America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 19 months ago by RayR. 223 replies replies.
5 Pages<12345>
Electric Cars in California
RayR Offline
#51 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,802
So goes WOKE LEFTY Europe, so goes WOKE LEFTY California, so goes America?

ELECTRIC CAR SCAM: Europeans could be paying $270 to charge their electric cars by early 2023 as electricity rates explode

Sunday, September 04, 2022 by: S.D. Wells

Quote:
(Natural News) Record highs are being set around the globe for the cost of electricity, and countries in Europe are experiencing the worst of it. The entire scam of electric cars is now being realized by the majority of the populace, as they finally realize it costs more to own, maintain and ‘fuel’ an electric car than any standard gasoline-fueled automobile. Don’t believe it?

Right now, in Europe, it costs about $135 to charge a Tesla to full, and that price is on track to DOUBLE by the new year. That means it will cost $270 to fully charge the average electric vehicle (EV) in Germany and France. Currently, one euro is equal to one US dollar. That’s just the beginning of insane costs incurred to support the EV nightmare. Let’s do the math.

More...

https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-09-04-europeans-could-pay-270-to-charge-their-electric-cars-2023.html


Brewha Offline
#52 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
tailgater wrote:
So, just curious about that battery that would let you live and drive for 3 days during an outage.
Do you have more info?
Cost
Life
End of Life (disposal)

We've got laws being implemented based on crossed fingers hoping that something might be invented to make it viable.

Brilliant.


So the devil is in the details here.

A Powerwall is a 13.5kWh battery. You can have one or several walls based on your planned usage. During an outage, you might want to run only essential things and have a low requirement, or run everything and charge your car. Then there is the matter of how much solar power you are generating during the outage. Or maybe there is no solar hooked to the battery.

Two Powerwalls would power the average home for about a day assuming there was little or no sun shining. But on a normal day in Texas (full sun), you would typically be making more power during the day than you would you all day.

Cost is about how much you buy, where you live, and if the local govmut is paying for part of it.

I'm thinking it is a 30 year life on the equipment.

Recycling the battery is part of the plan.




https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/how-powerwall-works
tailgater Offline
#53 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
So the devil is in the details here.

A Powerwall is a 13.5kWh battery. You can have one or several walls based on your planned usage. During an outage, you might want to run only essential things and have a low requirement, or run everything and charge your car. Then there is the matter of how much solar power you are generating during the outage. Or maybe there is no solar hooked to the battery.

Two Powerwalls would power the average home for about a day assuming there was little or no sun shining. But on a normal day in Texas (full sun), you would typically be making more power during the day than you would you all day.

Cost is about how much you buy, where you live, and if the local govmut is paying for part of it.

I'm thinking it is a 30 year life on the equipment.

Recycling the battery is part of the plan.




https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/powerwall/learn/how-powerwall-works


Devil's in the details, yet the only hard number you offer is the guess you made on the life of the battery. Which would be amazing if true.

I love me some off the grid stuff.
Solar and battery backup interest me greatly.

Not even Tesla, on the web link that you provided, are brave enough to offer actual numbers. Because here's the deal:
Solar power from one home wouldn't be enough to charge that powerwall battery pack in a day.

And if you do use the powerwall to charge your Tesla, it would usurp all the amps.

I don't doubt you could run an average home for some time. Be frugal. Don't use an electric oven or clothes dryer. Assume you don't have electric heat and won't use the AC.
It's all about amp draw.
And the Tesla powerwall might have changed names, but it hasn't changed technology over the past 5+ years. And the math simply doesn't add up.

Someday. Maybe.

We need a near perfect battery. Which will happen as soon as we approach near perfect super conductivity at temperatures a bit north of zero Kelvin.

Even liberals should recognize that mandates based on conjecture are bad laws.
HockeyDad Offline
#54 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,069
Tesla says 20 years and $11,500 for a PowerWall.

Could use a couple of PowerWalls right now.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#55 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 14,588
What do you call a magic dog?
A labracadabrador
tailgater Offline
#56 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
HockeyDad wrote:
Tesla says 20 years and $11,500 for a PowerWall.

Could use a couple of PowerWalls right now.


It would be interesting to know what the expectations are for that 20 year span.
Will the battery lose 10%? 20? 40?

Hey Biden!
Mandate additional battery life.


