A Youtuber tested how far he could drive a F-150 lightning from a full charge while towing a travel trailer. He was unable to drive even 100 miles before running out of juice. There is no services for over 100 miles on I-70 in Utah between Salina and Green River. Are EV pickup owners who are towing a travel trailer destined to get stranded while driving that section of interstate?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e55Vued028
Quote from: tradephoric on July 07, 2022, 03:10:45 PM
A Youtuber tested how far he could drive a F-150 lightning from a full charge while towing a travel trailer. He was unable to drive even 100 miles before running out of juice. There is no services for over 100 miles on I-70 in Utah between Salina and Green River. Are EV pickup owners who are towing a travel trailer destined to get stranded while driving that section of interstate?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-e55Vued028
This is one of my comments to electric cars as a whole. I am not shooting them down or saying they are stupid, but I am saying they are not practical for my uses. I drive distances that are sometimes multiple fill ups one way, and those are just jaunts, not my family road trips (so that's at about 350 miles between stops). I don't have the time to stop at every charging station and sit for hours while the thing charges to then make it a little down the road to repeat the process.
Now this throws a new wrinkle in the mix. towing on electric. In areas that resources are limited. Of course, those that do that on the regular probably wouldn't pick an electric truck as their power plant, but the stupidity of the human race never stops one-upping itself.
No current electric pickup owner is going to tow for any significant distances. They'll use it to go back and forth to their office complex, posing as a fake cowboy on their way back to their suburban tract. Or it will be guided by a shopaholic with with an inferiority complex but will leave it plugged in longer than necessary just to piss off other EV owners.
Check back in 10-20 years.
And does this surprise anyone? Basically the range of the motor/battery is rated at unladen curb weight. The more weight you toss on via a trailer the less the range will be. Even gasoline/diesel trucks have a massive economy drop the higher the weight of something being towed is. Less than 100 miles certainly isn't practical for much beyond short in-town distances.
The charging infrastructure network definitely needs work, especially on the non-Tesla side of things. Having to circle around to find working chargers on a few road trips with my friend in their EV is annoying and cumbersome when we we want to go somewhere more remote than the Interstates, so I can't imagine trying to rely on it for something more substantial.
Quote from: formulanone on July 07, 2022, 03:37:05 PM
No current electric pickup owner is going to tow for any significant distances. They'll use it to go back and forth to their office complex, posing as a fake cowboy on their way back to their suburban tract.
Plenty of diesel-guzzling pickups are treated just the same. :bigass:
Destined? Perhaps...
Quote from: Andy RooneyMy grandfather told me when I was a small boy that if a product was any good, they shouldn't have to advertise it. I believed my grandfather at the time, but then years later my mother said that when she was a little girl he had told her that they'd never be able to build an automobile that would go up a hill. So I never knew whether to believe my grandfather or not.
Quote from: Bruce on July 07, 2022, 04:44:02 PM
The charging infrastructure network definitely needs work, especially on the non-Tesla side of things. Having to circle around to find working chargers on a few road trips with my friend in their EV is annoying and cumbersome when we we want to go somewhere more remote than the Interstates, so I can't imagine trying to rely on it for something more substantial.
Quote from: formulanone on July 07, 2022, 03:37:05 PM
No current electric pickup owner is going to tow for any significant distances. They'll use it to go back and forth to their office complex, posing as a fake cowboy on their way back to their suburban tract.
Plenty of diesel-guzzling pickups are treated just the same. :bigass:
Something tells me they won't put chargers where there aren't even gas stations. One wonders where the power would come from on those desolate western stretches...
I saw comments on that video saying something like, "It's not like there won't be 220V charging stations at the campsite," made by commenters who think KOAs are roughing it. Within 90 miles of my house, I could easily find dozens of Forest Service primitive campsites that don't have any electrical services. That truck would do an amazing job getting to the campsite, and become a useless rock unless you brought a generator, solar panels, or other backup power to recharge while camping.
That's not counting the majority of Montana away from the Interstates that does not have any significant recharging infrastructure.
EDIT: Forgot to mention that most people I know in MT who have toy hauling campers like those in the video use it off road quite frequently for hunting and remote camping, usually with a side-by-side or dirt bikes in the back.
On the other hand, how many people tow trailers of any sort regularly enough that this matters at all? I don't even own any cars that can tow a trailer as it is. I've had the need to do it, maybe, a half-dozen times in my adult life. Any time I've needed to, I had a friend or family member do it for me and I threw them a twenty/took them out to eat/whatever for their time and gas.
Besides, if someone has enough money to own a travel trailer specifically, they probably have enough money to have both an electric vehicle for commuting and an ICE one for camping. These people are literally the least concern.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 07, 2022, 06:04:24 PM
On the other hand, how many people tow trailers of any sort regularly enough that this matters at all?
IMO, the importance of videos like this is to show that EV pickups are not quite ready to replace an ICE pickup for any serious labor. EVs have come a long way, but still have significant disadvantages over ICE that will cause problems if you rely on it for a job, use it outside of cities and suburbs, or need it for anything that might strain the battery capacity. If you do need to tow on a regular basis, cover long distances, go places without electricity, etc., then this video shows that an EV pickup is not right for you.
Quote from: Rothman on July 07, 2022, 05:12:13 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 07, 2022, 04:44:02 PM
The charging infrastructure network definitely needs work, especially on the non-Tesla side of things. Having to circle around to find working chargers on a few road trips with my friend in their EV is annoying and cumbersome when we we want to go somewhere more remote than the Interstates, so I can't imagine trying to rely on it for something more substantial.
Quote from: formulanone on July 07, 2022, 03:37:05 PM
No current electric pickup owner is going to tow for any significant distances. They'll use it to go back and forth to their office complex, posing as a fake cowboy on their way back to their suburban tract.
Plenty of diesel-guzzling pickups are treated just the same. :bigass:
Something tells me they won't put chargers where there aren't even gas stations. One wonders where the power would come from on those desolate western stretches...
That's the biggest issue I presently have making a jump to EV beyond commuter car. It would be a huge problem trying to track down infrastructure in places like the Sierra Nevada Mountains or Great Basin Desert for a charge up due to unexpected short range. Even when range on EVs is likely enhanced in the future getting charging stations to the remote corners of the America West will likely still be a major issue.
I think almost every gardener in So Cal drives a pickup towing a single-axle trailer filled with tools. (See picture for example) None are close to the size of that camping trailer. While the EV pickup may not be feasible yet for towing camping trailers, it should satisfy the needs of the gardeners of So Cal. It may be a while before any of them could afford one however.
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRhtJZt7MWRJLaTZ7Mb-AM41-QGUe4zq0Y76w&usqp=CAU)
Quote from: FrCorySticha on July 07, 2022, 07:27:31 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 07, 2022, 06:04:24 PM
On the other hand, how many people tow trailers of any sort regularly enough that this matters at all?
IMO, the importance of videos like this is to show that EV pickups are not quite ready to replace an ICE pickup for any serious labor. EVs have come a long way, but still have significant disadvantages over ICE that will cause problems if you rely on it for a job, use it outside of cities and suburbs, or need it for anything that might strain the battery capacity. If you do need to tow on a regular basis, cover long distances, go places without electricity, etc., then this video shows that an EV pickup is not right for you.
Well, yeah. But what I'm saying is, the vast majority of people rarely need to use a vehicle for serious labor and would do just fine in an EV.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 07, 2022, 08:06:25 PM
Quote from: Rothman on July 07, 2022, 05:12:13 PM
Quote from: Bruce on July 07, 2022, 04:44:02 PM
The charging infrastructure network definitely needs work, especially on the non-Tesla side of things. Having to circle around to find working chargers on a few road trips with my friend in their EV is annoying and cumbersome when we we want to go somewhere more remote than the Interstates, so I can't imagine trying to rely on it for something more substantial.
Quote from: formulanone on July 07, 2022, 03:37:05 PM
No current electric pickup owner is going to tow for any significant distances. They'll use it to go back and forth to their office complex, posing as a fake cowboy on their way back to their suburban tract.
Plenty of diesel-guzzling pickups are treated just the same. :bigass:
Something tells me they won't put chargers where there aren't even gas stations. One wonders where the power would come from on those desolate western stretches...
That's the biggest issue I presently have making a jump to EV beyond commuter car. It would be a huge problem trying to track down infrastructure in places like the Sierra Nevada Mountains or Great Basin Desert for a charge up due to unexpected short range. Even when range on EVs is likely enhanced in the future getting charging stations to the remote corners of the America West will likely still be a major issue.
Yes, this is going to be a major problem for people that live in places like Nevada. However, I wonder if we might see more EV chargers in these areas than there are gas stations now once the tech matures. Most gas stations need to have someone on property supervising/operating a C-store any time they're open, and even if not, you periodically have to have someone go out there and refill the tanks.
With electric, you could have a layby with one or two fully-automated chargers pretty much anywhere you can run electricity, even if it's in the middle of nowhere. They could probably even automatically dispatch someone to come out and look at them if they have a technical problem.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 07, 2022, 08:42:05 PM
With electric, you could have a layby with one or two fully-automated chargers pretty much anywhere you can run electricity, even if it's in the middle of nowhere. They could probably even automatically dispatch someone to come out and look at them if they have a technical problem.
So the obvious question is: how big a solar array (with appropriate batteries) would be needed to support a charger out in the middle of nowhere?
Another item I've pondered before: AAA can come to the rescue of an out-of-fuel ICE vehicle with a few gallons of gas (which takes up less than a cubic foot of space and weighs maybe 20 lb). The equivalent would be such a vehicle able to partially charge an EV's battery. How much space/weight would that be?
