Yes, the fanboyish need to argue with anyone who doesn't like the same model of car someone else just bought is sort of funny.aggievaulter07 said:
16 pages of one big circle jerk comprised of 95% ignorance and facepalms. Great job, guys.
Back to diesel for CT Transit, despite their governor's proclamation to move to EV buses only by 2024:Quote:
The Hamden Fire Department responded to a lithium-ion battery fire that turned an unoccupied CT Transit electric bus into an inferno in a parking lot on Saturday, according to a report by WTNH.
"Officials said the fire was difficult to extinguish due to the thermal chemical process that produces great heat and continually reignites," the outlet reported.
Assistant Fire Chief Jeffrey Naples noted that firemen had to use "copious" amounts of water to extinguish the flames.
"Lithium ion battery fires are difficult to extinguish due to the thermal chemical process that produces great heat and continually reignites," fire officials told New Haven Register. "Exposures were protected at the scene."
Two CT Transit workers were hospitalized as a precaution after being exposed to smoke. Moreover, two firefighters were also taken to a hospital to be treated for heat exhaustion.
CT Transit Interim Deputy General Manager Josh Rickman reportedly said that the bus that caught on fire was bought and delivered in 2021. The cause of the fire is currently being investigated by the Connecticut State Police Fire and Explosion Investigative Unit.
I know, I know, 'what does this have to do with politics, nortex?' Well, it was the DEMOCRATS who pushed for and got a DoT program for federal grants that enabled Connecticut to buy about 20 of these inferno machines on wheels powered by Chicom batteries. Sen. Chris Murphy was happy about the press/photo ops just a few months ago. It is part of an initiative including 15 states (communist mostly) and DC (wholly communist) to move more gov't fleets to EV.Quote:
The bus was delivered in December and began service in January according to CTtransit spokesperson Josh Rickman. "The bus, last operated on July 20, on routes 243 and 265, and was not in service at the time of the incident," Rickman said. "Bus fires are rare, but can occur similar to cars. This is CTtransit's first fire incident with a battery electric bus. Bus operators, maintenance staff and others undergo extensive training and safety protocols are in place."
Due to the fire, the entire electric bus fleet has been pulled from service as a precaution. "The importance of rider safety is demonstrated by taking these buses out of service and ensuring a thorough investigation is completed prior to any redeployment of the fleet," Rickman said. "We have deployed diesel buses to make sure people get to where they need to be."
Quote:
Back to diesel for CT Transit, despite their governor's proclamation to move to EV buses only by 2024:
nortex97 said:
Lucid EV plant has had an issue of late with 'thermal runaway' new batteries. They're not even making it out of the mfg plant!
Great technology.
Teslag said:MouthBQ98 said:
Yeah, but the thought of a six figure disposable capital item is distasteful to me.
Electrics like that that are a subscription service makes more sense to me than ownership of something that must basically be scrapped if it has a major failure outside of warranty.
I'm not keeping any vehicle past 300k miles and teslas in the real are hitting that mark in battery life. I personally don't keep vehicles more than 100k miles or more than 4 years or so.
Maybe. But a manufacturing glitch in LG batteries was traced as the cause for all those Chevy Bolt fires.nortex97 said:
The LG 90kw battery in the Jag probably wasn't the problem, imho, but rather the JLR-designed charging/battery management system. that's my guess.
Cry me a friggin' river.justcallmeharry said:
About that tax break...
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/automakers-70-ev-models-dont-qualify-tax-credit-under-senate-bill
"Automakers say 70% of EV models don't qualify for tax credit under Senate bill
The requirements could put a dent in President Biden's plan to have half of all vehicles sold be electric by 2030
"Buyers of a majority of electric-vehicle models would not qualify for a $7,500 tax credit under a Democratic proposal in the U.S. Senate."
More in the linked article.