DrMaddVibe Offline
#57 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,309
tailgater wrote:
Devil's in the details, yet the only hard number you offer is the guess you made on the life of the battery. Which would be amazing if true.

I love me some off the grid stuff.
Solar and battery backup interest me greatly.

Not even Tesla, on the web link that you provided, are brave enough to offer actual numbers. Because here's the deal:
Solar power from one home wouldn't be enough to charge that powerwall battery pack in a day.

And if you do use the powerwall to charge your Tesla, it would usurp all the amps.

I don't doubt you could run an average home for some time. Be frugal. Don't use an electric oven or clothes dryer. Assume you don't have electric heat and won't use the AC.
It's all about amp draw.
And the Tesla powerwall might have changed names, but it hasn't changed technology over the past 5+ years. And the math simply doesn't add up.

Someday. Maybe.

We need a near perfect battery. Which will happen as soon as we approach near perfect super conductivity at temperatures a bit north of zero Kelvin.

Even liberals should recognize that mandates based on conjecture are bad laws.


https://youtu.be/sC75aU47GRk

Mashin' all that Socalist avacado into a mango frappe and serving it back all cold with a paper straw man!
Gene363 Offline
#58 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,680
The difference between California and the Titanic?













The Titanic had the lights on as it slipped into the ocean.
Brewha Offline
#59 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
tailgater wrote:
Devil's in the details, yet the only hard number you offer is the guess you made on the life of the battery. Which would be amazing if true.

I love me some off the grid stuff.
Solar and battery backup interest me greatly.

Not even Tesla, on the web link that you provided, are brave enough to offer actual numbers. Because here's the deal:
Solar power from one home wouldn't be enough to charge that powerwall battery pack in a day.

And if you do use the powerwall to charge your Tesla, it would usurp all the amps.

I don't doubt you could run an average home for some time. Be frugal. Don't use an electric oven or clothes dryer. Assume you don't have electric heat and won't use the AC.
It's all about amp draw.
And the Tesla powerwall might have changed names, but it hasn't changed technology over the past 5+ years. And the math simply doesn't add up.

Someday. Maybe.

We need a near perfect battery. Which will happen as soon as we approach near perfect super conductivity at temperatures a bit north of zero Kelvin.

Even liberals should recognize that mandates based on conjecture are bad laws.

Dude, 13.5 kWh for the battery is a pretty hard number. That would be 1,000 watts of power for 13.5 hours of use.

And a roof of solar panels can charge the battery in a day. Here is some math for you:
1 solar panel rated at 300 watts, for say 5 hours a day = 1.5 kWh. This is a 3'x5' panel.
So on a good day you would need 9 such panels at about 15 sq/ft each = 135 sq/ft of roof to fill a 13.5 kWh battery.
They sell complete "off the grid" kits - cause it works.

Your power bill can show you how many kilo Watts your home uses so you can get an idea of sizing a system.

More math; my car has an 82 kWh battery rated at 350 miles. That's .234 kwh/mile. Charging for 50 miles/day = 11.7 kWh.

So there is a big difference between "off the grid" and selling your excess power back to the grid, in terms of the system you might need.




I have no idea why you would think an ultra-high efficiency battery, super conducting or not, is needed to make this work.
What you really want is a "decent battery" and a 90% efficient solar cell (good luck with that).

Oh - Conservatives should know the difference between conjecture and doing the math.
Brewha Offline
#60 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
DrMaddVibe wrote:
https://youtu.be/sC75aU47GRk

Mashin' all that Socalist avacado into a mango frappe and serving it back all cold with a paper straw man!


Dropped out of school, did we?
HockeyDad Offline
#61 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,069
We broke the record for electric use in California yesterday. Only a few rolling blackouts but plenty of blown up transformers and outages.
Brewha Offline
#62 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Liberal tree huggers are trying to help:

PG&E, Tesla virtual power plant delivers 16.5 MW to California grid amid calls for energy conservation

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/pge-tesla-virtual-power-plant/630310/
HockeyDad Offline
#63 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,069
It is an interesting pilot program. I think I would like working on it.

Just to put it in perspective, it produced 16.5 megawatts and we used 52,061.
ZRX1200 Offline
#64 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
“Calls for energy conservation”

Our plan sucks
Brewha Offline
#65 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
We have a plan?
tailgater Offline
#66 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
Dude, 13.5 kWh for the battery is a pretty hard number. That would be 1,000 watts of power for 13.5 hours of use.