My biggest issue is still.. We just aren't near ready to make this a viable thing. The technology and infrastructure just isn't there to make this a seamless transition. Again, not slamming electric cars, but I don't think much thinking was involved when the craze hit. It was "hey we got an electric car, hey California, pass a bill that will ban gasoline vehicle purchase in 2035! We're done with this, move on to the new shiny thing!!"
Again, they work fine in your city. They work fine for your daily work commute. There are a lot of people out there that use their car for only those purposes, but there are way more people out there that need their car to do their daily commute, commute from their to their second job, then to their kid's T-ball practice and then been the family road trip car. Yes the technology is there for electric cars, but there is a difference between the technology being there and it being a direct replacement for something that already works pretty good as it is. There are a lot of questions I have that not only aren't being answered, no one is even asking the questions. All this isn't even throwing in the fact most people can't even afford these cars.
It fells like another classic, "It works for me on my 1 mile commute to work, so it will work for everybody in this country."
I have mentioned this many times before in discussions of these types of vehicles and still have no reason to change my opinion on it. "Range on a charge" and "turnaround time on refueling (recharging)" were two of the primary reasons why battery-electric technology failed in the open market in the earliest days of automobility (well over a century ago) and why it will ultimately fail again. Battery-electric has its place (short range fleets, golf courses, warehouse lift trucks and the like), but is absolutely unsuitable for public general use.
Mike
The average daily drive for most Americans is under 45 miles according to the NHTS, well within range of any EV. If home-work-work-shopping-sports-home is double that, then you have a lifestyle problem (or a sprawl addiction).
Even my fairly intensive delivery driving still slides under the 300-mile range advertised for higher-end EVs, and in a decade's time that range should be attainable for most EVs.
Quote from: Bruce on July 08, 2022, 02:50:34 PM
The average daily drive for most Americans is under 45 miles according to the NHTS, well within range of any EV. If home-work-work-shopping-sports-home is double that, then you have a lifestyle problem.
My daily commute to work is longer than that alone, so when I add something else to do before I go home, that adds up, and it's not lifestyle problem....it's a way of life!
Seriously though, I also am afraid living in a hot state, because batteries don't last as long when hot constantly.
Quote from: Bruce on July 08, 2022, 02:50:34 PM
The average daily drive for most Americans is under 45 miles according to the NHTS, well within range of any EV. If home-work-work-shopping-sports-home is double that, then you have a lifestyle problem (or a sprawl addiction).
And this kind of condescension is why people can't stand New Urbanists or other fanatical planners obsessed with stacking people on top of each other and putting everyone on public transit.
And I say that as someone who doesn't have a daily drive at all (I walk to work) and as someone who currently lives in an apartment.
Fact of the matter is I still love the convenience of driving 300+ miles, filling up in a couple of minutes and away I go again.
And there's more to life than commuting, shopping and taking kids to extracurriculars. Walking around a city grid can be tiresome due to the traffic lights, so we head out of town to walk around the nearby lakes and the like.
The planner planning around "home-work-shopping-sports-home" routine is actually enforcing the system that exploits labor, if you think about it.
An electric vehicle would work very well for me where I live. I still live with my mother. Very few trips are over 20 miles (15 to her work, 15 to Lahey Hospital in Burlington, 20 to theatre when I did it, 20 to the second-closest Apple Store when the closest was booked), and even the trips to Boston are about 30 miles. Getting prescriptions and groceries are under 3 miles away.
Not I, alas. I like to go to the most remote places I can find in this state. I don't have a commute at all for work, and if I could afford to move to the mountains, I would. Instead, I have to drive there.
Quote from: 1 on July 08, 2022, 03:11:35 PM
An electric vehicle would work very well for me where I live. I still live with my mother. Very few trips are over 20 miles (15 to her work, 15 to Lahey Hospital in Burlington, 20 to theatre when I did it, 20 to the second-closest Apple Store when the closest was booked), and even the trips to Boston are about 30 miles. Getting prescriptions and groceries are under 3 miles away.
Again, there is nothing wrong with that. That works for you.
On the other hand, if my wife and I want to go to Walmart or another department store, its a 46 mile round trip on a day that's not a work day. We don't just stop at that so we usually put 75-100 miles on our car just running errands on a weekend. That's all the necessity part.
I am not throwing in the part where we are tired of being at home every day so we just take off, or we have to visit the grandkids 4 hours away, or my in-laws 5 hours away. Even a "short" weekend drive to San Antonio for the day is a 200 mile round trip. It's just not practical for my life. I know we can probably do all that in an electric car, but it's not exactly switching from one car to the next. Every aspect of our lives will change. What if I pull a bonehead like so many of us do when I get home from work and forget to plug the car in like I sometimes forget to plug the phone in? What happens when I run out of power on the highway/ Do they have electric cans I can carry some electricity in and fill-er up? What happens when I am low on "fuel" and I fill up? No big deal right, just plug in...except I don't want to kill 4 hours charging up my car. Some people boast that they have these "rapid chargers" that can do it in about 1.5 to 2 hours now. Sorry, but for my schedule and life, that doesn't help. I am pissed if it takes me more than 10 minutes to fill up my car, not because I am impatient, but because I don't like to hang out at a gas station for any longer than I have to. One blew up when I was a kid and I still think about it and there are so many that feel like I am either going to get stabbed or somehow get involved in a drug deal, but the Urbanist want me to hang out at these places for 2 to 4 hours? See the city they said! Or just the gas station/charging station.
Oh yeah, I am the type of guy that loves to keep a car until it falls apart. What will happen in 5 years when the battery doesn't hold the charge like it used to. Get a new battery they say...they also say, it will be so costly you have to drop another $80 grand on a new one...still, I am not seeing the good deal I am getting here.
Again, none of the points I am talking about are new, but I really feel like the powers that be that are pushing the electric car wagon either didn't think about all these things, or simply just don't give a crap about my life or others like me.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 08, 2022, 03:36:32 PM
Again, none of the points I am talking about are new, but I really feel like the powers that be that are pushing the electric car wagon either didn't think about all these things, or simply just don't give a crap about my life or others like me.
I think they've thought about these things and your demographic as well, but simply put, the technology isn't there yet. It's getting there for sure, but as of now, it's not in a place where it can completely replace combustion engines. It will get there at some point, and honestly probably not too far away in the future. I recently bought a 2019 Jeep thinking that it would probably be the last gas driven car I purchase, and hopefully so, but obviously there are still steps to take before EVs become ubiquitous.
I like using a sample of 1 to hint at everyone's experience for the rest of eternity.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 08, 2022, 04:05:06 PM
I like using a sample of 1 to hint at everyone's experience for the rest of eternity.
The plural of anecdote is not data.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on July 08, 2022, 03:45:54 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 08, 2022, 03:36:32 PM
Again, none of the points I am talking about are new, but I really feel like the powers that be that are pushing the electric car wagon either didn't think about all these things, or simply just don't give a crap about my life or others like me.
I think they've thought about these things and your demographic as well, but simply put, the technology isn't there yet.
And I am okay with it not being there yet. What does bother me is I feel like everyone is in such a hurry to switch to these cars that are a serious down grade at the moment. When the technology catches up, I am all for it, but I honestly don't see it happening in my lifetime. I look at all the other electrical gadgets out there and see the endless issues they have. If my iPhone stays in the car for more that 15 minutes in the summer its useless for 15 minutes due to overheating, so I have little faith even when the technology catches up that it will be bug free.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 08, 2022, 04:24:42 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on July 08, 2022, 03:45:54 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 08, 2022, 03:36:32 PM
Again, none of the points I am talking about are new, but I really feel like the powers that be that are pushing the electric car wagon either didn't think about all these things, or simply just don't give a crap about my life or others like me.
I think they've thought about these things and your demographic as well, but simply put, the technology isn't there yet.
And I am okay with it not being there yet. What does bother me is I feel like everyone is in such a hurry to switch to these cars that are a serious down grade at the moment. When the technology catches up, I am all for it, but I honestly don't see it happening in my lifetime. I look at all the other electrical gadgets out there and see the endless issues they have. If my iPhone stays in the car for more that 15 minutes in the summer its useless for 15 minutes due to overheating, so I have little faith even when the technology catches up that it will be bug free.
I wouldn't be surprised if the technology and infrastructure is fully capable within 10 years. Now, I don't know the cost side of things, as you already alluded to the price of the batteries.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on July 08, 2022, 04:29:08 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 08, 2022, 04:24:42 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on July 08, 2022, 03:45:54 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 08, 2022, 03:36:32 PM
Again, none of the points I am talking about are new, but I really feel like the powers that be that are pushing the electric car wagon either didn't think about all these things, or simply just don't give a crap about my life or others like me.
I think they've thought about these things and your demographic as well, but simply put, the technology isn't there yet.
And I am okay with it not being there yet. What does bother me is I feel like everyone is in such a hurry to switch to these cars that are a serious down grade at the moment. When the technology catches up, I am all for it, but I honestly don't see it happening in my lifetime. I look at all the other electrical gadgets out there and see the endless issues they have. If my iPhone stays in the car for more that 15 minutes in the summer its useless for 15 minutes due to overheating, so I have little faith even when the technology catches up that it will be bug free.
I wouldn't be surprised if the technology and infrastructure is fully capable within 10 years. Now, I don't know the cost side of things, as you already alluded to the price of the batteries.
You might be right. The technology might be ready in 10 years. Like many other things though, the practicality (affordability for the masses) of it may take another 20 years beyond that.
My favorite example is Laser Disc. It was invented in 1978, but no one really had one until they could make them less expensive and that took until the early 90s for some people to have them and the late 90s until the average moron like me could afford one. I think it's funny to use that reference because Laser Disc never really caught on, but it's a good example of product is ready to go vs. product can be purchased by any knucklehead and not just some guy with a yacht.
