And we thought diesels had torque

[franklyfrank]

Originally Posted by DKB_SATX

Totally natural. Nothing to do with human activities. Right?

A human is a natural part of the earth as much a tree, a bird, the mountains and the seas. We do our thing to survive and thrive just like any other species.
I am sick and tired of all the preaching by bleeding hearth tree huggers how we are destroying the planet, while hanging around destroying it with the rest of us..
Of course not missing a beat to let us know how we should behave.
And if we comply with all their rules we will be good citizens.
I was on a cruise ship in the Mediterranean when a Sirocco rolled across the Sahara blowing north across the Mediterranean.
The cruise had to be aborted because of the all the sand and dust the ship was covered with. Talk about air pollution with particulates to choke a horse.

[Moflash]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank

A battery is a lousy fuel tank.
The EV people keep trying to pound a square peg into a round hole.

Thats what they said about gasoline powered automobiles also.Lol

[Moflash]

Originally Posted by out of sight

The idea that carbon dioxide is pollution is even greater nonsense. CO2 is the primary building block of life on earth. Without it all life ends.

Everything can be good to a point.Water is good and a necessity to all living things but too much of it and everything drowns and of course dies.

[85MH325]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank

Where do you people get this kind of nonsense?
Natural " air pollution" is far more extreme than anything humans could ever do.
The whole notion of air pollution is nonsense.
If it has human origins it pollution. If its natural phenomenon its nature doing its thing. How absurd.

Lest you continue to believe your absurd comment, here's some history for you.

https://laist.com/2018/10/03/take_a_..._really_is.php

[new2trailer]

Originally Posted by Countryboy59

Everyone keeps repeating “battery production is bad for the environment” because they heard it somewhere. Just like “the power comes from dirty power plants”. I’m sick of hearing this parroting. Lithium mines have been around for over 100 years. Power plants are already running to power your 75” TV and giant central air conditioning units. If you really care (and no one does) about what will happen 100 years from now, shut all that stuff off and quit driving.

My bad for being too cryptic. I was referring to the disposal of batteries and solar panels. Focus on the disposal of tailpipe emissions is a relatively recent phenomenon. In part because tailpipe emissions are blown away by surface wind, in much of the world, and science's understanding of their role in the upper atmosphere.

Batteries and solar panels will be a major landfill problem in 10-20 years. It is unclear if the disposal of batteries and solar panels will be considered part of the price to slow global warming or a problem.

Mike

[new2trailer]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank

Where do you people get this kind of nonsense?
Natural " air pollution" is far more extreme than anything humans could ever do.
The whole notion of air pollution is nonsense.
If it has human origins it pollution. If its natural phenomenon its nature doing its thing. How absurd.

There is a rich dialog in the science community as to role of ICE in air pollution and greenhouse gasses, which are blamed for holding heat in.

Most people point to volcanic eruptions, fires etc. as "natural" pollution which is episodic and tends to be more particulate in nature which tends to shield the earth from heat. Greenhouse gasses are persistent and blamed for holding heat in.

There are several big questions. Is humanity, with our persistent pollution, causing climate change? Is the earth in a warming trend? Does our pollution exacerbate the trend? Is our behavior benign without affect?

Many thanks to DKB_SATX, David, for the LA picture, to understand the extent of human pollution.

Finally, this post is not meant to be a science explanation but rather a general introduction, to help you, understand where this "nonsense" comes from.

Mike

[Countryboy59]

Why does every discussion of EVs degrade to this definitely partisan nonsense? The original point of the post is high torque at zero rpm in an electric drivetrain.

I must live in a bubble. My neighbor loves my diesel truck and I think his Volt is cool. Of course, we both have giant energy-sucking air conditioners and giant TVs, ride Harleys and other loud, polluting toys and enjoy nice, smoky campfires. If the power goes out a bunch of non-CARB compliant Generacs fire up and all is good. There are several Priuses and lots of solar panels on my street but I doubt anyone really gives a rip about pollution, they just want to save money.

[Roadtech]

Originally Posted by Countryboy59

Why does every discussion of EVs degrade to this definitely partisan nonsense?

The answer is simple. It's all about politics. Why do you have groups pushing a technology that is not ready for the marketplace (although it will be in the near future)? Why are there government subsidies and climate scientists receiving huge amounts of government cash through grants? Political power. Its really that simple. When "climate change" research gets out of the government trough and back into the scientific community where it belongs, we will never get the truth about what is going on with world wide temperatures. The electric vehicles will take over the automobile marketplace when the economies and convenience factors of it match the market's demands. When that happens, I predict EV's will dominate. But it will happen because of market forces not from groups using it as one more "vehicle" in their quest for political power...