And a roof of solar panels can charge the battery in a day. Here is some math for you:
1 solar panel rated at 300 watts, for say 5 hours a day = 1.5 kWh. This is a 3'x5' panel.
So on a good day you would need 9 such panels at about 15 sq/ft each = 135 sq/ft of roof to fill a 13.5 kWh battery.
They sell complete "off the grid" kits - cause it works.

Your power bill can show you how many kilo Watts your home uses so you can get an idea of sizing a system.

More math; my car has an 82 kWh battery rated at 350 miles. That's .234 kwh/mile. Charging for 50 miles/day = 11.7 kWh.

So there is a big difference between "off the grid" and selling your excess power back to the grid, in terms of the system you might need.




I have no idea why you would think an ultra-high efficiency battery, super conducting or not, is needed to make this work.
What you really want is a "decent battery" and a 90% efficient solar cell (good luck with that).

Oh - Conservatives should know the difference between conjecture and doing the math.


Thank you. It's this type of information that I originally asked for.
I don't see efficiency in your equations, though.
And most areas of the country, including TX and CA, don't come close to "perfect" conditions. And that's what your wattage is based on.

Central AC is about 3500 watts on average. So your battery will power it for 3 hours, but won't be able to charge your car as well. Tough choice on a hot day. No?
Or maybe it's cold outside. You have baseboard electric heat at 1500W per unit. How many rooms? How many hours? Same choice.

So you can see that it's not yet ready for prime time.
The laws are based on conjecture. Or finger crossing. Or maybe just a SWAG.

But thanks for the numbers. They are better than I thought, despite being woefully insufficient.

HockeyDad Offline
#67 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,069
Blackout warnings again today. AC is cranked and pizza is in the oven.
ZRX1200 Offline
#68 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
I have a plan.

**** California and their policies. Invest in precious metals like lead and copper, and remember where those two Biden signs I saw in 2020 so I know where the soft targets are.

Brondo has electrolytes.
RayR Offline
#69 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,802
HockeyDad wrote:
Blackout warnings again today. AC is cranked and pizza is in the oven.


You better stop that chit, you've gotta flatten the curve.
Brewha Offline
#70 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
tailgater wrote:
Thank you. It's this type of information that I originally asked for.
I don't see efficiency in your equations, though.
And most areas of the country, including TX and CA, don't come close to "perfect" conditions. And that's what your wattage is based on.

Central AC is about 3500 watts on average. So your battery will power it for 3 hours, but won't be able to charge your car as well. Tough choice on a hot day. No?
Or maybe it's cold outside. You have baseboard electric heat at 1500W per unit. How many rooms? How many hours? Same choice.

So you can see that it's not yet ready for prime time.
The laws are based on conjecture. Or finger crossing. Or maybe just a SWAG.

But thanks for the numbers. They are better than I thought, despite being woefully insufficient.


You're welcome - glad to help.

Every component has a rated efficiency. System efficiency can be assessed once a design is done.
Once you settle on the requirement of a given home - and how you would use it - a system could be sized.

It's really is not as impractical as it may look though. And is does work when configure for an application. couple a points:
A typical 2,500 sq/ft home would prolly take 2 powerwalls and have 20+ solar panels. So double these numbers.
I only charge my car once a week - and can always go spend 20 minutes at a super charger.
But the thing to remember is that the system is scalable, and can be sized up if it is worth it.
"Worth it" is balancing the cost of the system against basically getting no electric bill - or just having some amount of off line power.
tailgater Offline
#71 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
You're welcome - glad to help.

Every component has a rated efficiency. System efficiency can be assessed once a design is done.
Once you settle on the requirement of a given home - and how you would use it - a system could be sized.

It's really is not as impractical as it may look though. And is does work when configure for an application. couple a points:
A typical 2,500 sq/ft home would prolly take 2 powerwalls and have 20+ solar panels. So double these numbers.
I only charge my car once a week - and can always go spend 20 minutes at a super charger.
But the thing to remember is that the system is scalable, and can be sized up if it is worth it.
"Worth it" is balancing the cost of the system against basically getting no electric bill - or just having some amount of off line power.


But it is impractical.
That's why the government is compelled to force it on us.

Many of us have ditched our gas mowers for electric ones.
And many of us love the savings that a hybrid vehicle offers.

But CA and eventually the Feds are going to jam it all down our collective throats. Because it doesn't make sense for many of us.