Here's another video that was just posted today with both a Ford F-150 Lightning & Rivian R1T Towing Over The Entire Rocky Mountain Range. They ran into a lot of charging issues and it seemed very difficult for them to navigate their truck/trailer into the charger so they weren't blocking anybody from getting around in the parking lot. That honestly appeared to be the most stressful part of the trip for the guys:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEtStnltwOo
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 08, 2022, 10:36:55 AM
My biggest issue is still.. We just aren't near ready to make this a viable thing. The technology and infrastructure just isn't there to make this a seamless transition.
Unfortunately, America is not a country where "let's plan things out so that we have a seamless transition" is a realistic option. The American Way is to kick the can down the road for decades until we're six months out from the country crashing and burning, or actually
let it crash and burn, and then do panic fixes once ignoring the problem is impossible. This is how we handle every other sort of infrastructure (roads, bridges, transit, water, Internet) and ERCOT shows that electricity is not any different.
If we need upgrades to electrical infrastructure to support electric cars, the only way to make it happen in America is for everyone to switch to electric cars first and thoroughly crash the grid. That's the only way to actually force the powers that be to do anything to correct the problem.
Now, I'm not saying that EVs can cover everything we do (in fact, I think roadgeeking as we know it will be one of the last use cases to be practical in EVs), but a lot of this is driving with an ICE mindset vs. driving with an EV mindset. Keep in mind that most of the time charging is the last 20%, not the first 80%. That's one reason why EV owners don't charge to 100% full often (the other being that it's bad for the battery and accelerates degradation). Charging to 100% is mainly reserved for the start of a roadtrip (in which case you get their overnight while home charging) or if there's a really long gap between chargers (an infrastructure issue, not a technology one, and one that will improve in most places as time goes on).
Charging an EV does take more planning. "Just drive and pop into the next station when nearly out of range" isn't a good strategy, especially given how much longer it takes to charge. Timing charge stops with food and bathroom breaks is the name of the game. Now, especially with current infrastructure, this can lead to tailoring the trip around the needs of the car rather than the desires of the driving (for example, taking a different route because of better charger availability, eating at different places for lunch, etc.). Such is why I think roadgeeking will be one of the last use cases to become practical in EVs. People who are happy to let GPS navigate for them will have an easier time, as they just need to switch to either in-car navigation or EV route planning apps. Those of us who navigate ourselves with the goal of seeing specific roads will have more issues.
Videos like this are stupid. The unstated premise here is "EV's are garbage if they can't do every little niche thing that ICE vehicles have come to do over the last 100 years."
It's not realistic to expect electric automobiles to do things like towing RV's and other giant shit. That's not their wheelhouse, so the only reason to make a big show of doing it is to shit on EV's for the vroom-vroom crowd. This is like using a cordless drill to chop down a goddamn tree. It proves nothing but how ineffective it is to use the wrong tool for wrong job and treat it like it's a big reveal. Duh!
Towing will be the future niche for hydrogen fuel cells. And by towing, I mean giant testicle trucks and actual semis. Compressed hydrogen will allow for the range needed for these low distance-per-unit-fuel-energy use cases. And yes, yes, it's only energy storage, not an energy source and most of that hydrogen comes from hydrocarbons, but those are manageable issues. 50 years from now, the solar panels on your house will use the energy you don't immediately need to hydrolyze water into hydrogen and oxygen to store that energy for later use; either in the home or in a vehicle. Or to be sold to the hydrogen man, who goes around paying folks for their excess H-2.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 13, 2022, 12:25:37 PM
It's not realistic to expect electric automobiles to do things like towing RV's and other giant shit. That's not their wheelhouse, so the only reason to make a big show of doing it is to shit on EV's for the vroom-vroom crowd.
The auto/truck manufacturers are the ones
suggesting it in the first place, though at a more modest number than the ICE equivalents.
Quote from: https://www.chevrolet.com/electric/silverado-ev
Silverado EV will offer up to 14 available camera views* and up to 10,000 lbs.* of max towing — with up to 20,000 lbs. available on a future WT model* — you'll be able to hitch up and hit the road with ease.
{good luck finding it in a continuously-scrolling page with animations}
Quote from: https://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/f150-lightning/features/towing/#towingandhauling/?intcmp=vhp-featcta-towing-f-150-lightning
10,000 lbs. Targeted available maximum towing capacity" "
Yeah, it's done for the gearheads
but somebody has to try to keep the manufacturers honest by using high school math. To be fair, I didn't watch the video because the amount of
cut-to-the-chase for most YouTube videos is unsurprisingly low.
So for someone who might travel only 20-30 miles away to a campsite with a light trailer and not too much added interior weight, then you're in luck. Hopefully, you don't have to go into town for additional supplies. Perhaps some sort of municipal use, university grounds, or business which will travel rather short distances
and also have enough downtime to recharge it constantly might also see some benefit. But the price tag is too dear for that kind of thing for anything other than vanity. Fleets will go for stripped-down models which cost a third of an EV pickup. The only other benefit is the "frunk" which is actually kind of useful and seriously cuts down on theft.
I'm not saying "we'll never be there", because the advances in automobiles over 140 years of development didn't happen overnight. If anything, the hybrid/EV phenomenon has only been seriously been going on for 25-30 years, so it will get there eventually. But right now, the technology doesn't measure up for the use of pickup trucks as towing vehicles. It's fine for the daily commute, but probably a bit too much of a vehicle for that anyhow. At a lofty six-figures, plus you get be the beta-tester, it's not even in the conversation for most folks. Like the pace of most new technologies, EVs will need a two-generation jump to catch up: (1) the weight of the batteries (2) storage capacity of the individual batteries hasn't increased much (3) battery life-span has marginally increased (4) charging infrastructure is improving somewhat, at least in less-rural areas.
Also, this pains the traditionalists a bunch...not all EVs are slow! And while there's a lot of people who will probably never want an EV, most of the industry (as well as pledges to reduce greenhouse gasses) has accepted that the automotive landscape will change in the next 10-25 years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JYp9eGC3Cc&t=16s
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 13, 2022, 12:25:37 PM
Videos like this are stupid. The unstated premise here is "EV's are garbage if they can't do every little niche thing that ICE vehicles have come to do over the last 100 years."
I agree, you are correct. Electric vehicles cannot do everything their gas powered equivalents have done and can do. That's not saying they are not a viable alternative to some cars. That's all true, but when you have car manufactures and government entities yelling at you to switch to an electric car immediately while the electric car is still so far from where it needs to be to outlaw gas/diesel powered cars, that's when I start having a problem. I have a problem when urbanists finger wag me and tell me I need to have an electric car while they so underperform for what I need it for, cost way more and still rely on getting their energy from fossil fuels. All they can see is their 5 mile commute is perfect for their electric car, then they yell at me for not converting under the guise that I don't have an open mind, or I am not thinking about the environment or that I am too narrow minded. It's the pot calling the kettle black. Let me throw my narrow minded views onto you, then if you don't immediately agree with me, I will call you narrow minded.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 13, 2022, 12:25:37 PM
It's not realistic to expect electric automobiles to do things like towing RV's and other giant shit. That's not their wheelhouse, so the only reason to make a big show of doing it is to shit on EV's for the vroom-vroom crowd. This is like using a cordless drill to chop down a goddamn tree. It proves nothing but how ineffective it is to use the wrong tool for wrong job and treat it like it's a big reveal. Duh!
It's hard to use the right tool for the job when the governments of the world are staring to enact ICE bans. Just let me keep towing my trailer with my diesel truck and we're all good.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 13, 2022, 02:02:22 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 13, 2022, 12:25:37 PM
Videos like this are stupid. The unstated premise here is "EV's are garbage if they can't do every little niche thing that ICE vehicles have come to do over the last 100 years."
I agree, you are correct. Electric vehicles cannot do everything their gas powered equivalents have done and can do. That's not saying they are not a viable alternative to some cars. That's all true, but when you have car manufactures and government entities yelling at you to switch to an electric car immediately while the electric car is still so far from where it needs to be to outlaw gas/diesel powered cars, that's when I start having a problem. I have a problem when urbanists finger wag me and tell me I need to have an electric car while they so underperform for what I need it for, cost way more and still rely on getting their energy from fossil fuels. All they can see is their 5 mile commute is perfect for their electric car, then they yell at me for not converting under the guise that I don't have an open mind, or I am not thinking about the environment or that I am too narrow minded. It's the pot calling the kettle black. Let me throw my narrow minded views onto you, then if you don't immediately agree with me, I will call you narrow minded.
Both of you are right. Electric cars are really useful for many people and it's unfair to test them in guaranteed to fail environments. They're really good for commuters who can recharge once or twice per day (home and destination). They're not ready yet for towing, big trucks, those who frequently drive long distances, etc and may not ever be ready for most drivers in the foreseeable future. Hydrogen fuel cells are a good candidate for the future for those purposes. But like it or not, political will may force ICEs off the road by mid-century.
It's not the urbanists who will decide this issue; it's swing groups like soccer moms. If the automakers build electric vehicles that the soccer moms and factory workers demand, that's probably enough votes to stop new ICE manufacturing. They're already making electric SUVs but the range is about 200 miles. Get that up to 350-400 miles (good enough for most families as drivers could recharge during a meal on vacations) and families will snap them up fast, especially if gasoline prices continue to rise.
Airplanes can't cross the Atlantic Ocean but blimps can! Airplanes are a dead technology. -1936
Quote from: tradephoric on July 13, 2022, 03:13:33 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 13, 2022, 12:25:37 PM
It's not realistic to expect electric automobiles to do things like towing RV's and other giant shit. That's not their wheelhouse, so the only reason to make a big show of doing it is to shit on EV's for the vroom-vroom crowd. This is like using a cordless drill to chop down a goddamn tree. It proves nothing but how ineffective it is to use the wrong tool for wrong job and treat it like it's a big reveal. Duh!
