Electric (F150 Ford Lightning) vs. Gas (GMC 1/2 Ton V8) Test

[KK4YZ]

Originally Posted by gypsydad

Agree; especially if your talking to this crowd! I don't see AS changing their product line or going out of business with making 25's and larger AS's anytime soon; especially if the 27' is the most popular in sales...

I expect we will still be debating this for many years to come...perhaps when many of us are too old to remember the oft overlooked negative effects to the environment all this EV technology causes that our grandkids will have figured out that the cost of eliminating the ICE is not worth the advertised benefits to our way of life. When you consider reality of environmental waste all from developing this technology, even the windmills, there is a heavy price we all will have to pay.

Yeah. This has been beat to death. I guess I’ll just continue to drive Ole’ Smokey, my F350 diesel…😂

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by gypsydad

I expect we will still be debating this for many years to come...perhaps when many of us are too old to remember the oft overlooked negative effects to the environment all this EV technology causes that our grandkids will have figured out that the cost of eliminating the ICE is not worth the advertised benefits to our way of life. When you consider reality of environmental waste all from developing this technology, even the windmills, there is a heavy price we all will have to pay.

We’re towing recreational trailers made of several tons of aluminum with diesel pickups that weigh 8,000 lbs. that are manufactured with alloy steels and plastics. The “net negative effects of EV technology” generally exist only in memes and not hard facts. The negative effects of my diesel pickup pulling 7000 lbs of Airstream across the country are well documented and this activity is discretionary. Just felt that point needed clarification. Accept the fact that our discretionary travel in these giant vehicles has an impact.

[rideair]

I found this video to be very interesting, a little long, but worth the information closer to the middle/end, but well worth the watch. Like I've said in the past, I'm neither "for or against" EV vs. ICE. But really swapping one problem for another.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8CnlL8I4HE

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by rideair

I found this video to be very interesting, a little long, but worth the information closer to the middle/end, but well worth the watch. Like I've said in the past, I'm neither "for or against" EV vs. ICE. But really swapping one problem for another.

It’s actually not. All the data is available on relative effects, but may be a difficult read for the YouTube generation 😂

[gypsydad]

Originally Posted by Countryboy59

We’re towing recreational trailers made of several tons of aluminum with diesel pickups that weigh 8,000 lbs. that are manufactured with alloy steels and plastics. The “net negative effects of EV technology” generally exist only in memes and not hard facts. The negative effects of my diesel pickup pulling 7000 lbs of Airstream across the country are well documented and this activity is discretionary. Just felt that point needed clarification. Accept the fact that our discretionary travel in these giant vehicles has an impact.

Absolutly! Most everything we do has an impact of some sort. Not complaining about new technology improving our lives...it's the nuts who are so emphatic about eliminating what works today, for what they want to work tomorrow, that drives me nutz! Go back to the reality of how the electricity is being generated today, how our tax dollars are being spent without consensus on this technology, and there are arguments for both sides...reality is both can exist while the newer technology is refined. Not sure you will be towing your 27' with an EV anytime in next 5 years, right?

[gypsydad]

And then there is this from Nasa on environmental climate change...is it man made or natural? Here we go again....

file:///C:/Users/jerry/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/9HLIBMKW/NASA%20Report-compressed.pdf

[mikeinca]

Originally Posted by gypsydad

And then there is this from Nasa on environmental climate change...is it man made or natural? Here we go again....

file:///C:/Users/jerry/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/9HLIBMKW/NASA%20Report-compressed.pdf

Looks like a computer file address, not a link. Can you try posting it again in a format we can access? Thx.

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by gypsydad

Absolutly! Most everything we do has an impact of some sort. Not complaining about new technology improving our lives...it's the nuts who are so emphatic about eliminating what works today, for what they want to work tomorrow, that drives me nutz! Go back to the reality of how the electricity is being generated today, how our tax dollars are being spent without consensus on this technology, and there are arguments for both sides...reality is both can exist while the newer technology is refined. Not sure you will be towing your 27' with an EV anytime in next 5 years, right?

My tax dollars have been wasted for years without my consent, on everything from people’s health insurance to the worst “investment” option available.

My EV is range extended and I use about 3-4 gallons of gas weekly for about 400 miles of commute. I kept my gas SUV which uses 30-40 gallons for the same time frame. I’ll always have a diesel for my RV application.

Unfortunately they no longer make a nice EV with extended range. I can unplug and drive to work, or leave work and go to California on gas I if I want. Never understood why they didn’t keep that option. You really CAN have both. A small diesel with 100 miles all-electric range, that I would tow with.