And no matter if it has a 20 year warranty. That's a joke. Try replacing the battery on an EV that is only 15 years old.
And you say they'll recycle the battery? Ha! You know Pepsi says they'll recycle bottles. Don't fall for it.


I love electric motors and agree solar is a great way for individuals to save some money. But we can't shut down even one dino-fueled plant until we have reliable replacements. Not reliable most of the time. Reliable all of the time. And that's not solar.
But we're getting there. And when we finally do, I'll be first in line to upgrade.
Problem is, the progressive can't wait for progress. They'd rather mandate an agenda.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#72 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,309
Ahem...it's called a subsidy...not an agenda.


Jeez.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#73 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 14,588
Forest Gump's password?

1Forest1
Brewha Offline
#74 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
tailgater wrote:
But it is impractical.
That's why the government is compelled to force it on us.

Many of us have ditched our gas mowers for electric ones.
And many of us love the savings that a hybrid vehicle offers.

But CA and eventually the Feds are going to jam it all down our collective throats. Because it doesn't make sense for many of us.

And no matter if it has a 20 year warranty. That's a joke. Try replacing the battery on an EV that is only 15 years old.
And you say they'll recycle the battery? Ha! You know Pepsi says they'll recycle bottles. Don't fall for it.


I love electric motors and agree solar is a great way for individuals to save some money. But we can't shut down even one dino-fueled plant until we have reliable replacements. Not reliable most of the time. Reliable all of the time. And that's not solar.
But we're getting there. And when we finally do, I'll be first in line to upgrade.
Problem is, the progressive can't wait for progress. They'd rather mandate an agenda.

Impractical for you, that may be.

More than practical for me though - and I McLov it!
Sunoverbeach Offline
#75 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 14,588
How do poets greet each other?
Haven't we metaphor?
MACS Offline
#76 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,599
Solution: Solar panels on the electric vehicles... and a small wind turbine on the trunk to charge the batteries while you're driving!

Brilliant!
Sunoverbeach Offline
#77 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 14,588
What do you get from a pampered cow?
Spoiled milk
Gene363 Offline
#78 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,680
MACS wrote:
Solution: Solar panels on the electric vehicles... and a small wind turbine on the trunk to charge the batteries while you're driving!

Brilliant!


I think you just invented perpetual motion! If you're friends with the Bidens and cut them in, I think you can a crap ton of government money to develop this idea.
Brewha Offline
#79 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Maybe we could use some of the crap ton of money we spend subsiding Oil and Gas…..


Wait - it’s Macs idea - never mind…..
Sunoverbeach Offline
#80 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 14,588
Not saying your statement is wrong, but careful how hard you throw stones in that glass house. Tax breaks on EVs, tax breaks on residential solar panel installation, subsidies for wind and solar generation.....

How many times can you subtract 10 from 100?
Once. After that, you're subtracting from 90, then 80, then...
Brewha Offline
#81 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Sunoverbeach wrote:
Not saying your statement is wrong, but careful how hard you throw stones in that glass house. Tax breaks on EVs, tax breaks on residential solar panel installation, subsidies for wind and solar generation.....

How many times can you subtract 10 from 100?
Once. After that, you're subtracting from 90, then 80, then...

Sorry SOB, I don’t understand the math you’re referring to. Perhaps you could explain.

That said, many simply do not see the ecological disaster we are visiting on ourselves. We NEED to move to cleaner energy and energy usage. And it will take the govmut to make it happen because unbridled capitalism will always do what is cheap and easy - that’s how we got here.

Now nobody cries about subsidizing oil and gas. Many here don’t think industrial pollution is even a real concern. But I have kids and things need to change.

Every time the govmut forces change for the right reasons and the good of all, the knuckle draggers come out of the woodwork crying about their rights, their freedom, and how “corrupt” the corrupt system is.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#82 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 14,588
The math is simply my daily joke for the thread. Didn't care to do a separate post

As for the rest, I don't disagree, but don't believe current tech and infrastructure support current demand. Planning for rolling brownouts in CA would support this lack of ability to support. At this time anyway
Brewha Offline
#83 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
This is about planning and building a future.

They don’t make enough EV’s for everyone to have one - today. And the existing power grid won’t support us all 10 years from now even if there were no EV’s. But we are going to spend the next 10 years building something - the issue is what to build.

