El_Zorro said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Teslas have consistently been rated among the safest vehicles on the road, more safe than any SUV or Truck, because their low center of gravity reduces the likelihood of a rollover event and their weight being comparable to an SUV or truck.

---

How they are they rated when broad sided by a lifted F250? That is the more likely scenario here.

---

How is any car rated?

Doesn't matter what you are driving unless it's another giant vehicle.

Electric cars are heavy because of the their batteries, so might fare better in collisions than most non electric vehicles of a similar size.

"As has been mentioned, nobody is forcing anyone to buy an EV. Those who think that is happening are fighting a straw man. Providing for more options is not reducing anybody's choices."

That is simply false.

Washington state is doing just that. Did you miss the latest announcement? Marxist Joe is raising CAFE standards to unrealistic levels. He wants almost 50 MPG by 2026. He's doing everything he can to drive up gas prices. No offshore lease auctions since he's taken office. Killing all future fracing in federal land. Etc.

Stop the gaslighting.

Tax rebates and fuel savings mean EV ownership was about the same or less than ICE ownership in California, which is why California alone is half of Tesla's sales.

If you were already shopping for a luxury brand, Tesla cost to own ends up being less than others, and it's also very fast.

Electric is an obvious winner on certain circumstances, if you have money, and a home charger, it makes sense.

Where government is screwing America is forcing electric. The federal and state governments are intentionally increasing the cost of vehicle ownership and of energy both gasoline and electricity purely out of misguided virtue signaling.

Quote:

---

As has been mentioned, nobody is forcing anyone to buy an EV. Those who think that is happening are fighting a straw man. Providing for more options is not reducing anybody's choices.

---

While factually correct, the government has put incentives in place to make it more attractive. As has proven over and over, they will not stop there. See Seattle. It's also obvious that some sort of mileage tax is coming and I would venture to say it will exceed what normal cars pay now. Once again, it's how they operate.

I'm seeing 60 -70% of the BTUs lost at the plant depending on source, LNG versus coal. Then about 5% lost on the lines. Then 25% lost chargjng the battery.

If I start with 1 btu, I have 0.28 btu in the battery. How much is lost taking it from battery to mechanical? It looks like a wash to me, or worse.

hph6203 said:

---

It is. Transmission loss is minimal, conversion from electrical to mechanical is minimal over the whole system. The greatest source of loss is in the conversion from hydrocarbon to electrical, and that process is more efficient at the plant, coal or natural gas, than the vast majority of combustion vehicles. Scale matters.

---

Could you put a number on the subjective "minimal" quoted above?

TIA

Ulrich said:

---

This is one of two reasons why we cant glibly dismiss objections as irrelevant edge cases.

The regulators and public thought leaders who guide or control so many aspects of our lives tend to live very similar lives in a very specific environment that is conducive to electric vehicles. They live in large, dense cities; many of them have drivers to handle the charging and private jets to travel long distances even when there isn't a major airport at each end. They can also grant themselves waivers if the laws are inconvenient for them. For those of us without those advantages the ICE is a component, often a critical one, of living the life we choose to live. It's important to keep that front and center and make sure we're all represented as these laws are being written.

Second is that our electrical infrastructure is nowhere close to being able to replace the gas infrastructure. It's a massive investment that the market isn't really calling for, but as adoption rates are forced higher we are going to outgrow the existing infrastructure and there will be a period of time where EVs get worse than they are now, and the additional draw on the grid impacts the availability of reliable heat and air conditioning, endangering lives in some parts of the country.

---

Spot freakin on

Sgt. Schultz said:

---

Ulrich said:

---

This is one of two reasons why we cant glibly dismiss objections as irrelevant edge cases.

The regulators and public thought leaders who guide or control so many aspects of our lives tend to live very similar lives in a very specific environment that is conducive to electric vehicles. They live in large, dense cities; many of them have drivers to handle the charging and private jets to travel long distances even when there isn't a major airport at each end. They can also grant themselves waivers if the laws are inconvenient for them. For those of us without those advantages the ICE is a component, often a critical one, of living the life we choose to live. It's important to keep that front and center and make sure we're all represented as these laws are being written.

Second is that our electrical infrastructure is nowhere close to being able to replace the gas infrastructure. It's a massive investment that the market isn't really calling for, but as adoption rates are forced higher we are going to outgrow the existing infrastructure and there will be a period of time where EVs get worse than they are now, and the additional draw on the grid impacts the availability of reliable heat and air conditioning, endangering lives in some parts of the country.