[FilmGuy]

Originally Posted by John&Vicki

OK, this is typically where a thread wanders off topic (I’m totally guilty!). But this topic is too interesting to let it go off the rails.

Beer Runner makes a good point - how is highway construction going to be funded when gasoline sales start dwindling? There’s going to have to be another funding mechanism. Perhaps some sort of mileage tax on vehicles? With today’s technology it would be possible for tax agencies to monitor things digitally and remotely. Which sends shivers down my spine.

As I mentioned, there are so many complexities to this issue.

This is an issue even withour electric vehicles. Gas mileage has been increasing since the 1970s, so highway tax revenues per mile driven have been decreasing. Meanwhile, the costs for building and maintaining roads has increased like everything else. But no one has the political will to raise gas and diesel fuel taxes to keep them on par with what they were in the 1960s. So we're going to have to solve that problem whether electrics take over or not.

[FilmGuy]

Originally Posted by Countryboy59

I don’t think it matters whether the technology to pull a trailer ever changes. The vast majority of car trips are within EV range, and 50% are 5 miles or less. 90% of commutes are less than 20 miles. The change in technology in the next 5 years will be more than we saw in the last 50 years.

In the grand scheme of things, what we tow RVs with really doesn’t matter. In 5 years I’m sure I will still have my Ram/Cummins (driven 5 or 6 times a year) in the garage, and something completely different for commuting.

This is exactly right. And many of us are there now. I have a diesel Mercedes for towing, hauling film gear, and long trips. It has a range of 700 miles and plenty of torque for towing. And we have a Nissan Leaf+ for most other trips. It has a range of 220 miles or so, which is plenty for most day trips we take and for all of our "errands". Neither of us commute, but if we did, it's hard to imagine a better commuter car: it charges in the garage overnight, uses no energy at all when stopped in traffic, and gets the cost equivalent of 125mpg.

The Leaf is also an ideal partner to the diesel in another way. The diesel is very dirty and inefficient until it reaches operating temperature, and driving short trips is very bad for its longevity because it clogs its exhaust scrubbing system. The Leaf requires no warmup at all for peak efficiency, and suffers no ill effects from short trips. The two of them together are a really complimentary pair.

In my view, this is the future: different vehicles for different purposes--perhaps one owned and others rented as needed. I don't see any monolithic technology as desirable.

[FilmGuy]

Originally Posted by KK4YZ

My wild guess is we're only about 5 years away from affordable electric vehicles that are practical for more than urban commuting. Lets check back in 5 years to see if I'm right :-)

What's affordable? EVs for urban commuting are available now for just over $30K. Where woud they have to be to be affordable? It seems to me that they command about a $10K premium over equivalent ICE vehicles (which is mostly offset by tax incentives at the moment) but save about $1.5K per year in fuel costs. (Plus maintenance costs are reduced to rotating the tires.)

[franklyfrank]

Originally Posted by FilmGuy

What's affordable? EVs for urban commuting are available now for just over $30K. Where woud they have to be to be affordable? It seems to me that they command about a $10K premium over equivalent ICE vehicles (which is mostly offset by tax incentives at the moment) but save about $1.5K per year in fuel costs. (Plus maintenance costs are reduced to rotating the tires.)

Any consumer item needing tax incentives to sell is not ready for prime time and is promoted purely on bases of politics.
Not only are EV cars subsidized to the buyer the manufacturers have incentives to make them and to sell them without profit to help them meet government mandated cafe standards.
That's a whole lot of political push in my book.
I have no interest in owning an EV yet I am subsidizing your ownership all the way around.
Conversely in Europe anyone who can afford a diesel ownes one because at the end of the day it is the cheapest car to operate over there.

[wulfraat]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank;

Any consumer item needing tax incentives to sell is not ready for prime time and is promoted purely on bases of politics.

Not only are EV cars subsidized to the buyer the manufacturers have incentives to make them and to sell them without profit to help them meet government mandated cafe standards.

That's a whole lot of political push in my book..

Kinda like federal income tax deductions on primary residence mortgages?

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank

Any consumer item needing tax incentives to sell is not ready for prime time...(snip)...

I have no interest in owning an EV yet I am subsidizing your ownership all the way around.
.