It is a question of were we focus our efforts for the future.
Brewha Offline
#84 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Sunoverbeach wrote:
Not saying your statement is wrong, but careful how hard you throw stones in that glass house. Tax breaks on EVs, tax breaks on residential solar panel installation, subsidies for wind and solar generation.....

How many times can you subtract 10 from 100?
Once. After that, you're subtracting from 90, then 80, then...

Ok - I see.

Did you hear about the plastic surgeon who hung himself?
tailgater Offline
#85 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
Impractical for you, that may be.

More than practical for me though - and I McLov it!


I'm jealous that you're able to make it work.

New England doesn't have the same sunlight hours.

My rant isn't about making a switch to an EV. It's the government forcing it upon us.
ZRX1200 Offline
#86 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
Didn’t you know if the government mandates something, The Science listens and technology appears out of thin air!!!
BuckyB93 Offline
#87 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 14,111
Once we switch over to eliminating day light savings time, them solar panels will be kicking out way more energy than we consume.

Plus if we keep our tires properly inflated, this will be better than drilling for more oil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akjXqfvLu28
Brewha Offline
#88 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
tailgater wrote:
I'm jealous that you're able to make it work.

New England doesn't have the same sunlight hours.

My rant isn't about making a switch to an EV. It's the government forcing it upon us.

Fair enough. But see it for what it is - a 10 to 20 year phase out of gas burning cars.

Remember when they figured out how bad HCFC's (read Freon) are so they started banning their use? They started in 2003 and won't finish until 2030. When I replaced our home HVAC I had to get one that didn't use Freon. No big deal - BUT THE GOVERMENT FORCED ME (wgaf)!

Myself I really love that the govmut is kicking the lazy azz auto industry in the pills and making them start building the cars they should have 20 years ago.
frankj1 Offline
#89 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
I know that no one wants Prius to be the future, but it's been many years since they were recharging whenever they slowed down/braked.
Why hasn't this technology been pushed by now? No electricity from any fuel source required.

Or Hydrogen?
Sunoverbeach Offline
#90 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 14,588
What do you call a rooster staring at a pile of lettuce?
A chicken sees a salad
Brewha Offline
#91 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
frankj1 wrote:
I know that no one wants Prius to be the future, but it's been many years since they were recharging whenever they slowed down/braked.
Why hasn't this technology been pushed by now? No electricity from any fuel source required.

Or Hydrogen?

My car drives with full regenerative braking - normally you never touch the brake peddle, and the slow down energy goes back into the battery. Called "one peddle driving". The exception is if the battery is already at 100%.

My understanding is that most all new EV's use regenerative braking. The Prius is like 20 years old....and a good reason not to like EV's. Besides, it is a Hybrid - not a true BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle).

Toyota sells Fuel Cell cars (hydrogen electric - google "Mirai") in Hawaii/CA. This is a test case infrastructure thing because you need "gas stations" to tank up on liquid hydrogen. These cars have great promise, but likely wont become conventional because of the difficulties of dealing with liquid hydrogen. This may well be the long term path for air craft (hydrogen electric).

The technology is much further along than most people know....

frankj1 Offline
#92 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
thanks
tailgater Offline
#93 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
Fair enough. But see it for what it is - a 10 to 20 year phase out of gas burning cars.

Remember when they figured out how bad HCFC's (read Freon) are so they started banning their use? They started in 2003 and won't finish until 2030. When I replaced our home HVAC I had to get one that didn't use Freon. No big deal - BUT THE GOVERMENT FORCED ME (wgaf)!

Myself I really love that the govmut is kicking the lazy azz auto industry in the pills and making them start building the cars they should have 20 years ago.


Unlike your freon analogy, the alternate automotive technology isn't even near the equivalent of what it purports to displace. So there's that...

tailgater Offline
#94 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Brewha wrote:
My car drives with full regenerative braking - normally you never touch the brake peddle, and the slow down energy goes back into the battery. Called "one peddle driving". The exception is if the battery is already at 100%.

My understanding is that most all new EV's use regenerative braking. The Prius is like 20 years old....and a good reason not to like EV's. Besides, it is a Hybrid - not a true BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle).

Toyota sells Fuel Cell cars (hydrogen electric - google "Mirai") in Hawaii/CA. This is a test case infrastructure thing because you need "gas stations" to tank up on liquid hydrogen. These cars have great promise, but likely wont become conventional because of the difficulties of dealing with liquid hydrogen. This may well be the long term path for air craft (hydrogen electric).