[gypsydad]

Originally Posted by Countryboy59

My tax dollars have been wasted for years without my consent, on everything from people’s health insurance to the worst “investment” option available.

My EV is range extended and I use about 3-4 gallons of gas weekly for about 400 miles of commute. I kept my gas SUV which uses 30-40 gallons for the same time frame. I’ll always have a diesel for my RV application.

Unfortunately they no longer make a nice EV with extended range. I can unplug and drive to work, or leave work and go to California on gas I if I want. Never understood why they didn’t keep that option. You really CAN have both. A small diesel with 100 miles all-electric range, that I would tow with.

Agree with hybrid comment; logic escapes me also..great idea for sure! Especially if they can increase the electric range on the hybrid....I am sure they could, but....I am also sure many of the nutz would get very upset to see something like that happen.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by Countryboy59

Unfortunately they no longer make a nice EV with extended range. I can unplug and drive to work, or leave work and go to California on gas I if I want. Never understood why they didn’t keep that option. You really CAN have both. A small diesel with 100 miles all-electric range, that I would tow with.

Originally Posted by gypsydad

Agree with hybrid comment; logic escapes me also..great idea for sure! Especially if they can increase the electric range on the hybrid....I am sure they could…

It is worth looking back at what we are trying to accomplish with this shift. The goal is not to switch to EVs. It is to decarbonize our transportation system. If the goal is understood to be eliminating fossil fuel consumption in transportation, then it is clear that gas electric hybrids are not a solution. Which is why they are going away. Because we can’t have both.

[gypsydad]

Originally Posted by mikeinca

Looks like a computer file address, not a link. Can you try posting it again in a format we can access? Thx.

Sorry- here it is. Makes a lot of sense to some of us...to others, likely will be dismissed as biased, but hey, it is seems rational from NASA.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by gypsydad

Sorry- here it is. Makes a lot of sense to some of us...to others, likely will be dismissed as biased, but hey, it is seems rational from NASA.

What is worrying is that this rant makes sense to some.

There is no conspiracy.

There is a very badly constructed argument in the paper. The first clue should be the pictures. Look at the third one, which is wrongly labelled to try and make a point. Don’t be fooled.

NASA are a good source of info on climate change.

Start here. https://climate.nasa.gov/

NASA explains Mikankovitch cycles here. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/m...arths-climate/

Fun fact: the Mikankovitch cycles put us in a cooling phase, so they can’t explain current warming.

[gypsydad]

Originally Posted by jcl

What is worrying is that this rant makes sense to some.

There is no conspiracy.

There is a very badly constructed argument in the paper. The first clue should be the pictures. Look at the third one, which is wrongly labelled to try and make a point. Don’t be fooled.

NASA are a good source of info on climate change.

Start here. https://climate.nasa.gov/

NASA explains Mikankovitch cycles here. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2948/m...arths-climate/

Fun fact: the Mikankovitch cycles put us in a cooling phase, so they can’t explain current warming.

Think they kind of sum up your response at the end of this article:

"If we had to sum the whole thing up in one simple phrase, it would be this: The biggest factor influencing weather and climate patterns on earth is the Sun, period. Depending on the earth's position to the sun at any given time, climate conditions are going to vary dramatically, and even create drastic abnormalities that defy everything that humans thought they knew about how the earth worked. But rather than embrace this truth, today's climate "scientists," joined by leftist politicians and a complicit mainstream media, insist that not using reusable grocery bags at the supermarket and not having an electric vehicle are destroying the planet so quickly that we absolutely must implement global climate taxes as the solution.

"The climate change debate is not about science. It is an effort to impose political and economic controls on the population by the elite," wrote one commenter at the Hal Turner Radio Show.
"And it's another way to divide the population against itself, with some who believe in man-made global warming and some who don't, i.e. divide and conquer."

Pretty accurate description IMHO.

[RedSHED]

My neighbor's house caught fire several years ago. I had a couple cans of old thinner and some used motor oil. It never occurred to me to add them to the fire.



I do applied math in exchange for filthy lucre. I've told a couple supervisors that "I would do the work for free, but I take the money so HR remembers that they care." I. Love. the profession I've found myself in, I love the mathematics, I love the physics. Seeing stuff I've designed, stuff I've designed or created (or patented) out in "the world" is a nice coda, but there is real joy in creating something beautiful that maybe no one else will ever notice - because then you know you've done an elegant thing in the true service of your profession.