---

Spot freakin on

---

This! It's like February 2021 and any one of hurricanes & other natural disasters never happened...

4-5% transmission loss, 10% loss into battery (can be worse if you use stupid charging methods), 6-10% loss in battery to propulsion conversion after accounting for regenerative braking. I tend to lean towards best case scenarios as that's how technology trends. Peak today is average in the future.

My 90% statement may have been an overstatement/confusion on efficiency points as it's been a year or two since I actually looked into the data and I'm refreshing myself. It's more like 80%. 90-94% once it's in the battery, which is how I confused myself. The total system has to be 66% efficient for it to be comparable with natural gas power plants, and even at that efficiency it's still better than the median combustion vehicle.

Regardless the external (transmission, loss into battery) efficiencies have to be far worse to make it less efficient/more emissive than a pure combustion vehicle. It's why it costs less to drive a mile in an EV than it does in any other vehicle.


The arguments against electric vehicles are not in the realm of efficiency of energy production vs propulsion, or even on the level of emissions as coal has become the most expensive source of energy we have, it's on grid capability and vehicle cost. Cost of goods on electric vehicles is actually going down relative to combustion vehicles, and the grid expansion is a matter of investment not capability.

People that argue against EVs suppose a world a year from now where EVs are the dominant vehicle, and claim it's absurd. It is. Anyone with any sense that is a proponent of EVs is talking about 2035 as the majority (>50% of vehicles on the road) and 2050 for the totality. This is not a short time horizon conversation.

I think EVs are a better overall technology for a variety of reasons and emissions doesn't make the top 5.

agent-maroon said:

---

Sgt. Schultz said:

---

Ulrich said:

---

This is one of two reasons why we cant glibly dismiss objections as irrelevant edge cases.

The regulators and public thought leaders who guide or control so many aspects of our lives tend to live very similar lives in a very specific environment that is conducive to electric vehicles. They live in large, dense cities; many of them have drivers to handle the charging and private jets to travel long distances even when there isn't a major airport at each end. They can also grant themselves waivers if the laws are inconvenient for them. For those of us without those advantages the ICE is a component, often a critical one, of living the life we choose to live. It's important to keep that front and center and make sure we're all represented as these laws are being written.

Second is that our electrical infrastructure is nowhere close to being able to replace the gas infrastructure. It's a massive investment that the market isn't really calling for, but as adoption rates are forced higher we are going to outgrow the existing infrastructure and there will be a period of time where EVs get worse than they are now, and the additional draw on the grid impacts the availability of reliable heat and air conditioning, endangering lives in some parts of the country.

---

Spot freakin on

---

This! It's like February 2021 and any one of hurricanes & other natural disasters never happened...

---

Funny how the government made sure they had ICE generators to supply the electricity needed, and for months there was a run on generators.

As an aside, I have looked into going 100% off the grid in our 2500 SF house. The lowest cost to do so has been quoted to be about $75k and then another $6k-$8k for a propane generator to charge the batteries when there is not enough sun or wind. That's an awful lot of $ for a peak load of about 65-70 kwh per day during climate extremes. That said, there is peace of mind knowing that we would be self-sufficient. When the cost makes sense, people will do this of their own free will. The market works very well on its own.

hph6203 said:

---

There are no direct subsidies on the most popular EV on the market other than penalty payments from other auto makers for fleet emission violations. Those represent a small and shrinking proportion of Tesla's revenue (they had 7.6 billion in profit in 2021, 1.4 billion in ZEV credits, in Q4 2021 it was 2.9 billion vs 386 million). Elon Musk is on record saying that they don't need a renewal/expansion of EV tax credits (theirs completely expired 3 years ago, they are far more profitable today than when they had the credits available).

Their gross margins are growing, because the demand is so strong and their production is temporarily constrained, due to lack of factory floor space, that they are increasing prices to reduce wait times. They just opened two new 500,000+ vehicle per year production facilities in the last month and have announced they will be naming the location of their next facility before the end of the year. When production catches up to demand you'll start to see prices drop.


I'm all for the market deciding, and the market is currently saying I'll pay a sticker premium over a combustion vehicle to gain the day to day benefits on long term cost reductions of a Tesla (I would not say the same for other model vehicles, Teslas are the proof of concept, everyone else has to catch up).