The technology is much further along than most people know....


The technology fits the needs of only a small subset of our population. I enjoy skiing in the winter months (for instance). A 3 or 4 hour drive would virtually deplete today's EV battery, and if it's snowing there isn't enough sun to recharge with a panel. And there won't be hundreds of recharge stations at the mountain. And if there were, where would they get the electricity to power them?

A month ago, my wife and I drove out to the Finger Lakes in NY. Over a 6 hour drive.
Regenerative braking helps "top off" the battery, but the efficiency doesn't allow for unlimited driving.
Today, it takes 5 minutes to fill up. I'm not ready to add hours to my drive just to make some misguided politicians and left minded moonbats feel good about themselves. Because at the end of the day, most of the power will still originate at a fossil fuel plant. Lest we embrace nuclear (as we should).

It's an incomplete technology that works great in a specific application. Implementing mandates today, without a suitable alternative, is government overreach.
At best.

tailgater Offline
#95 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
As I stated previously, if it works for you, great.
I hope it will work for me at some point.
Until then, stop implementing mandates in the HOPES of having a viable solution.

Brewha Offline
#96 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
tailgater wrote:
The technology fits the needs of only a small subset of our population. I enjoy skiing in the winter months (for instance). A 3 or 4 hour drive would virtually deplete today's EV battery, and if it's snowing there isn't enough sun to recharge with a panel. And there won't be hundreds of recharge stations at the mountain. And if there were, where would they get the electricity to power them?

A month ago, my wife and I drove out to the Finger Lakes in NY. Over a 6 hour drive.
Regenerative braking helps "top off" the battery, but the efficiency doesn't allow for unlimited driving.
Today, it takes 5 minutes to fill up. I'm not ready to add hours to my drive just to make some misguided politicians and left minded moonbats feel good about themselves. Because at the end of the day, most of the power will still originate at a fossil fuel plant. Lest we embrace nuclear (as we should).

It's an incomplete technology that works great in a specific application. Implementing mandates today, without a suitable alternative, is government overreach.
At best.


Ok, so you don't believe that car emissions are a problem that needs to be fixed. Do you think is a a govmut plot to endlessly subsides EV manufactures like we do now with oil and gas production? Because I would trade one for the other.

Very few people drive more than 300 miles a day round trip. And you can get another 200 miles of range from a super charger in the 15-20 minutes that you would use for a break after 3-4 hours in the car. But the point is that the occasional long trip is not what we are talking about.

YouTube has lots of people chronicling long road trips in EV's. And while it will be a lot better in years to come, they do as well as ICE vehicles in practical use - go have a look.

Honestly, the technology is farther along than most people know. And every major manufacturer is killing themselves to get into this - because it is not just better - it really is our future.

Face it, if it were not for govmut mandates you would be driving a car that got 11 gallons to the mile and used leaded gas.





I get that people don't like change - or guvmut mandates.
But do your homework on this - it's worth it.
ZRX1200 Offline
#97 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
Car emissions vs aircraft emissions…

Go.
Brewha Offline
#98 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
Full Cells for aircraft.

Done!
deadeyedick Offline
#99 Posted:
Joined: 03-13-2003
Posts: 16,961
We only talk about vehicle emissions because that affects us personally each day but that sector only accounts for something like 15-20% of total C02 emissions.

We are going to need a whole lot more than EVs if the scientists are correct. Geo engineering anybody?
Brewha Offline
#100 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,147
deadeyedick wrote:
We only talk about vehicle emissions because that affects us personally each day but that sector only accounts for something like 15-20% of total C02 emissions.

We are going to need a whole lot more than EVs if the scientists are correct. Geo engineering anybody?

The govmut mandate to move us from incandescent light bulbs to LED did not cure the energy waist or fix the environment. But it helped and we all get lighting that lasts longer and is cheaper to use.

Shifting to EV’s in the next 10-20 year will not fix it, but it is a large help. Arguably 1/4 of emission given that industry also moving to EV’s. Walmart, Amazon and many other have vehicles on order and are making the change.

Wind and solar have proven to be cheaper way to generate power, and with localized storage will be a real path to cleaning things up.



Besides all of that, EV’s are way better than ICE in most every comparison.
Of course people would have to look into it to know….
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages<12345>