With that said, anyone, ANYONE who interjects their politics - left, right, or center - into a design, a review, or a discussion of the underlying math or physics gets an automatic ticket to the "your next presentation is going to be especially grueling" as they have betrayed the discipline of their profession in favor of personal aggrandizement. Just no.

[mikeinca]

Originally Posted by gypsydad

Think they kind of sum up your response at the end of this article:

"If we had to sum the whole thing up in one simple phrase, it would be this: The biggest factor influencing weather and climate patterns on earth is the Sun, period.

That's not NASA's conclusion, it's the conclusion of whoever (no attribution given) wrote the article.

I posted a response to your article in a different thread, but in case you missed it, the bottom line is that NASA information from 1958 that earth's orbit and its axis contribute to climate doesn't mean that rising CO2 isn't an even more important component of the problem. They aren't mutually exclusive.

The author of the article also lies (or didn't bother to validate the claim) when they say NASA has had no comment on the issue since 1958. See here for their current stand on the subject:

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

[Bobbo]

Originally Posted by jcl

It is worth looking back at what we are trying to accomplish with this shift. The goal is not to switch to EVs. It is to decarbonize our transportation system. If the goal is understood to be eliminating fossil fuel consumption in transportation, then it is clear that gas electric hybrids are not a solution. Which is why they are going away. Because we can’t have both.

While a hybrid may not be the solution, it could be a step toward the solution. It can REDUCE the hydrocarbons burned while maintaining our current lifestyle while BEVs get to the point where they can carry the whole burden. You know, electric for every day errands. Hydrocarbons for long trips/heavy duty use. Baby steps. We need baby steps. A hybrid can be such a baby step.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by Bobbo

While a hybrid may not be the solution, it could be a step toward the solution. It can REDUCE the hydrocarbons burned while maintaining our current lifestyle while BEVs get to the point where they can carry the whole burden. You know, electric for every day errands. Hydrocarbons for long trips/heavy duty use. Baby steps. We need baby steps. A hybrid can be such a baby step.

Hybrid vehicles have served as a bridge until BEV technology and infrastructure was ready. The issue is that we have largely crossed that bridge over the past years. Not in all geographic areas, and not in all applications, eg towing longer distances, but certainly for a large percentage of normal use, including long trips. We shouldn’t expect manufacturers to develop special products for a rapidly shrinking market opportunity.

[richard5933]

Originally Posted by jcl

Hybrid vehicles have served as a bridge until BEV technology and infrastructure was ready. The issue is that we have largely crossed that bridge over the past years. Not in all geographic areas, and not in all applications, eg towing longer distances, but certainly for a large percentage of normal use, including long trips. We shouldn’t expect manufacturers to develop special products for a rapidly shrinking market opportunity.

What percentage of normal use, including longer trips do you actually think is ready for EVs across North America at the current moment? I'm not sure that your reality and my reality overlap that much in this regard.

Sure, I can search online and find publicly accessible charging stations located here and there throughout the area, but the overall picture looks nothing like what you describe in your area. It certainly doesn't sound like what you describe for the vast number of people living in cities around here or in the more densely packed outer urban areas.

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by jcl

It is worth looking back at what we are trying to accomplish with this shift. The goal is not to switch to EVs. It is to decarbonize our transportation system. If the goal is understood to be eliminating fossil fuel consumption in transportation, then it is clear that gas electric hybrids are not a solution. Which is why they are going away. Because we can’t have both.

Actually it’s an EV with a range extender, not a hybrid like a Prius. Relatively few were made and they’re selling for a premium right now. I’m guessing a lot of people who aren’t ready to jump into a full EV would love to burn $10 of gas a week instead of $200. And I have no trouble answering the red herring “what if the power goes out?” And “what if you’re caught in an ice storm on I-95?” questions. I’ve got warranty until 2027 and still have my diesel, so after that we’ll see.

[rideair]

After thinking about it, there is one really good thing that will come from me being forced to drive/tow with an EV's, I won't keep getting the phone calls from my wife telling me she accidently filled-up my Excursion (7.3 diesel) up with gasoline and is used to tow the Airstreams

But on the other side of the house, switching to EV's will not be so easy for many of the folks in the USA regardless of if they are towing an Airstream or not. Between having to download apps for payment of a recharge, living in places lower income areas that won't have support to charge at home, etc.. many will be forced to walk or take public transportation. Think about the folks that use check cashing places, payday loans, etc.. and tell me the plan for them recharging their new EV auto?

Just a thought?