It's hard to use the right tool for the job when the governments of the world are staring to enact ICE bans. Just let me keep towing my trailer with my diesel truck and we're all good.
Right, and that's why this sort of thing matters. It's not a problem that there are specific use cases EVs can't properly fill so long as alternatives are available. But since some politicians want to eliminate those alternatives, we need to worry about whether they'll be nice enough to walk back their rules or carve out exceptions in order to avoid leaving people who'd rely on them high and dry.
There's also the small issue of "preventing entire states from becoming uninhabitable" becoming a higher policy priority for many jurisdictions than "making sure people can tow trailers when they go camping". Ideally, we can have both, and hopefully we will. But some jurisdictions may be convinced that, if they don't act in a regulatory capacity to force matters, the free market will be ready to provide solutions approximately 30 years after swaths of their territory become damaged beyond repair.
It's easy to not care about this stuff, or not believe it, if you live in the Central or Eastern time zones. It's impossible to ignore it if you live west of there.
I look at it like this, I am all for the production of electric cars, but electric cars and the internal combustion engine ones must co-exist.
I am not a fan of the oil companies, but one thing good they did do for us was build a network throughout this country of gas stations, spaced apart perfectly so in most cases, you can take off out of your house on a 1,500 mile road trip and not plan where you are going to stop for fuel because the network is great. The trade off to that was it took about 50 years to get that network to that point. Now governments want us to outlaw the sale of gas/diesel powered vehicles, so all that work is wasted. It will take another 50 years to get the grid back to this point, starting from the day they realized outlawing them was a mistake. We are not going to start building that network now...it takes a gigantic problem to get anything like that done in this country. Basically when they decided to outlaw gas/diesel powered cars, we will be reverted back to the 30s or 40s when you didn't take the family road trip because your car wasn't reliable enough to not break down every other day. Road trips are a luxury, I know, but what about people who just drive a lot in their lives per day? They will have to give up half their lives because their car doesn't have the range to get them there, or it does have the range, and you have to stop and charge for hours, but you don't have hours to waste doing that.
I think tests like this on how these electric trucks tow a trailer with water on it through the western Continental Divide are important to see because you are not always going to take your vehicle from work to home. You need to know how this will work when it happens. What if you move to another city and have to rent a Uhall to carry all your crap to another state? I am sure that's not on everyone's mind because as humans we think of the status quo and want the status quo to remain the status quo indefinitely, when that's just not reality. What if you lose our job that's 5 minutes away and have to take a job 45 minutes away. Your commuting habits have to change, gas powered car or electric car. It all changes.
Do I also agree that a test like this is designed for failure? Sure I do, but again, it is a practical application (albeit the extreme, but still practical). It may not be everyone's situation, but you never know when you will have to be in that situation. It's like when I was in driver's ed and we learned about driving in the ice on a mountain. I was like, "I live in central Texas, I will never be on an icy mountain." It wasn't ten years later and I was on said icy mountain saying, this is why we learned about this then.
I don't care if you replace all internal combustion engines with electric ones. I am not holding on to the gasoline fumes or the American Muscle. I am saying we are not ready for it yet...and we will not be ready for it in my lifetime, but, like lots of dumb things people come up with, I will be forced to convert no matter if it's practical or not.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 14, 2022, 12:22:30 PM
It will take another 50 years to get the grid back to this point, starting from the day they realized outlawing them was a mistake.
The network has already been under construction for a decade. The video tradephoric shared in the middle of the thread (which I think is the one you are referencing) even showed them stopping at Electrify America stations. It's not as prevalent as gas stations, but it may never need to be outside of major travel corridors, as home charging means that anyone who owns their own parking space will not need to use public chargers except for on a road trip.
Also, it doesn't "take hours to charge". An Audi e-tron can charge from zero to 80% in half an hour at a DC fast charging station, and most people won't be plugging in at zero. That misconception really needs to die. Yes, charging to 100% takes longer, but it's actually faster to stop charging sooner and go to the next charger, and it's bad for the battery to charge up to 100% all the time anyways.
So yes, it's possible to roadtrip in an EV in most of the country. Given charging speeds, the roadgeek-style "I'm going to drive for 12 hours picking routes I want to clinch and stop nowhere except for an unplanned 5 min gas stop and a drive thru for lunch" will probably die, but how many people do that anyways? Most people roadtripping area going to sit down somewhere for lunch rather than eating while driving, and they're going to have stops to pee, stretch their legs, and get snacks.
Yes, ICE cars are better than EVs in many things (especially today)... but given automakers improving the cars they make and improvements in charging infrastructure, they probably won't be so much better to stick around. The best cell phone for texting is one of the fold-out keyboard phones, but how many of those do you see these days? Just about everyone uses a smartphone, and those who don't either stuck with flip phones or landlines. We adapt our lives around regressions that tend to happen with the advancement of technology/society
all the time. It will be inconvenient for us roadgeeks and a few others, but that's life.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 14, 2022, 12:22:30 PM
I look at it like this, I am all for the production of electric cars, but electric cars and the internal combustion engine ones must co-exist.
I am not a fan of the oil companies, but one thing good they did do for us was build a network throughout this country of gas stations, spaced apart perfectly so in most cases, you can take off out of your house on a 1,500 mile road trip and not plan where you are going to stop for fuel because the network is great. The trade off to that was it took about 50 years to get that network to that point. Now governments want us to outlaw the sale of gas/diesel powered vehicles, so all that work is wasted. It will take another 50 years to get the grid back to this point, starting from the day they realized outlawing them was a mistake. We are not going to start building that network now...it takes a gigantic problem to get anything like that done in this country. Basically when they decided to outlaw gas/diesel powered cars, we will be reverted back to the 30s or 40s when you didn't take the family road trip because your car wasn't reliable enough to not break down every other day. Road trips are a luxury, I know, but what about people who just drive a lot in their lives per day? They will have to give up half their lives because their car doesn't have the range to get them there, or it does have the range, and you have to stop and charge for hours, but you don't have hours to waste doing that.
I think tests like this on how these electric trucks tow a trailer with water on it through the western Continental Divide are important to see because you are not always going to take your vehicle from work to home. You need to know how this will work when it happens. What if you move to another city and have to rent a Uhall to carry all your crap to another state? I am sure that's not on everyone's mind because as humans we think of the status quo and want the status quo to remain the status quo indefinitely, when that's just not reality. What if you lose our job that's 5 minutes away and have to take a job 45 minutes away. Your commuting habits have to change, gas powered car or electric car. It all changes.
Do I also agree that a test like this is designed for failure? Sure I do, but again, it is a practical application (albeit the extreme, but still practical). It may not be everyone's situation, but you never know when you will have to be in that situation. It's like when I was in driver's ed and we learned about driving in the ice on a mountain. I was like, "I live in central Texas, I will never be on an icy mountain." It wasn't ten years later and I was on said icy mountain saying, this is why we learned about this then.
I don't care if you replace all internal combustion engines with electric ones. I am not holding on to the gasoline fumes or the American Muscle. I am saying we are not ready for it yet...and we will not be ready for it in my lifetime, but, like lots of dumb things people come up with, I will be forced to convert no matter if it's practical or not.
Overall, you make several excellent points. I disagree with a couple of your statements (highlighted). As far as
spaced apart perfectly so in most cases, that's only true east of the 100th Meridian. There are large gaps on several highways, including interstates, throughout the West. It's not unusual to see signs stating "Next Gas XX Miles" or similar even when driving the interstates.
(https://erepublic.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/f016b20/2147483647/strip/true/crop/719x350+0+3/resize/1440x700!/quality/90/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ferepublic-brightspot.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fda%2F47%2Fba6b5fd44157bd5685a2823ee3e9%2Fexperience.arcgis.com_experience_984572ed531a4c3d981367b344c78bb5_page_Page__rsource%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Flinks.esri.com%252FEVChargingStations%20%281%29.png)
It won't take
another 50 years to get the grid back to this point; here's an image of current EV chargers. I'd argue that's already decent coverage for EVs with the same issue of lack of coverage west of the 100th Meridian plus spotty support in the rural Deep South. Despite cities in California being fairly far apart compared to the East Coast, almost 1 in 8 new car purchases are EVs (https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/02/25/california-leads-the-nations-zev-market-surpassing-1-million-electric-vehicles-sold/). (Note: Over 25% of new purchases in Europe are EVs (https://cleantechnica.com/2022/01/30/29-of-cars-sold-in-europe-were-plugin-electric-vehicles-in-december/)which helps the economies of scale and should contribute to EV affordability.) The map shows pretty decent EV charger distribution from the Bay Area to San Diego. It may be more difficult to find where EV chargers are available, but that's because gas stations have big signs advertising their location while most EV chargers are inconspicuously placed. EVs have the advantage of being able to be recharged at home nightly vs needing to find a gas station. They can also be charged while shopping or when visiting attractions from Disney to museums. Drivers can still use apps to find EV chargers (https://www.gotrhythm.com/blog/electric-vehicles/the-7-best-ev-charging-apps) away from home so this isn't usually an issue, at least along major highways and in urban areas. EVs are also a lot more reliable than those older cars so
it won't be like the 30s or 40s though the vehicles are unlikely to be able to be fixed by their owners and the repair infrastructure will need to be improved (especially for EV-only manufacturers like Tesla).
Quote from: skluth on July 14, 2022, 01:20:31 PM
They can also be charged while shopping or when visiting attractions from Disney to museums.
