Maintenance and Care | EVgo

OK, so you over that 120k miles (roughly 10 years) you don't do 20 oil changes , and you don't have to do 3 tuneups (spark plugs every 40k miles), and you don't have to do a couple of coolant flushes (one every 60k miles), and you don't have to do a couple of transmission or differential services (every 60k miles), and you don't have to do a timing belt (around 80-90k miles).
20 oil changes @ $75 each = $1500
3 tuneups @ $75 each = $225
2 coolant flushes $100 each = $200
2 tranny flushes @ $100 each = $200
2 differential oil changes @ $75 each = $150
1 timing belt replacement @ $1500 = $1500
I come up with about $3775 in maintenance costs for a standard ICE vehicle over a 100k span.

ASSUMING that NOTHING else goes wrong with it, when your EV battery goes KAPUT at 10 years / 120k miles and you pay $8000 - $10,000 (in some cases up to $20,000) to replace it.

The maintenance costs I quote above are for the ICE vehicle assume you are having someone else do the work. I can do it all myself for about 1/3-1/2 that. Plus my ICE vehicle will run 200k-250k miles - by which time your EV will need a SECOND battery replacement, just as expensive as the first one.

But either way, I'm not seeing the savings.

What's more, your friends with EVs, how many of them have had them enough years to have experienced them long term? Everybody loves their new car for the first few years - its when they've been around 10 years and 100k miles that the problems start cropping up, and most EVs haven't been around long enough for that yet.

 

[BC38]

When will it be technically feasible if staying the course with existing technology means kicking the feasible technology down the road for future generations to solve, because current generation simply want to play it safe with what already exists…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

DO THE MATH and then set the "100%" EV target based on THAT.

Start with the question of "How long is it going to take to build the power grid and charging infrastructure?"
Then start building it, with intermediate targets - like having it 25% built by 2035, 50% built by 2045, 75% built by 2055, and 100% built by 2075. Make the EV targets coincide with those dates and numbers.

Saying we will be 100% EV by 2035 with no PLAN on how to get there - other than saying YOU (all of us) HAVE TO go 100% EV by 2035 is ridiculous.

It simply isn't possible and MANDATING something based simply on the fact that it SOUNDS good to a small subset of people is foolishness.

You want everyone onboard with EV's? Come up with a plan that is ambitious, but at least theoretically possible. Force feeding our people the IMPOSSIBLE is not going to work.

 

[pawngal]

I wonder how many of them are driving their EVs 600 miles to visit family. The range of most of them won't get me out of Florida.

Exactly! 550 miles to visit my son, I can drive it in a day. Not possible with an EV currently. At least 2 days.
Last year I visited family in California and Arizona, 4000 miles total. I was gone for 17 days. With an average current EV that entire time would be traveling & charging IF a charger was available.
If someone came to visit me driving an EV, the closest charging station is 20 miles away and it is not a fast charge one.

 

[venomballistics]

OK, so you over that 120k miles (roughly 10 years) you don't do 20 oil changes , and you don't have to do 3 tuneups (spark plugs every 40k miles), and you don't have to do a couple of coolant flushes (one every 60k miles), and you don't have to do a couple of transmission or differential services (every 60k miles), and you don't have to do a timing belt (around 80-90k miles).
20 oil changes @ $75 each = $1500
3 tuneups @ $75 each = $225
2 coolant flushes $100 each = $200
2 tranny flushes @ $100 each = $200
2 differential oil changes @ $75 each = $150
1 timing belt replacement @ $1500 = $1500
I come up with about $3775 in maintenance costs for a standard ICE vehicle over a 100k span.

ASSUMING that NOTHING else goes wrong with it, when your EV battery goes KAPUT at 10 years / 120k miles and you pay $8000 - $10,000 (in some cases up to $20,000) to replace it.

The maintenance costs I quote above are for the ICE vehicle assume you are having someone else do the work. I can do it all myself for about 1/3-1/2 that. Plus my ICE vehicle will run 200k-250k miles - by which time your EV will need a SECOND battery replacement, just as expensive as the first one.

But either way, I'm not seeing the savings.

What's more, your friends with EVs, how many of them have had them enough years to have experienced them long term? Everybody loves their new car for the first few years - its when they've been around 10 years and 100k miles that the problems start cropping up, and most EVs haven't been around long enough for that yet.

well illustrated "pay now or pay later" nature of the beasts.
I still like my 17 year old junkyard refugee Subaru forester. I'm overdue for a timing belt and and oil change on it. But it got me into a 2023 outback, so no pressure. Just as long as it's ready when my wifes Buick gnarffles the Garthok.

 

[1BadSmith]

If these EVs are such a great idea, how come the current presidential motorcade isnt using them? Their gas guzzling SUVs ruin the environment, and we are told we shouldnt drive them?? Well, I'm sure the same motorcade is fully armed in gun free zones too, just like we aren't allowed to be...No double standard at all, just a simple observation. My cell phone can't even last a day lol.

 

[pharmer]

When will it be technically feasible if staying the course with existing technology means kicking the feasible technology down the road for future generations to solve, because current generation simply want to play it safe with what already exists…

Well, we used steam to power "us" for 150 years and after WWII we switched over to "petroleum based power" in a relatively short time because of the "obvious advantages," although the technology was available for 50 years in 1950. EV technology might be viable in 50 years for the "masses" when it meets the same criteria. Joe

 

[Alton]

There are other's options.

Some think that carrying a generator is a joke but the wife's cousin carried one when traveling in his Lightning. Normally he could make it to the coast and plug in when he got there. But once there was a very strong head wind and very hot so AC ran the entire time. He had to pull over and waste 2 hours with his plug in generator in a parking lot. He sold it. When you type in charging stations you get 100's of locations. Most are level two with 6.6KW to 14KW which are a joke, very few 150KW to 350KW. Most people do not understand that a Tesla charging station draws as much power off the grid as a 200,000 sqft Wal-Mart Super Center. Until we find a way to produce more energy Hybrids are the way to go.

 

[Protocall_Design]

Studies show that 95% of EVs are still on the road. The other 5% made it back home...