hunter2012 said:

---

---

And basically no Tesla drivers care. I've yet to meet a single Tesla owner that bought one to be green

There's something about this that reminds me about VHS vs. Betamax.

Meanwhile, via ICE, we basically already have netflix/streaming.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

RoyVal said:

---

Ok so now let's share anecdotal posts about ICE vehicle fires. I'll start with this pic we saw Saturday in Houston on beltway 8 just west of 288. Even more impressive was the lady on the phone no more than 10-15ft away from the truck. Whew….glad I wasn't parked next to this at the airport! Those dually's hold a lot of flammable liquids LOL.

---

Why are you derailing? If you want to talk about an ICE fire, start a thread for that.

---

This isn't a thread on lithium fires. It seems like it though. Mine hasn't caught on fire yet. I store it in a detached garage fifty feet from my house. Good thing.

Can that water be recovered? Does it evaporate from the large holding areas they put the water in? Or are the water molecules destroyed to disappear forever? Kind of like frac water at 12,000 feet.

Bubblez said:

---

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-12504841/Worlds-largest-lithium-deposit-McDermitt-Caldera-US.html

A bunch of lithium has been found domestically...


Clay containing up to 40 million metric tons of the precious metal was identified throughout the 28-mile-long McDermitt Caldera - nearly double what has been found in Bolivia's salt flats that have long held the record for the most lithium deposits.

While the amount of lithium is based on estimates - no drilling has taken place - scientists have found high concentrations of lithium in the caldera since the 1970s.

---

the same commie ****ups that are forcing this ev **** on people are also precluding domestic mining.

cecil77 said:

---

Very different kinds of fires.

Anyone that can't admit that a Li battery fire is very different from other fires just really doesn't want to discuss it.

---

Of course it's different. One is much less frequent.

JayM said:

---

Can that water be recovered? Does it evaporate from the large holding areas they put the water in? Or are the water molecules destroyed to disappear forever? Kind of like frac water at 12,000 feet.

---

Not sure. Water used in lithium mining also doesn't cause earthquakes. Another win for EV's.

A Li battery fire supplies it's own oxygen and can't readily be extinguished

It can only be isolated and allowed to burn.

That makes it much different from other fires.

I repeat, anyone who doesn't want to acknowledge this doesn't really want to participated in a discussion.

cecil77 said:

---

A Li battery fire supplies it's own oxygen and can't readily be extinguished

It can only be isolated and allowed to burn.

That makes it much different from other fires.

I repeat, anyone who doesn't want to acknowledge this doesn't really want to participated in a discussion.

---

It's reality. But it's also rare and happens much less than ICE vehicles per undisputed NTSB data.

JayM said:

---

Can that water be recovered? Does it evaporate from the large holding areas they put the water in? Or are the water molecules destroyed to disappear forever? Kind of like frac water at 12,000 feet.

---

Currently, the most common processes is a brine solution left in a shallow reservoir to evaporate over a long period of time.

Bubblez said:

---

JayM said:

---

Can that water be recovered? Does it evaporate from the large holding areas they put the water in? Or are the water molecules destroyed to disappear forever? Kind of like frac water at 12,000 feet.

---

Currently, the most common processes is a brine solution left in a shallow reservoir to evaporate over a long period of time.

---

Of course. It's the hydrology cycle. Of course waste water evaporates. And then someone has to clean up the remainder if it is a 1st world country. I know the molecules are not destroyed. Serious discourse and discussion of alternatives for serious matters is severely lacking in this country anymore. Lot's of finger pointing and one-upmanship.

nortex97 said:

---

There's something about this that reminds me about VHS vs. Betamax.

Meanwhile, via ICE, we basically already have netflix/streaming.

---

It's more like Sony vs. Toshiba than VHS vs. Betamax. The platform has been decided (all of those companies have adopted the NACS charger) it's just now about who makes the best product. It seems unlikely that this effort is going to result in those companies significantly competing with Tesla for the prime real estate as the current spend per charger by Tesla is ~25% of their competitors, in large part due to their competitors not manufacturing their own chargers. Something I doubt these companies plan to do.

cecil77 said:

---

A Li battery fire supplies it's own oxygen and can't readily be extinguished

It can only be isolated and allowed to burn.