I agree, and it's just speculation, but LG is a global leader in mass production of these batteries, specifically large LI batteries for EV's. I think they are well past that stage in their product design/safety; they are right behind the Chinese in market share. Much more so than some of the bit players with great PR departments, they are a top competitor/producer globally (yes, even producing/selling to/for Tesla):techno-ag said:Maybe. But a manufacturing glitch in LG batteries was traced as the cause for all those Chevy Bolt fires.nortex97 said:
The LG 90kw battery in the Jag probably wasn't the problem, imho, but rather the JLR-designed charging/battery management system. that's my guess.
Also, maybe I am showing my age a bit, but when I read about an electronic bit being 'designed by Jaguar/Land Rover' I am thrown into an old man lucas electronics skeptical mindset automatically. That, and my inner engineer mindset says 'batteries aren't inherently dangerous, it's how they are managed that can create great hazards.' Then I picture someone setting down a combo wrench on top of an 'old style' car battery.Quote:
The world's second largest EV battery maker after Chinese CATL raised 12.8 trillion KRW ($10.8 billion), which valued the company at $59 billion, last week in South Korea's largest IPO.
LG Energy has approximately 23% of the global EV battery market, with customers including Tesla, General Motors and Volkswagen, according to a sector analyst. In comparison, China's CATL topped with about 35% market share. The analyst also noted that Japan's Panasonic and Chinese BYD account for roughly 13% and 7% share, respectively.
Science Denier said:Teslag said:MouthBQ98 said:
Yeah, but the thought of a six figure disposable capital item is distasteful to me.
Electrics like that that are a subscription service makes more sense to me than ownership of something that must basically be scrapped if it has a major failure outside of warranty.
I'm not keeping any vehicle past 300k miles and teslas in the real are hitting that mark in battery life. I personally don't keep vehicles more than 100k miles or more than 4 years or so.
You should start buying quality vehicles.
Does it? I get that battery powered cars are older than ICE vehicles, but in what other way does this make you think of a handful of production challenges from….dodge of all companies? Do you see Lucid as the Dodge of EV's?BigRobSA said:nortex97 said:
Lucid EV plant has had an issue of late with 'thermal runaway' new batteries. They're not even making it out of the mfg plant!
Great technology.
Dang! Sounds like Dodge and their hemis catching fire while driving off the assembly line a few yrs ago.
notex said:
A car salesman's dream.
So if you have an android can you buy a Tesla?Teslag said:notex said:
Pay your deposit with Apple Pay
BoerneGator said:
But if they did, you'd still "fit the bill"...
That's the point you missed; or at least tried to obfuscate. You're a walking, talking commercial...
Quote:
When a group of engineers and researchers gathered in a warehouse in Mukilteo, Wash., 10 years ago, they knew they were onto something big. They scrounged up tables and chairs, cleared out space in the parking lot for experiments and got to work.
They were building a battery a vanadium redox flow battery based on a design created by two dozen U.S. scientists at a government lab. The batteries were about the size of a refrigerator, held enough energy to power a house, and could be used for decades. The engineers pictured people plunking them down next to their air conditioners, attaching solar panels to them, and everyone living happily ever after off the grid.
"It was beyond promise," said Chris Howard, one of the engineers who worked there for a U.S. company called UniEnergy. "We were seeing it functioning as designed, as expected."
Quote:
But that's not what happened. Instead of the batteries becoming the next great American success story, the warehouse is now shuttered and empty. All the employees who worked there were laid off. And more than 5,200 miles away, a Chinese company is hard at work making the batteries in Dalian, China.
Read the rest HEREQuote:
The Chinese company didn't steal this technology. It was given to them by the U.S. Department of Energy. First in 2017, as part of a sublicense, and later, in 2021, as part of a license transfer. An investigation by NPR and the Northwest News Network found the federal agency allowed the technology and jobs to move overseas, violating its own licensing rules while failing to intervene on behalf of U.S. workers in multiple instances.