How many parking spots at your local Kroger or Walmart have an EV charger? How many at the mall or warehouse store? How many parking spots at Disney have an EV charger?
The best we can say right now is that public EV chargers exist, but they are not ubiquitous. Neither are they available in sufficient quantities to service the public if/when EV's become a significant proportion of the vehicle fleet (let alone when ICE vehicles are banned).
A story in the Detroit News about an EV RV:
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2022/07/14/van-life-goes-electric-rv-makers-race-lure-millennials/10038691002/
120 miles. Yeah, that's going to get you a long way toward your campsite in Yellowstone.
In most cases was the qualifier. I am aware of the multiple miles of no facilities having driven a lot out west.
I don't think the network is near as good as most think it is. It will take a long time to get it running smoothly. Not to mention, when I need fuel, I love the idea of a hidden gas station that I may be able to find on my phone that I may or may not have on me at the time.
When I said it would be like the 30s or 40s, I was not referring to reliability at all. I was referring to people's reluctance to drive any great distance. In the 30s and 40s is was because your car would break down at the drop of the hat, and carburetors were super picky on which days they wanted to work and which days they didn't, and you engine might not even have an issue. In contrast, the car may be more reliable, but the energy source is less. What happens when I run out of juice on those sporadically spaced areas? Can I get my gas can and fill it with electricity. At this moment, frankly I don't know what to do. You can rebuttal with, you have to charge it between remote areas. Great. Only problem is I have owned too many rechargeable electronics that say they are fully charged then die on me moments later because either they got a false reading or that battery just wigged out. I know the same can happen with gas (false reading), but seems like it happens more in electronics than more practical things. Yes, people will stop driving longer distances like they did a long time ago because it takes too much time to charge them and not near practical enough.
Do EV chargers bill users which stay too long at a station? In the ideal examples, everyone charges up and gets on with their lives in 30-60 minutes. The reality will be that someone will hog it up for 3-4 hours because they're busy. Realistically, it happens even by accident.
Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2022, 02:05:52 PM
A story in the Detroit News about an EV RV:
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2022/07/14/van-life-goes-electric-rv-makers-race-lure-millennials/10038691002/
120 miles. Yeah, that's going to get you a long way toward your campsite in Yellowstone.
Yellowstone is an extreme example; there's probably a half-dozen campsites within 100 miles of most people's homes.
Its easier to have an EV charger in the middle of nowhere than a gas station.
1) A gas station requires electricity already, as pumps are electric. So wherever theres a gas station, you can have an EV charger.
2) Ev "fuel" can be created pretty much anywhere via solar, wind, or geothermal. Gas stations need to be restocked with a truck, which is incredibly inefficient. Hence the $9 gas at the California gas station thats 2 hours away from anything.
As such, even if you do need a charger every 90 miles (which assumes absolutely no improvement in battery storage or vehicle efficiency) thats actually a much easier lift than building gas stations everywhere.
And if we were able to blanket the country in gas stations, I am pretty sure we have the means to do the same with EV chargers. I find the defeatist attitude from some folks to be alarming.
Quote from: formulanone on July 14, 2022, 02:40:49 PM
Do EV chargers bill users which stay too long at a station?
Some do. I know Tesla charges idle fees at the busy supercharger stations along highway. Meanwhile, there would be no such fee at the mall parking garage charger, since they want you to linger
When it comes to big road trips and vacations, many will simply rent a more capable vehicle (hybrid or hydrogen fuel cell) for such endeavors rather than expect their every day driver to also do that. That's going to become a comparatively more affordable option in the future as the demand for such rentals increases over time. The money saved on transportation costs throughout the year with a relatively small electric car can really stuff the ol' vacation fund, too. So realistically, the same person/family is spending the same amount of money on their yearly travel, both commuting and vacationing, even if on the surface, the vacay appears more expensive compared to when they drove the soccer-mom-mobile up to the lake or out the the national park.
In fact, most families could probably afford to rent a much nicer vehicle for the vacation than they could ever afford to own.
Relevant news:
QuoteOn Thursday, GM announced that it is working with the Pilot Company to install 2,000 DC fast chargers at Pilot and Flying J travel centers around the US.
The chargers will be operated by EVgo, which has already partnered with GM on a fast charger expansion program–initially 2,700 and now 3,250–to be completed by 2025.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/07/gm-evgo-and-pilot-will-install-2000-fast-chargers-at-travel-centers/
This whole thread is a lot to digest, but one thing that is most striking to me about it: lots of people debating the merits of EVs, but a dearth of input from people who own or drive EVs. This technology is moving fast, and some of the opinions I am seeing people share here about range and charging speed make me think that your point of reference is a 2011 Nissan Leaf or an old GM EV1. I'd like to share my own personal experience and observations as an EV owner that may help clear up some of these misconceptions.
First off, with regards the electric pickup trucks originally referred to in this thread: the technology and infrastructure are not there yet for out-of-town towing. I still have an ICE pickup truck that I use to tow my boat because I do take it to several lakes that are a 100-200 mile round-trip from my house. I would not want to try to tow my boat to Lake Tahoe or Lake Berryessa with a Lightning or an R1T, even with the largest battery option, because I am unconvinced I could make the trip without having to stop and charge midway with a trailer attached. There are not enough pull-through charging stations out there, and I would not want to have to unhitch a trailer to charge. IMHO, we are about 5-10 years away from the combination of having pickups with enough range, and enough pull-through charging stations for me to consider replacing my ICE pickup.
I have also owned, over the past several years, a Tesla Model S, Model 3, and Model Y. Our family uses the Model Y as our primary mode of transport. It recharges every night in our garage, and although advertised at 300+ mile range, realistically gets closer to 250 when you drive like a normal human. For most days, that range is all we need and don't need to plug in again until we get home that night, even when taking a day trip to more distant places 100+ miles away.
Road trips are a piece of cake also, we have taken 1000+ miles trips, and the navigation in the car does a great job of telling you where you need to stop and charge. Tesla has built out an excellent charging network over the past 10 years, and it certainly does have gaps, but I have yet to encounter a trip I did not feel comfortable making due to a lack of chargers. Do we have to stop more often than we did in an ICE vehicle? Yes. At my typical interstate driving speeds of 80-85 MPH, I'm stopping about every 2 hours. In my younger days, I would have scoffed at that preferring to only stop maybe every 3-4 hours when I needed gas. I'm in my 40's now, and I appreciate being able to stretch my legs a little more often. Our average charging stop on a trip like that is about 20-30 minutes. Longer than the ~5 minute fill-up at a gas pump, sure... but if you factor in taking a bathroom break or grabbing food, the difference diminishes.
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
If I lived in a place that does not provide somewhere to charge a car, or frequently traveled to or through remote off-grid areas, I probably would not have decided to purchase an EV.
I am a suburban homeowner who rarely has to travel more than 250 miles in a day, in fact most days I drive less than 100 miles in a day. The number of other Americans who would describe themselves the same ways is probably a majority of the population at this point. An EV is an ideal choice in a case like mine. I did not choose to own an EV for environmental reasons, my decision was purely economic. Gas has always been expensive where I live, and I have solar panels so the electricity at home home is essentially free (the cost of panels will have paid for themselves by 2024). Obviously YMMV (quite literally).
What will the expected general rate posted on the signs for energy at these stations (ie, USAdollars per joule in 2022-01-01 money) be?
Mike
Quote from: jdbx on July 14, 2022, 08:01:15 PM
This whole thread is a lot to digest, but one thing that is most striking to me about it: lots of people debating the merits of EVs, but a dearth of input from people who own or drive EVs. This technology is moving fast, and some of the opinions I am seeing people share here about range and charging speed make me think that your point of reference is a 2011 Nissan Leaf or an old GM EV1. I'd like to share my own personal experience and observations as an EV owner that may help clear up some of these misconceptions.
First off, with regards the electric pickup trucks originally referred to in this thread: the technology and infrastructure are not there yet for out-of-town towing. I still have an ICE pickup truck that I use to tow my boat because I do take it to several lakes that are a 100-200 mile round-trip from my house. I would not want to try to tow my boat to Lake Tahoe or Lake Berryessa with a Lightning or an R1T, even with the largest battery option, because I am unconvinced I could make the trip without having to stop and charge midway with a trailer attached. There are not enough pull-through charging stations out there, and I would not want to have to unhitch a trailer to charge. IMHO, we are about 5-10 years away from the combination of having pickups with enough range, and enough pull-through charging stations for me to consider replacing my ICE pickup.
I have also owned, over the past several years, a Tesla Model S, Model 3, and Model Y. Our family uses the Model Y as our primary mode of transport. It recharges every night in our garage, and although advertised at 300+ mile range, realistically gets closer to 250 when you drive like a normal human. For most days, that range is all we need and don't need to plug in again until we get home that night, even when taking a day trip to more distant places 100+ miles away.
Road trips are a piece of cake also, we have taken 1000+ miles trips, and the navigation in the car does a great job of telling you where you need to stop and charge. Tesla has built out an excellent charging network over the past 10 years, and it certainly does have gaps, but I have yet to encounter a trip I did not feel comfortable making due to a lack of chargers. Do we have to stop more often than we did in an ICE vehicle? Yes. At my typical interstate driving speeds of 80-85 MPH, I'm stopping about every 2 hours. In my younger days, I would have scoffed at that preferring to only stop maybe every 3-4 hours when I needed gas. I'm in my 40's now, and I appreciate being able to stretch my legs a little more often. Our average charging stop on a trip like that is about 20-30 minutes. Longer than the ~5 minute fill-up at a gas pump, sure... but if you factor in taking a bathroom break or grabbing food, the difference diminishes.
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
If I lived in a place that does not provide somewhere to charge a car, or frequently traveled to or through remote off-grid areas, I probably would not have decided to purchase an EV.