That makes it much different from other fires.

I repeat, anyone who doesn't want to acknowledge this doesn't really want to participated in a discussion.

---

Oh, they participate. They respond to every single post.

techno-ag said:

---

cecil77 said:

---

A Li battery fire supplies it's own oxygen and can't readily be extinguished

It can only be isolated and allowed to burn.

That makes it much different from other fires.

I repeat, anyone who doesn't want to acknowledge this doesn't really want to participated in a discussion.

---

Oh, they participate. They respond to every single post.

---

The total lack of self awareness is fascinating.

Animal Farm of vehicle fires. ICE fires are more equal than EV fires

Yeah I sure don't know what the ratio really is, but on the "I will never by an EV" thread I have to imagine something like 70 percent of the posts are from EV drivers (who comprise less than 10 percent of all drivers or so), who are offended and angry anyone would hold such an opinion, bent on explaining why they are wrong, and how their situations/feelings/economics/science/politics etc. are so much smarter/better.

It's pretty funny, when you think about it.

I a brand enthusiast phase in my teenage years. I grew out of it before I got to A&M.

I have never understood the rabid hatred that some seem to have for EVs.

No, they are NOT a good option for someone who often drives long distances. They ARE a good option for someone who drives around town, seldom goes very far and can charge every night in his garage.

Why the hostility?

nortex97 said:

---

Yeah I sure don't know what the ratio really is, but on the "I will never by an EV" thread I have to imagine something like 70 percent of the posts are from EV drivers (who comprise less than 10 percent of all drivers or so), who are offended and angry anyone would hold such an opinion, bent on explaining why they are wrong, and how their situations/feelings/economics/science/politics etc. are so much smarter/better.

It's pretty funny, when you think about it.

---

Yet you probably post more about EV's than anyone

Antoninus said:

---

I have never understood the rabid hatred that some seem to have for EVs.

No, they are NOT a good option for someone who often drives long distances. They ARE a good option for someone who drives around town, seldom goes very far and can charge every night in his garage.

Why the hostility?

---

Wrong question, try: Why do you care?

I like to point and laugh at EV owners, as do many others. Whats it to you?

Antoninus said:

---

I have never understood the rabid hatred that some seem to have for EVs.

No, they are NOT a good option for someone who often drives long distances. They ARE a good option for someone who drives around town, seldom goes very far and can charge every night in his garage.

Why the hostility?

---

Governmental mandates.

Because it's trolly behavior on a thread that occasionally (but too rarely) drifts into genuine discussion, which makes it a waste of space.

It's also really weird to laugh at someone for making a purchasing decision that meets their needs better than an alternative. It works well for every person I know that owns one with most of them saying they'll never buy a vehicle from another brand (they all own Teslas). Most of them came to the product with a sense of skepticism and after buying it changed their mind towards the positive.

In an automotive market that has been rising faster than inflation for decades, electric vehicles are a deflationary pressure on transportation costs and you mock that opportunity with zero substance. With the majority of people against EVs on this thread having absolutely minimal understanding of the use patterns or capabilities of the product.

That's why.

Not for most. It the governmental intervention.

cecil77 said:

---

Not for most. It the governmental intervention.

---

People say this but their comments indicate otherwise. Though I don't include you in that group.

That's not near the top of the list of complaints or mockery on this thread from EV detractors. China risks, fire risk, grid risks, range, battery longevity and charging rates occur as talking points far more frequently than government intervention.

I will admit it appears to be your most frequent point and you and I agree, but it's nowhere near the most frequent talking point of the rest of the people in this thread.

hph6203 said:

---

That's not near the top of the list of complaints or mockery on this thread from EV detractors. China risks, fire risk, grid risks, range, battery longevity and charging rates occur as talking points far more frequently than government intervention.

I will admit it appears to be your most frequent point and you and I agree, but it's nowhere near the most frequent talking point of the rest of the people in this thread.