I don't argue that anyone should buy an EV, but most of the people that argue against them as a technology can conceptualize the problems, but they don't conceptualize the advantages.

---

I have read that for England to meet their goal to have no internal combustion engines by 2030 it will take the entire world supply of lithium. That means the rest of the world has no laptop batteries, no cell phone batteries and no electric car batteries. Could you expound on this fact?

With all due respect, you are tossing out crazy numbers, eg 10% loss on battery charge, not supported by most of the knowledge I'm seeing out there. I can post up numerous articles but you can obviously see them if you do a search.

We haven't even discussed the energy needed to get it out of the ground and to the pump/plant. That may be an advantage for electricity, no idea.

Most people advocating for EV do so from a CO2 angle using natural gas at the generating plants, since it is much better than burning gasoline from greenhouse perspective.

geoag58 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

There are no direct subsidies on the most popular EV on the market other than penalty payments from other auto makers for fleet emission violations. Those represent a small and shrinking proportion of Tesla's revenue (they had 7.6 billion in profit in 2021, 1.4 billion in ZEV credits, in Q4 2021 it was 2.9 billion vs 386 million). Elon Musk is on record saying that they don't need a renewal/expansion of EV tax credits (theirs completely expired 3 years ago, they are far more profitable today than when they had the credits available).

Their gross margins are growing, because the demand is so strong and their production is temporarily constrained, due to lack of factory floor space, that they are increasing prices to reduce wait times. They just opened two new 500,000+ vehicle per year production facilities in the last month and have announced they will be naming the location of their next facility before the end of the year. When production catches up to demand you'll start to see prices drop.


I'm all for the market deciding, and the market is currently saying I'll pay a sticker premium over a combustion vehicle to gain the day to day benefits on long term cost reductions of a Tesla (I would not say the same for other model vehicles, Teslas are the proof of concept, everyone else has to catch up).

I don't argue that anyone should buy an EV, but most of the people that argue against them as a technology can conceptualize the problems, but they don't conceptualize the advantages.

---

I have read that for England to meet their goal to have no internal combustion engines by 2030 it will take the entire world supply of lithium. That means the rest of the world has no laptop batteries, no cell phone batteries and no electric car batteries. Could you expound on this fact?

---

Somebody posted a great article about that fact a while back. Very well researched and sourced. I'll try to find it.

Everyone is missing the whole point.

The ice was freedom and independence.

Ev tech is easily controlled

Economics media politics are all just a joke to get sufficient useful idiot buy in.

That said, modern ice vehicles have remote control built in anyway.

Anyone know if there's any sensitivity to changes in electrical current while it's charging? What would a lightning strike do to it?

So when are states & Feds going to tax EV for funding highways.
How High are Gas Taxes in Your State? July 28, 2021 Janelle Cammenga Twitter Logo
Comparing gas usage vs electric rates is fine now but completely ignores the amount of taxes on a gallon of gas(California is @ ~$0.70/gallon). This cannot continue as our infrastructure is declining.

Then the question becomes how to tax EVs for infrastructure.

I vote GPS tracking for EVs with monthly billing. Failure to comply results in canceling those peoples credit cards, ability to fly and right to vote. (note sarcasm).

You know who else never bought an EV, Ms Hawg? Hitler!!!

Great company you're keeping!

Here is the video that explains the lithium and battery issue with EVs.

Can you address the issues and why they are incorrect or will be overcome.




To get England to EV conversion by 2030 like they have proposed, every lithium producer would have to work for almost a year supplying nothing but lithium for that effort.

So no new cell phones, laptops, etc for anyone else.

cbr said:

---

The ice IS freedom and independence.

---

FIFY

Besides, I keep my valuable cars in the driveway and my crap in the garage which means I'd have to run an extension cord. I'm not whitetrash yet.

You're looking at maximum losses, I'm looking at minimum. The minimum today is more close to reality tomorrow than the maximum.

I don't care much about emissions beyond air quality. I argue for EVs from a long term expense standpoint, emissions are a side benefit. The world will trend towards solar, wind, hydro, gas and nuclear. The world will trend towards EVs. It will take decades. The number of doubters will decrease over time, because the drawbacks and challenges will decrease over time. We will be better for it.