Now, China has forged ahead, investing millions into the cutting-edge green technology that was supposed to help keep the U.S. and its economy out front.
'Unexpectedly' the author even notes toward the end that China's monopolistic position for lithium battery supplies is pretty darn dominant, including sourcing many precious metals from Africa.Quote:
Ford increased pricing on the F-150 Lightning EV substantially this week, citing "significant material cost increases and other factors." The all-electric model now comes with an MSRP that ranges between $46,974 (for the base Pro trim) and $96,874 (for the Extended Range Platinum). All told, the decision has made the pickup anywhere from $6,000 to $8,500 more expensive than it was just a few days earlier. In exchange, Blue Oval has ever so slightly upgraded the maximum range of some of the lower trims. But some of us would probably prefer a more comprehensive explanation as to what's causing EV prices to surge in general, because it's not just Ford that's been raising the sticker price of in-demand electric vehicles.
General Motors increased the price of the Hummer EV by $6,250 in June a vehicle that will be impossible to option for under six figures until the delayed "affordable" trims commence production. Tesla also raised its prices around that time, with most products seeing increases of at least a few grand, and was followed by EV startups like Lucid and Rivian.
What gives? One of the biggest appeals of transitioning over to EVs for automakers was a lessened need for manpower and diminished overhead. They'd have to spend less on production, meaning they could theoretically pass the savings onto you. The public was even issued promises on electrics reaching complete parity with combustion vehicles by 2025 by industry groups and market experts for years. But we don't actually seem to be on course for that to take place, despite companies gearing up for the layoffs as they swap toward building more electrified products.
Ford made numerous assurances that the Lightning would start below $40,000. But it's looking like that's not really going to be possible moving forward, even with government subsidies that were allegedly designed to keep EV prices down. Other companies have made similar promises, often while touting EVs as an affordable alternative to traditional combustion vehicles. But many have placed their focus on building high-margin electrics they think people are willing to splurge on, that aren't really sized in a manner that prioritizes efficient energy usage. Meanwhile, the only EVs that seem to be coming down in price are older models the public seems less interested in either due to high-profile recalls (e.g. Chevrolet Bolt) or widening technological gaps (e.g. Nissan Leaf).
This seems like a bad situation considering there's mounting evidence that consumers have just about had it with price hikes regardless of whether they're being pinned on inflation, supply chain issues, or corporate greed and EVs price bumps have been outpacing their combustion-reliant counterparts.
aggievaulter07 said:
16 pages of one big circle jerk comprised of 95% ignorance and facepalms. Great job, guys.
They don't cause more accidents per se with other vehicles, but are more likely to be involved in 1 vehicle/driver-caused losses.Quote:
French insurer AXA has been looking into the peculiarities of accidents involving electric vehicles following its 2022 crash tests in Zurich, Switzerland. The company found in its testing that accidents involving the new vehicles are more expensive, more dangerous to occupants of other vehicles, and that EVs have an Achilles' heel.
"We insurers and our customers also have to manage new risks: Although e-cars do not cause more accidents in this country, they can often lead to more expensive individual claims," said Nils Reich, director of property insurance at AXA in Germany.
The reasoning behind the claims being more expensive is simple: EVs are filled with expensive technology that, if damaged, can be expensive to fix. Moreover, although EVs, by and large, feature the latest safety technology for the cabin, there is an inevitable weakness in their design.
Wonderful.Quote:
"Most electric cars, especially the powerful ones, have a very high torque, which is immediately noticeable when you tap the power pedal," said Michael Pfaffli, head of accident research at AXA Switzerland. "This can result in unwanted, jerky acceleration that the driver can no longer control."
What AXA refers to as "overtapping" is leading to 50 percent higher rates of accidents in which drivers damage their own vehicles, as compared to vehicles powered by combustion engines. And that is working in concert with another aspect of EVs to lead to bigger crashes.