I am a suburban homeowner who rarely has to travel more than 250 miles in a day, in fact most days I drive less than 100 miles in a day. The number of other Americans who would describe themselves the same ways is probably a majority of the population at this point. An EV is an ideal choice in a case like mine. I did not choose to own an EV for environmental reasons, my decision was purely economic. Gas has always been expensive where I live, and I have solar panels so the electricity at home home is essentially free (the cost of panels will have paid for themselves by 2024). Obviously YMMV (quite literally).
I appreciate this insight and you have opened my eyes to a lot of realities about having an electric car. I still think they are a great idea and are all for them. I just don't want the ban on gas powered vehicles is all. If I can go to Home Depot and choose between an electric weed eater or a gas powered one, why can't we do the same thing with cars?
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 09:55:23 AM
Quote from: jdbx on July 14, 2022, 08:01:15 PM
This whole thread is a lot to digest, but one thing that is most striking to me about it: lots of people debating the merits of EVs, but a dearth of input from people who own or drive EVs. This technology is moving fast, and some of the opinions I am seeing people share here about range and charging speed make me think that your point of reference is a 2011 Nissan Leaf or an old GM EV1. I'd like to share my own personal experience and observations as an EV owner that may help clear up some of these misconceptions.
First off, with regards the electric pickup trucks originally referred to in this thread: the technology and infrastructure are not there yet for out-of-town towing. I still have an ICE pickup truck that I use to tow my boat because I do take it to several lakes that are a 100-200 mile round-trip from my house. I would not want to try to tow my boat to Lake Tahoe or Lake Berryessa with a Lightning or an R1T, even with the largest battery option, because I am unconvinced I could make the trip without having to stop and charge midway with a trailer attached. There are not enough pull-through charging stations out there, and I would not want to have to unhitch a trailer to charge. IMHO, we are about 5-10 years away from the combination of having pickups with enough range, and enough pull-through charging stations for me to consider replacing my ICE pickup.
I have also owned, over the past several years, a Tesla Model S, Model 3, and Model Y. Our family uses the Model Y as our primary mode of transport. It recharges every night in our garage, and although advertised at 300+ mile range, realistically gets closer to 250 when you drive like a normal human. For most days, that range is all we need and don't need to plug in again until we get home that night, even when taking a day trip to more distant places 100+ miles away.
Road trips are a piece of cake also, we have taken 1000+ miles trips, and the navigation in the car does a great job of telling you where you need to stop and charge. Tesla has built out an excellent charging network over the past 10 years, and it certainly does have gaps, but I have yet to encounter a trip I did not feel comfortable making due to a lack of chargers. Do we have to stop more often than we did in an ICE vehicle? Yes. At my typical interstate driving speeds of 80-85 MPH, I'm stopping about every 2 hours. In my younger days, I would have scoffed at that preferring to only stop maybe every 3-4 hours when I needed gas. I'm in my 40's now, and I appreciate being able to stretch my legs a little more often. Our average charging stop on a trip like that is about 20-30 minutes. Longer than the ~5 minute fill-up at a gas pump, sure... but if you factor in taking a bathroom break or grabbing food, the difference diminishes.
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
If I lived in a place that does not provide somewhere to charge a car, or frequently traveled to or through remote off-grid areas, I probably would not have decided to purchase an EV.
I am a suburban homeowner who rarely has to travel more than 250 miles in a day, in fact most days I drive less than 100 miles in a day. The number of other Americans who would describe themselves the same ways is probably a majority of the population at this point. An EV is an ideal choice in a case like mine. I did not choose to own an EV for environmental reasons, my decision was purely economic. Gas has always been expensive where I live, and I have solar panels so the electricity at home home is essentially free (the cost of panels will have paid for themselves by 2024). Obviously YMMV (quite literally).
I appreciate this insight and you have opened my eyes to a lot of realities about having an electric car. I still think they are a great idea and are all for them. I just don't want the ban on gas powered vehicles is all. If I can go to Home Depot and choose between an electric weed eater or a gas powered one, why can't we do the same thing with cars?
Don't worry. There won't be a ban on gas powered vehicles any time soon - if ever. Economics remain undefeated, and until those start making better sense for the majority of Americans, gas vehicles will continue to exist.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 09:55:23 AM
Quote from: jdbx on July 14, 2022, 08:01:15 PM
This whole thread is a lot to digest, but one thing that is most striking to me about it: lots of people debating the merits of EVs, but a dearth of input from people who own or drive EVs. This technology is moving fast, and some of the opinions I am seeing people share here about range and charging speed make me think that your point of reference is a 2011 Nissan Leaf or an old GM EV1. I'd like to share my own personal experience and observations as an EV owner that may help clear up some of these misconceptions.
First off, with regards the electric pickup trucks originally referred to in this thread: the technology and infrastructure are not there yet for out-of-town towing. I still have an ICE pickup truck that I use to tow my boat because I do take it to several lakes that are a 100-200 mile round-trip from my house. I would not want to try to tow my boat to Lake Tahoe or Lake Berryessa with a Lightning or an R1T, even with the largest battery option, because I am unconvinced I could make the trip without having to stop and charge midway with a trailer attached. There are not enough pull-through charging stations out there, and I would not want to have to unhitch a trailer to charge. IMHO, we are about 5-10 years away from the combination of having pickups with enough range, and enough pull-through charging stations for me to consider replacing my ICE pickup.
I have also owned, over the past several years, a Tesla Model S, Model 3, and Model Y. Our family uses the Model Y as our primary mode of transport. It recharges every night in our garage, and although advertised at 300+ mile range, realistically gets closer to 250 when you drive like a normal human. For most days, that range is all we need and don't need to plug in again until we get home that night, even when taking a day trip to more distant places 100+ miles away.
Road trips are a piece of cake also, we have taken 1000+ miles trips, and the navigation in the car does a great job of telling you where you need to stop and charge. Tesla has built out an excellent charging network over the past 10 years, and it certainly does have gaps, but I have yet to encounter a trip I did not feel comfortable making due to a lack of chargers. Do we have to stop more often than we did in an ICE vehicle? Yes. At my typical interstate driving speeds of 80-85 MPH, I'm stopping about every 2 hours. In my younger days, I would have scoffed at that preferring to only stop maybe every 3-4 hours when I needed gas. I'm in my 40's now, and I appreciate being able to stretch my legs a little more often. Our average charging stop on a trip like that is about 20-30 minutes. Longer than the ~5 minute fill-up at a gas pump, sure... but if you factor in taking a bathroom break or grabbing food, the difference diminishes.
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
If I lived in a place that does not provide somewhere to charge a car, or frequently traveled to or through remote off-grid areas, I probably would not have decided to purchase an EV.
I am a suburban homeowner who rarely has to travel more than 250 miles in a day, in fact most days I drive less than 100 miles in a day. The number of other Americans who would describe themselves the same ways is probably a majority of the population at this point. An EV is an ideal choice in a case like mine. I did not choose to own an EV for environmental reasons, my decision was purely economic. Gas has always been expensive where I live, and I have solar panels so the electricity at home home is essentially free (the cost of panels will have paid for themselves by 2024). Obviously YMMV (quite literally).
I appreciate this insight and you have opened my eyes to a lot of realities about having an electric car. I still think they are a great idea and are all for them. I just don't want the ban on gas powered vehicles is all. If I can go to Home Depot and choose between an electric weed eater or a gas powered one, why can't we do the same thing with cars?
Huh?
You still can. Most states aren't banning them, at least yet.
For your weed eater, CA is banning them in 2024. Other states are considering similar bills.
Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2022, 02:05:52 PM
Quote from: skluth on July 14, 2022, 01:20:31 PM
They can also be charged while shopping or when visiting attractions from Disney to museums.
How many parking spots at your local Kroger or Walmart have an EV charger? How many at the mall or warehouse store? How many parking spots at Disney have an EV charger?
The best we can say right now is that public EV chargers exist, but they are not ubiquitous. Neither are they available in sufficient quantities to service the public if/when EV's become a significant proportion of the vehicle fleet (let alone when ICE vehicles are banned).
A story in the Detroit News about an EV RV:
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2022/07/14/van-life-goes-electric-rv-makers-race-lure-millennials/10038691002/
120 miles. Yeah, that's going to get you a long way toward your campsite in Yellowstone.
There are no EV chargers at my local Walmart or Kroger, though there is one across the street from my local Kroger. There are also chargers at the Palm Springs Art Museum, (several) in the PS downtown parking structure, at a couple other parking lots downtown, downtown Palm Desert (the other major downtown in the Coachella Valley), the local Westfield mall, at several local hotels and most casinos, the nearby outlet mall in Cabazon, and even at the Walmart in Palm Desert. There are also EV chargers at the local minor league ball park, the tram to Mount San Jacinto, a couple local libraries, and the city hall of conservative Rancho Mirage. EVs are more popular here than much of the country, but I don't think it will take long before the rest of the populated parts of the country are as covered.
As far as towing and RVs go, I don't think anyone here is arguing that EVs are ready for those purposes yet so if that's your argument, you're not disagreeing with anyone.
And why would a significant number of people need a charger at the local Kroger or Wal-Mart? Most people live a few miles from either, and drive locally to get to both. People likely just charge up at home.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 09:55:23 AM
If I can go to Home Depot and choose between an electric weed eater or a gas powered one, why can't we do the same thing with cars?
Interesting example, since gas powered lawn equipment is being banned left and right. They create a huge amount of local pollution and everyone hates the noise.