My argument to people to buy an EV is to not buy an EV, if that's convincing to you, then you shouldn't. The product speaks for itself which is why Tesla has the largest margins, highest customer satisfaction, and doesn't spend anything on advertising. It is not for everyone today, but the technology is improving every year faster than combustion vehicles.

Don't buy an EV.

Marcus Brutus said:

---

"As has been mentioned, nobody is forcing anyone to buy an EV. Those who think that is happening are fighting a straw man. Providing for more options is not reducing anybody's choices."

That is simply false.

Washington state is doing just that. Did you miss the latest announcement? Marxist Joe is raising CAFE standards to unrealistic levels. He wants almost 50 MPG by 2026. He's doing everything he can to drive up gas prices. No offshore lease auctions since he's taken office. Killing all future fracing in federal land. Etc.

Stop the gaslighting.

---

Too much "alternative news" seems to prevent people from telling true from false.

Washington state is not forcing anybody to buy an electric vehicle. As you are (purposefully?) being rather vague with your "announcement", but it seems that you are trying to imply that Washington State's SB5974, which has recently been signed into law by their governor, outlaws the sale, purchase, or registration of non-electric vehicles, requiring people to buy electric vehicles.

It does not.

What it does do is this law creates a target date of 2030 (eight years from now) for many classes of new vehicles purchased, sold, or registered in the state to be electric. It also establishes what they call an "interagency electric vehicle coordinating council" that is to see what it will take to achieve that target.

This council has nearly two years to (Dec 2023) to report what it will take to achieve this target and what effects it would have.

So, there is not law, just a decision to examine the effects that such a law would have. If the people of Washington State decide they do not want it, they can change it.

Don't want to buy an electric vehicle? Don't. It's not 2030, yet, so you don't have a problem.

What happens after 2030? Who knows. If Washington State does pass this into law without change (doubtful), nobody is forcing you to live in Washington State. Feeling as you do, why would want to live someplace like that?

Are electric vehicles likely to become more popular in the future? Almost certainly. People's attitudes change. Technology improves. Despite the misinformation being spread, for a lot of people electric vehicles are making sense. They are cheaper to operate and maintain, particularly at higher performance levels.

You are not wrong. Electric vehicles, green energy is neither sustainable feasible on a large scale. These people are nuts. They are living in a fantasy land.

There is nothing wrong with oil and gas, coal, all the fossil feels. Not a damn thing wrong with them.

annie88 said:

---

You are not wrong. Electric vehicles, green energy is neither sustainable feasible on a large scale. These people are nuts. They are living in a fantasy land.

There is nothing wrong with oil and gas, coal, all the fossil feels. Not a damn thing wrong with them.

---

Yes it is not scaleable at the current time. That is not the same as saying there couldn't be a technology in the future that is scaleable.

aggiehawg said:

---

annie88 said:

---

You are not wrong. Electric vehicles, green energy is neither sustainable feasible on a large scale. These people are nuts. They are living in a fantasy land.

There is nothing wrong with oil and gas, coal, all the fossil feels. Not a damn thing wrong with them.

---

Yes it is not scaleable at the current time. That is not the same as saying there couldn't be a technology in the future that is scaleable.

---

I doubt it, but never say never. I mean if you had told someone in the 1850s that we would once fly in the air and go to the moon they wouldn't have believed it either.

But it most likely won't be in my lifetime.

Joe Biden and the Democrats and the dumbass AOC's of the world literally think you can go buy an electric vehicle tomorrow and everything will be fine. Then we can just get rid of gas like that. It's frightening.

richardag said:

---

So when are states & Feds going to tax EV for funding highways.
How High are Gas Taxes in Your State? July 28, 2021 Janelle Cammenga Twitter Logo
Comparing gas usage vs electric rates is fine now but completely ignores the amount of taxes on a gallon of gas(California is @ ~$0.70/gallon). This cannot continue as our infrastructure is declining.

Then the question becomes how to tax EVs for infrastructure.

I vote GPS tracking for EVs with monthly billing. Failure to comply results in canceling those peoples credit cards, ability to fly and right to vote. (note sarcasm).

---

Vehicle mileage usage fee was passed in the Infrastructure law. Current state now that's it's passed is them researching an analyzing how they will implement and how much it will cost you.

Someone should remind everyone where energy comes from. pic.twitter.com/GqQntSBu0g

— Luke Rudkowski (@Lukewearechange) March 12, 2022

aggiehawg said:

---

Someone should remind everyone where energy comes from. pic.twitter.com/GqQntSBu0g

— Luke Rudkowski (@Lukewearechange) March 12, 2022

---

That one headline about not charging vehicles is from last summer.