Even without the incentive it’s still about the same cost as a nicely equipped small SUV. I think most of the subsidies are gone by now anyway.

Understand about not wanting to subsidize things. I’m wasting money paying into Social Security. I’m sure retirees are drawing it and loving it but I’d prefer to opt out. If I had been investing that money over even the past 15 years I would have retired 5 years ago. Maybe we can get rid of that soon? Maybe Tack it onto a bill removing the EV subsidies. I’d support that.

[FilmGuy]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank

Any consumer item needing tax incentives to sell is not ready for prime time and is promoted purely on bases of politics.
Not only are EV cars subsidized to the buyer the manufacturers have incentives to make them and to sell them without profit to help them meet government mandated cafe standards.
That's a whole lot of political push in my book.
I have no interest in owning an EV yet I am subsidizing your ownership all the way around.
Conversely in Europe anyone who can afford a diesel ownes one because at the end of the day it is the cheapest car to operate over there.

I agree. There are all kinds of distortions caused by subsidies. But I also believe it is a good thing to have more viable modes of transportation available because different technologies are better in different situations. And I believe that subsidies to help a new tech get started are a good thing, if they sunset. In the case of EVs, the subsidies are designed to end as an EV reaches a certain market presence. That's as it should be. A Tesla, for example, is no longer eligible for a subsidy because they've reached sales of the total number of vehicles for which subsidies are available. The Chevy Bolt will reach that number soon as well.

But none of that answers my initial question, which was: At what price would you consider an EV affordable?

[Roadtech]

Originally Posted by FilmGuy

But none of that answers my initial question, which was: At what price would you consider an EV affordable?

My answer to that is at an equivalent price (maybe up to a 20% premium) to a comparable ICE vehicle in amenities and power, but the EV would have to have comparable range and refuel/recharge times being close to the same. When that happens, ICE vehicles will be obsolete due to the inherent maintenance cost benefits and maintenance simplicity of the EV's. The one other factor will be battery life and replacement cost that would have to be factored in to the life costs comparison.

[FilmGuy]

Originally Posted by Roadtech

My answer to that is at an equivalent price (maybe up to a 20% premium) to a comparable ICE vehicle in amenities and power, but the EV would have to have comparable range and refuel/recharge times being close to the same. When that happens, ICE vehicles will be obsolete due to the inherent maintenance cost benefits and maintenance simplicity of the EV's. The one other factor will be battery life and replacement cost that would have to be factored in to the life costs comparison.

I'd say that for some use cases, we're there now. For others, not so much.

A nicely equipped Honda Accord is $32K at my local Honda dealer. A Tesla Model 3 (Standard model, 250mi range) is $39K without incentives (It turns out that there is still an $1800 tax rebate for Teslas, but let's ignore that.) That is just over a 20% premium. Tesla calculates fuel savings of $4300/year, so in less than two years, that premium is paid for and you're banking $350/month.

If your daily drive is under 200 miles, charging is not an issue. You do it at home overnight and never see a charging station. Since most families have more than one vehicle, if you take a longer trip and don't want to deal with charging every 200 miles, you can take the other vehicle.

That said, I don't see ICEs becoming obsolete for a long time, because there are use cases (towing is one) where they have more to offer than EVs. But I do see EVs gaining traction steadily because of the convenience of charging at home, the performance, and the reduction of routine maintenance to rotating your tires.

[Roadtech]

Originally Posted by FilmGuy

That said, I don't see ICEs becoming obsolete for a long time, because there are use cases (towing is one) where they have more to offer than EVs

I would think there will eventually be 3/4 ton and larger EV trucks capable of towing large heavy trailers with decent range and recharge times. I see articles on Tesla tractor trailer rigs coming soon.

[Roadtech]

https://tinyurl.com/Ford-Charging-Network

[franklyfrank]

Originally Posted by Roadtech

I would think there will eventually be 3/4 ton and larger EV trucks capable of towing large heavy trailers with decent range and recharge times. I see articles on Tesla tractor trailer rigs coming soon.

A battery is a lousy fuel tank.
You never know when it will be empty and takes hours to refill.
Not a very common sense replacement for a diesel 18 wheeler with 300 gallons of fuel on board a thousand mile range pulling 80k lbs payload. Not to forget that refueling, lunch and a shower for the driver will have him back on the road for another thousand miles in less than two hours.
We have been working on the battery as a fuel tank for over 100 years without making much headway.