---

Oh ffs, I should have known you'd completely miss the point.

Logos Stick said:

---

Antoninus said:

---

I have never understood the rabid hatred that some seem to have for EVs.

No, they are NOT a good option for someone who often drives long distances. They ARE a good option for someone who drives around town, seldom goes very far and can charge every night in his garage.

Why the hostility?

---

Liberty.

Nobody gives a damn if a government free loader drives an EV. We point out all the obvious issues with them because the Marxists are forcing them on us.

Drive an EV. Don't drive an EV. I don't care. But stop making me pay for it. Stop forcing the manufacturers to transition.

---

Almost everyone on here including those with EVs agree with you. The comedy is the EV haters on here that want to ban them which is the exact issue you raise about liberty. Let each consumer decide what is best for them and make a level playing field for all cars.

Quote:

---

Almost everyone on here including those with EVs agree with you. The comedy is the EV haters on here that want to ban them which is the exact issue you raise about liberty. Let each consumer decide what is best for them and make a level playing field for all cars.

---

Make it level then. Zero tax dollars for charging stations anywhere in the US.

Deal?

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Almost everyone on here including those with EVs agree with you. The comedy is the EV haters on here that want to ban them which is the exact issue you raise about liberty. Let each consumer decide what is best for them and make a level playing field for all cars.

---

Make it level then. Zero tax dollars for charging stations anywhere in the US.

Deal?

---

And no tax credits for purchases, no mandates, and I think the $200 annual fee in lieu of gas taxes about levels it out based on average gas taxes paid by US drivers.

It is not about government interference. If subsidies for oil production were announced tomorrow the entire forum would celebrate a reversal of policy. There would be a few principled people criticizing the interference, but most aren't that ideologically consistent.

The driving force behind the upset is a perception of technological inferiority being facilitated by government interference. The perception of technological inferiority comes first causing the upset, not the government interference which is why it is not among the most frequently cited arguments against EVs on this thread. It is the backstop argument that's given as counter arguments to the technological inferiority argument. "If it were a superior technology why does it need subsidies?"

That perception of inferiority comes from ignorance of the speed of advancement in the technology both in terms of quality and reduction in price. It's a lack of intellectual curiosity.

So again I'll say that government interference is among the list of complaints, but is absolutely not at the top of the list for the vast majority in this thread.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Almost everyone on here including those with EVs agree with you. The comedy is the EV haters on here that want to ban them which is the exact issue you raise about liberty. Let each consumer decide what is best for them and make a level playing field for all cars.

---

Make it level then. Zero tax dollars for charging stations anywhere in the US.

Deal?

---

We were fine with that too.

The pro-EV crowd keeps missing the reason for the hate: Its government interference that ignores and pretends China risks, fire risk, grid risks, range, battery longevity and charging rates issues don't exist and want to FORCE these on us.

I'm fine with EVs as a choice, but current leadership in Washington and several states have announced clearly that we will be forced into EVs with 10-15 years with no plan to resolve the China risk and grid risk at all. And the reason given for the ban is the false pretense of "saving the us from climate change". The other issues (range, charging, battery longevity) MAY resolve themselves over time, but don't force me to count on that.

The fact oil has supposed subsidies is besides the point. The Government is forcing something on us that is in many ways inferior. Its the same as the government banning gas stoves, forcing expensive water heaters, mandating toilets, etc. except EVs being forced is more expensive and disruptive.

Enjoy your EV but don't force me to have one.

Two more Nikola trucks catch fire in a week.

Quote:

---

The third and fourth fires to affect its vehicles this summer, Nikola's image has taken a beating this summer. Following the first reported fire in June, the company blamed foul play, but an investigation did not bear that explanation out.

The company then disclosed another fire, and in August announced a coolant leak was likely behind the first fire. It admitted that it would have to pause sales and initiated a recall of the Tre transport truck as a result of the defect.

Following the most recent reported fires, Nikola's stock fell by about 15 percent to 88 cents per share last week, reports Reuters. Since announcing the recall in August, the company's shares are down a total of 55 percent.

---

That one's just not gonna make it.