Since electric vehicles simply weigh more than their combustion counterparts, they generate more force in an accident. Two cars that are identical in size, but have different weights, will do different amounts of damage in a crash.
This isn't a feature that is unique to EVs, as all vehicles are getting heavier, but heavy battery packs are only likely to make average vehicle weights grow further. AXA, therefore, recommends that drivers take that power and force into account while driving.
That's not what the insurance company analyses said at all.Teslag said:
Expensive, fast cars are more costly to insure. Who knew?
Quote:
"Norway is by far the number 1 Tesla country in the world," says the website, referencing the country's claim to, globally, having more Tesla owners per capita than anywhere else. "We are the canary in the coal mine."
The site's header includes a GIF of an aerial view of several Tesla cars spelling out "HELP," with about 20 people standing and waving to the camera above.
The list of issues the owners posted to the site, apparently borrowed from a Norwegian class-action against Tesla, include: problems with the car's operation in cold weather, and warm weather; doors, wipers, and lights not working properly; and rapidly rusting cars, poorly applied paint, and odd creaking noises. They also cite problems with the Autopilot driver assistance software, as well as with charging and battery life.
nortex97 said:aggievaulter07 said:
16 pages of one big circle jerk comprised of 95% ignorance and facepalms. Great job, guys.
Quote:
There were no batteries in the tested vehicles, as the firm acknowledged in response to a request from 24auto.de.
The entire "crash test" demonstration served to promote a report by AXA claiming that electric vehicles are more likely to be involved in accidents that result in massive damages.
The press office claims that because there were guests present, it would have been too risky to demonstrate a battery fire. Thus, the electric cars' battery cells were taken out before the tests. With the same justification, the insurance firm used pyrotechnics to start the fire of a Tesla Model S that was being tested.
EV buyers much more so, from an environmental perspective. The vehicles have to be driven 5 to 7 years or so just to offset the added 'carbon emissions' in their construction (primarily the battery) vs. ICE.MouthBQ98 said:
I'd content that regular new vehicle purchases are much more environmentally damaging than driving one single vehicle for a decade or more. It is the frequent new vehicle buyer that is the greatest "environmental sinner", and that includes people buying new EV every lease cycle.
Quote:
Typically, they need a new battery around that age anyway.
That doesn't say they faked their findings at all. They staged a demonstration regarding the report. There's no reason they had an obligation to create a thermal runaway/battery fire event for reporters.Teslag said:
And by the way, the insurance company in Nortex post actually faked their findings. I get you guys hate EV's, but at least research your **** before posting.
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/279900/20220831/insurance-company-fakes-tesla-battery-fire-demonstrate-evs-accident-prone.htmQuote:
There were no batteries in the tested vehicles, as the firm acknowledged in response to a request from 24auto.de.
The entire "crash test" demonstration served to promote a report by AXA claiming that electric vehicles are more likely to be involved in accidents that result in massive damages.
The press office claims that because there were guests present, it would have been too risky to demonstrate a battery fire. Thus, the electric cars' battery cells were taken out before the tests. With the same justification, the insurance firm used pyrotechnics to start the fire of a Tesla Model S that was being tested.
Quote:
While they offer the convenience of speed, regularly using Level 3 fast-charging stations can shorten the expected battery life in electric vehicles. These high-voltage DC stations can charge an EV's battery up to 80% in about 30 minutes. Still, the process can generate heat in the battery and therefore affect its long-term performance.
EV battery life expectancy and warranties
In a survey of consumers, Cox Automotive (the parent company to Autotrader) found that potential EV
buyers have reservations over battery life and the costs associated with battery replacement. Of those considering an electric car purchase, 50% view the average battery life at 100,000 miles or more, and 46% believe average battery life lasts 65,000 miles or less.
To provide some assurance over car battery lifespan and concern with replacement cost, the federal government mandates that manufacturers offer a minimum of an 8-year/100,000-mile warranty on batteries.