Quote from: jdbx on July 14, 2022, 08:01:15 PM
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
The EV cannonball run record is over 16 hours slower than the ICE cannonball run record (42 hours and 17 minutes VS. 25 hours 39 minutes). ICE drivers have modified their vehicles to achieve the cannonball run record (increasing their gas tank size to reduce the number of stops) so it should be possible to shatter the EV cannonball run record if you find a way where you don't have to wait on charging (battery swap). Now some would say that's cheating but you are still driving across the country in an EV.
Quote from: jamess on July 15, 2022, 11:06:53 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 09:55:23 AM
If I can go to Home Depot and choose between an electric weed eater or a gas powered one, why can't we do the same thing with cars?
Interesting example, since gas powered lawn equipment is being banned left and right. They create a huge amount of local pollution and everyone hates the noise.
A) Those bans haven't even been talked about where I live and B) swap it out with whatever. Generator, power washer. Same point. I am saying let there be two options.
I own an electric mower, weed eater and power washer.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 03:40:33 PM
Quote from: jamess on July 15, 2022, 11:06:53 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 09:55:23 AM
If I can go to Home Depot and choose between an electric weed eater or a gas powered one, why can't we do the same thing with cars?
Interesting example, since gas powered lawn equipment is being banned left and right. They create a huge amount of local pollution and everyone hates the noise.
A) Those bans haven't even been talked about where I live and B) swap it out with whatever. Generator, power washer. Same point. I am saying let there be two options.
I own an electric mower, weed eater and power washer.
How's that electric powered generator going to work?
Quote from: skluth on July 15, 2022, 10:36:14 AM
Quote from: GaryV on July 14, 2022, 02:05:52 PM
Quote from: skluth on July 14, 2022, 01:20:31 PM
They can also be charged while shopping or when visiting attractions from Disney to museums.
How many parking spots at your local Kroger or Walmart have an EV charger? How many at the mall or warehouse store? How many parking spots at Disney have an EV charger?
The best we can say right now is that public EV chargers exist, but they are not ubiquitous. Neither are they available in sufficient quantities to service the public if/when EV's become a significant proportion of the vehicle fleet (let alone when ICE vehicles are banned).
A story in the Detroit News about an EV RV:
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/2022/07/14/van-life-goes-electric-rv-makers-race-lure-millennials/10038691002/
120 miles. Yeah, that's going to get you a long way toward your campsite in Yellowstone.
There are no EV chargers at my local Walmart or Kroger, though there is one across the street from my local Kroger. There are also chargers at the Palm Springs Art Museum, (several) in the PS downtown parking structure, at a couple other parking lots downtown, downtown Palm Desert (the other major downtown in the Coachella Valley), the local Westfield mall, at several local hotels and most casinos, the nearby outlet mall in Cabazon, and even at the Walmart in Palm Desert. There are also EV chargers at the local minor league ball park, the tram to Mount San Jacinto, a couple local libraries, and the city hall of conservative Rancho Mirage. EVs are more popular here than much of the country, but I don't think it will take long before the rest of the populated parts of the country are as covered.
As far as towing and RVs go, I don't think anyone here is arguing that EVs are ready for those purposes yet so if that's your argument, you're not disagreeing with anyone.
You made the statement that vehicles could be charged when shopping or visiting attractions.
My point was that, in public parking facilities like that, an EV charger is more of a show-off novelty today. "Look how environmentally conscious we're being, we've installed chargers." When there might be 2 slots. If a majority, or even a significant minority, of vehicles become EV, there won't be enough capacity at stores and attractions to charge those who want to use them.
That's for regular transportation - cars, SUV's, pickups, etc. I'm not even talking about vehicles towing RV's or motorhomes.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 15, 2022, 02:07:02 PM
Quote from: jdbx on July 14, 2022, 08:01:15 PM
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
The EV cannonball run record is over 16 hours slower than the ICE cannonball run record (42 hours and 17 minutes VS. 25 hours 39 minutes). ICE drivers have modified their vehicles to achieve the cannonball run record (increasing their gas tank size to reduce the number of stops) so it should be possible to shatter the EV cannonball run record if you find a way where you don't have to wait on charging (battery swap). Now some would say that's cheating but you are still driving across the country in an EV.
I have never participated in a cannonball run or modified the fuel capacity of a vehicle, but I can say that a drive to Phoenix from my place, a trip of about 750 miles, has taken about 10-12 hours over the past 20+ years that I have been doing it, whether I'm in an EV or an ICE vehicle. The biggest variable has always been traffic, construction, and weather in that order.
I think the place where you might notice the biggest difference is medium-length trips... the trips of 3-6 hours that you normally can accomplish on a single tank of gas, or with only one short stop. The 3-4 times a year that I take a trip like that are more than compensated for by all of the time the rest of the year driving closer to home that I never need to think about getting gas, or even know what the current price of gas is.
Quote from: SectorZ on July 15, 2022, 05:49:52 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 03:40:33 PM
Quote from: jamess on July 15, 2022, 11:06:53 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 09:55:23 AM
If I can go to Home Depot and choose between an electric weed eater or a gas powered one, why can't we do the same thing with cars?
Interesting example, since gas powered lawn equipment is being banned left and right. They create a huge amount of local pollution and everyone hates the noise.
A) Those bans haven't even been talked about where I live and B) swap it out with whatever. Generator, power washer. Same point. I am saying let there be two options.
I own an electric mower, weed eater and power washer.
How's that electric powered generator going to work?
They are portable battery packs with an AC inverter built in. I have a small one that I use when we're camping. You recharge it when you have power, or they sell solar charging kits also. I think calling it a "generator" is a bit of a stretch, but I believe that's what was implied.
I have a 40V battery electric weed eater and I have found it a lot more reliable and easier to use than the old 2-stroke one I had before it.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 15, 2022, 02:07:02 PM
Quote from: jdbx on July 14, 2022, 08:01:15 PM
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
The EV cannonball run record is over 16 hours slower than the ICE cannonball run record (42 hours and 17 minutes VS. 25 hours 39 minutes). ICE drivers have modified their vehicles to achieve the cannonball run record (increasing their gas tank size to reduce the number of stops) so it should be possible to shatter the EV cannonball run record if you find a way where you don't have to wait on charging (battery swap). Now some would say that's cheating but you are still driving across the country in an EV.
How many Cannonball Runs do you personally do in the average week?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 15, 2022, 08:07:38 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 15, 2022, 02:07:02 PM
Quote from: jdbx on July 14, 2022, 08:01:15 PM
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
The EV cannonball run record is over 16 hours slower than the ICE cannonball run record (42 hours and 17 minutes VS. 25 hours 39 minutes). ICE drivers have modified their vehicles to achieve the cannonball run record (increasing their gas tank size to reduce the number of stops) so it should be possible to shatter the EV cannonball run record if you find a way where you don't have to wait on charging (battery swap). Now some would say that's cheating but you are still driving across the country in an EV.
How many Cannonball Runs do you personally do in the average week?
It's not how many one does, it's how many they want to do and how an EV could inhibit that dream...
Quote from: tradephoric on July 15, 2022, 02:07:02 PM
Quote from: jdbx on July 14, 2022, 08:01:15 PM
So do EVs require you to stop more often and for longer on a long road trip? Yes. But, on road trips that I have done my entire life, such as from the Bay Area to San Diego or Phoenix, taking the trip in an EV vs an ICE vehicle has not added that much additional travel time. I find that traffic or weather conditions along the way make a much bigger difference than how many times I had to stop.
The EV cannonball run record is over 16 hours slower than the ICE cannonball run record (42 hours and 17 minutes VS. 25 hours 39 minutes). ICE drivers have modified their vehicles to achieve the cannonball run record (increasing their gas tank size to reduce the number of stops) so it should be possible to shatter the EV cannonball run record if you find a way where you don't have to wait on charging (battery swap). Now some would say that's cheating but you are still driving across the country in an EV.
The cannonball runs have also been done with gasoline engines that have been updated and improved upon for a hundred years. Modern EVs have been around a decade or so. Really no comparison, and future EVs will have greatly reduced distance times.
Quote from: Bruce on July 07, 2022, 04:44:02 PM
The charging infrastructure network definitely needs work, especially on the non-Tesla side of things. Having to circle around to find working chargers on a few road trips with my friend in their EV is annoying and cumbersome when we we want to go somewhere more remote than the Interstates, so I can't imagine trying to rely on it for something more substantial.
Quote from: formulanone on July 07, 2022, 03:37:05 PM
No current electric pickup owner is going to tow for any significant distances. They'll use it to go back and forth to their office complex, posing as a fake cowboy on their way back to their suburban tract.
Plenty of diesel-guzzling pickups are treated just the same. :bigass:
Not every station has diesel, but it is of no comparison. There is Diesel available just about everywhere.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2022, 11:29:20 AM
The cannonball runs have also been done with gasoline engines that have been updated and improved upon for a hundred years. Modern EVs have been around a decade or so. Really no comparison, and future EVs will have greatly reduced distance times.
The first successful EV in America dates back to 1890 when William Morrison debuted his 6-passenger electrified vehicle capable of top speeds of 14 mph. A working prototype has been around for over 130 years with the opportunity during that time for people to tinker and improve its design. Yet after 130 years a production EV struggles to drive over 100 miles between charges when towing a trailer at freeway speeds. You may think pointing that out is a cheap shot but it's still a fact.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 16, 2022, 03:38:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2022, 11:29:20 AM
The cannonball runs have also been done with gasoline engines that have been updated and improved upon for a hundred years. Modern EVs have been around a decade or so. Really no comparison, and future EVs will have greatly reduced distance times.
The first successful EV in America dates back to 1890 when William Morrison debuted his 6-passenger electrified vehicle capable of top speeds of 14 mph. A working prototype has been around for over 130 years with the opportunity during that time for people to tinker and improve its design. Yet after 130 years a production EV struggles to drive over 100 miles between charges when towing a trailer at freeway speeds. You may think pointing that out is a cheap shot but it's still a fact.