This summer will be even worse with more people going back to the office.

Quote:

---

That one headline about not charging vehicles is from last summer.

This summer will be even worse with more people going back to the office.

---

And there is always fire season when lines get shut down in high winds. If California alone cannot make this work smoothly, which state could? And the number of EVs there maybe the highest in the nation but still not all that much.

Quote:

---

It also varies highly per capita.

According to the U.S. DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy report, based on data for the year 2018, the highest number of plug-in electric cars per capita is in California - almost 12 per 1,000 people.

---

Link

Any idea what the actual source of that second picture is from or it's use case and whether or not it's an actual commercial product, or are you just recycling memes?


It's a prototype created by a person living in Australia for vehicles to drive across the outback where even gas refueling is a rarity. It's not in commercial use, and is far from the norm use case.

It's also still more efficient to charge an electric vehicle with that than run a vehicle on diesel.

https://thedriven.io/2018/12/14/diesel-charge-evs-remote-locations-greener-than-you-think/amp/

It's also far from difficult to recharge an EV in off peak hours was the time required is shorter than the typical person's time spent at home and the charging can be scheduled from x time to x time. Memes are fun. They're just not always honest.

Quote:

---

Over the past week, charging attempts for electric-vehicle drivers in California might have been thwartedand everyday life interruptedby rolling blackouts in some parts of the state.

Those were due, governor Gavin Newsom said Monday, to some "gaps" in reliability amid the state's transition to renewable energy.

The blackouts not only created an opportunity to criticize California's aggressive renewable-energy plans, but also led to the use of diesel generators to fill those demand "gaps" just as regulators announced new plans to steer commercial trucks away from diesel.

California Independent System Operator, the state's grid operator, has blamed the California Public Utilities Commission for the blackouts, alleging the commission underestimated how much electricity-generating capacity would be needed from utilities, according to the Los Angeles Times.

During the grid operator's board meeting Monday, president Stephen Berberich specifically cited the lack of adequate generating capacity on hot summer evenings, when output from solar arrays diminishes even as demand from home air conditioners remains high, the paper reported.

---

Quote:

---

Now California is using diesel generators as emergency power sources. The state has 2,773 stationary and mobile generators in its inventory, according to the Diesel Technology Forum advocacy group, which cited an inventory from the California Air Resources Board (CARB).

California utility Pacific Gas & Electric began making plans to use emergency diesel generators months ago, proposing to secure 450 megawatts of mobile generators, according to a May report from Greentech Media.

This works out to some strange optics. On Monday, at the height of the blackout period, CARB announced a joint memorandum of understanding with 15 states and the District of Columbia aimed at achieving 100% zero-emission medium-duty and heavy-duty vehicle sales by 2050.

The joint effort, which encompasses large pickup trucks, vans, box trucks, transit and school buses, and heavy-duty trucks, also calls for 30% zero-emission vehicle sales by 2030. In June, California independently announced plans to mandate sales of electric commercial trucks in 2024, and end sales of new diesel trucks by 2045.

---

Link

These debates remind me way back in my corporate days. Company wanted to show how green woke they were so the 800+ employees in the office were issued reusable plastic cups and ceramic coffee mugs and all the paper cups were removed.

Couple of us put together an analysis of how much water was wasted washing these cups one or more times per day. The environmental impact of the waste water was several times that of the disposable paper cups. This was sent (anonymously of course) to the senior management and "green team".

60 days later paper cups were back with recycling bins for the cups. This concept applies to electric vehicles these days. EVs are an order of magnitude more environmentally unfriendly than even the worst ICE vehicle.

Quote:

---

Over the past week, charging attempts for electric-vehicle drivers in California might have been thwartedand everyday life interruptedby rolling blackouts in some parts of the state.

Those were due, governor Gavin Newsom said Monday, to some "gaps" in reliability amid the state's transition to renewable energy.

---

Is there anything that a liberal can't deflect away with a little semantics? The only gaps I'm concerned about are the ones between truth & liberal dogma. And maybe the gaps between their ears.

I was graduating from A&M in 1979. Also lived up north in the early 70s. Yes, I'm aware of gas shortages in the past and what caused them. Dad was high exec in a very large international oil company..