And that fact is utterly useless to someone who never tows a trailer at freeway speeds (i.e. most of America).
FWIW the last time I hauled a 5,000 trailer was about a decade ago with a Chevy Suburban. I seem to recall 8-9 MPG was the best I could do at freeway speeds. The only reason I got semi-acceptable range was due to the 31 gallon gas tank.
I've never even owned a vehicle with a trailer hitch. The only time I've driven one was the old beater pickup I learned to drive in, and of course I never drove it with a trailer attached.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 16, 2022, 03:38:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2022, 11:29:20 AM
The cannonball runs have also been done with gasoline engines that have been updated and improved upon for a hundred years. Modern EVs have been around a decade or so. Really no comparison, and future EVs will have greatly reduced distance times.
The first successful EV in America dates back to 1890 when William Morrison debuted his 6-passenger electrified vehicle capable of top speeds of 14 mph. A working prototype has been around for over 130 years with the opportunity during that time for people to tinker and improve its design. Yet after 130 years a production EV struggles to drive over 100 miles between charges when towing a trailer at freeway speeds. You may think pointing that out is a cheap shot but it's still a fact.
Of course it's a cheap shot. Something else came along to power vehicles and that became the standard. Nothing unusual about that whatsoever. Standards change over time, and things improve.
Diesel pickup trucks are very fuel efficient compared to gasoline fueled ones in heavy use. BTW, the main difference between retail 'auto' diesel fuel pumps and the ones intended for CDL trucks is the rate at which there are set to deliver fuel.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on July 16, 2022, 10:59:00 PM
Diesel pickup trucks are very fuel efficient compared to gasoline fueled ones in heavy use. BTW, the main difference between retail 'auto' diesel fuel pumps and the ones intended for CDL trucks is the rate at which there are set to deliver fuel.
Mike
Certainly helps they achieve max torque at way lower RPMs than gasoline engines.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2022, 06:35:22 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 16, 2022, 03:38:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2022, 11:29:20 AM
The cannonball runs have also been done with gasoline engines that have been updated and improved upon for a hundred years. Modern EVs have been around a decade or so. Really no comparison, and future EVs will have greatly reduced distance times.
The first successful EV in America dates back to 1890 when William Morrison debuted his 6-passenger electrified vehicle capable of top speeds of 14 mph. A working prototype has been around for over 130 years with the opportunity during that time for people to tinker and improve its design. Yet after 130 years a production EV struggles to drive over 100 miles between charges when towing a trailer at freeway speeds. You may think pointing that out is a cheap shot but it's still a fact.
Of course it's a cheap shot. Something else came along to power vehicles and that became the standard. Nothing unusual about that whatsoever. Standards change over time, and things improve.
So 130 years from now... when you are 177 years old... will they finally be able to push that range up to at least 200 miles between charges when towing a trailer? I guess it won't matter to you by that point.
Most people don't tow trailers.
In addition, the majority of the US population is urban or suburban, which means that their daily commute plus shopping trips is well below 100 miles.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 03:40:33 PM
Quote from: jamess on July 15, 2022, 11:06:53 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 15, 2022, 09:55:23 AM
If I can go to Home Depot and choose between an electric weed eater or a gas powered one, why can't we do the same thing with cars?
Interesting example, since gas powered lawn equipment is being banned left and right. They create a huge amount of local pollution and everyone hates the noise.
A) Those bans haven't even been talked about where I live...
For what it's worth, it's been discussed in Dallas, so there is a little movement on it on the state. They haven't banned them yet, but the attention is there.
Quote from: GaryV on July 15, 2022, 07:52:12 PM
My point was that, in public parking facilities like that, an EV charger is more of a show-off novelty today. "Look how environmentally conscious we're being, we've installed chargers." When there might be 2 slots. If a majority, or even a significant minority, of vehicles become EV, there won't be enough capacity at stores and attractions to charge those who want to use them.
Simple economics.
Do you, and anyone who is against EVs, really think that once a place installs 2 chargers they'll never keep up with demand? Like any other business anywhere, as more people get an EV, if the parking garage determines they can make money off people charging their car in the facility they'll install more.
Hardware stores are stocking up on battery-operated equipment because the price has dwindled enough to where people will buy them.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 09:14:26 AM
So 130 years from now... when you are 177 years old... will they finally be able to push that range up to at least 200 miles between charges when towing a trailer? I guess it won't matter to you by that point.
You said yourself it was a prototype. Not all prototypes become the standard.
The *
MODERN* EV range will easily be doubled in the next 10 years, across all types of vehicles.
The average ICE fuel mileage for an F-150 when towing a trailer is a miserable 15.7 mpg. If gas and diesel have been the gold standard for powering vehicles over the past 100 years, why hasn't that been improved upon?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 10:03:22 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 09:14:26 AM
So 130 years from now... when you are 177 years old... will they finally be able to push that range up to at least 200 miles between charges when towing a trailer? I guess it won't matter to you by that point.
You said yourself it was a prototype. Not all prototypes become the standard.
The *MODERN* EV range will easily be doubled in the next 10 years, across all types of vehicles.
The average ICE fuel mileage for an F-150 when towing a trailer is a miserable 15.7 mpg. If gas and diesel have been the gold standard for powering vehicles over the past 100 years, why hasn't that been improved upon?
Gas and diesels are still the gold standard because you can store a lot more energy in a 36 gallon tank in your F-150 compared to a 98 kWh battery pack in your F-150 Lightning. Even at just 10 mpg, a 36 gallon tank will get you over 300 miles before your next stop. When you do got to fill up it takes you 5 minutes. The F-150 Lightning on the other hand... don't expect 5 minute charge times and don't expect 300 miles of range when towing.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 11:43:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 10:03:22 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 09:14:26 AM
So 130 years from now... when you are 177 years old... will they finally be able to push that range up to at least 200 miles between charges when towing a trailer? I guess it won't matter to you by that point.
You said yourself it was a prototype. Not all prototypes become the standard.
The *MODERN* EV range will easily be doubled in the next 10 years, across all types of vehicles.
The average ICE fuel mileage for an F-150 when towing a trailer is a miserable 15.7 mpg. If gas and diesel have been the gold standard for powering vehicles over the past 100 years, why hasn't that been improved upon?
Gas and diesels are still the gold standard because you can store a lot more energy in a 36 gallon tank in your F-150 compared to a 98 kWh battery pack in your F-150 Lightning. Even at just 10 mpg, a 36 gallon tank will get you over 300 miles before your next stop. When you do got to fill up it takes you 5 minutes. The F-150 Lightning on the other hand... don't expect 5 minute charge times and don't expect 300 miles of range when towing.
The 36 gallon tank ain't standard. 23 & 26 gallon tanks are, giving you a third less ramge than you tried claiming. You're looking at the premium F-150 truck lines, which start around $75,000.
Nice try compaing apples with bananas buddy.
The premium F-150 with a 36 gallon tank for $75,000 is still 20k less than the F-150 Lightning Platinum for around $97,000. Nearly 100k for a pickup truck... what world are we living in!
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 10:03:22 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 09:14:26 AM
So 130 years from now... when you are 177 years old... will they finally be able to push that range up to at least 200 miles between charges when towing a trailer? I guess it won't matter to you by that point.
You said yourself it was a prototype. Not all prototypes become the standard.
The *MODERN* EV range will easily be doubled in the next 10 years, across all types of vehicles.
The average ICE fuel mileage for an F-150 when towing a trailer is a miserable 15.7 mpg. If gas and diesel have been the gold standard for powering vehicles over the past 100 years, why hasn't that been improved upon?
That 'modern' EV pickup truck still won't be able to tow an Airstream trailer from Green River, UT to Salina, UT without getting stranded.
Mike
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 12:09:02 PM
The 36 gallon tank ain't standard. 23 & 26 gallon tanks are, giving you a third less ramge than you tried claiming. You're looking at the premium F-150 truck lines, which start around $75,000.
Nice try compaing apples with bananas buddy.
With the 23 gallon tank and the 15.7 MPG fuel mileage while towing that you cited, the F-150 will go 361.1 miles on a full tank. More importantly it only takes 5 minutes to fill up. The EV F-150 Lightning has a long way to go before matching that.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 12:52:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 12:09:02 PM
The 36 gallon tank ain't standard. 23 & 26 gallon tanks are, giving you a third less ramge than you tried claiming. You're looking at the premium F-150 truck lines, which start around $75,000.
Nice try compaing apples with bananas buddy.
With the 23 gallon tank and the 15.7 MPG fuel mileage while towing that you cited, the F-150 will go 361.1 miles on a full tank. More importantly it only takes 5 minutes to fill up. The EV F-150 Lightning has a long way to go before matching that.
Except on the rare long-haul trips, most will charge them overnight at home, taking a few seconds to plug in and unplug, without needs to stop on the road at all.
Quote from: mgk920 on July 17, 2022, 12:47:36 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 10:03:22 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 09:14:26 AM
So 130 years from now... when you are 177 years old... will they finally be able to push that range up to at least 200 miles between charges when towing a trailer? I guess it won't matter to you by that point.
You said yourself it was a prototype. Not all prototypes become the standard.
The *MODERN* EV range will easily be doubled in the next 10 years, across all types of vehicles.
The average ICE fuel mileage for an F-150 when towing a trailer is a miserable 15.7 mpg. If gas and diesel have been the gold standard for powering vehicles over the past 100 years, why hasn't that been improved upon?
That 'modern' EV pickup truck still won't be able to tow an Airstream trailer from Green River, UT to Salina, UT without getting stranded.
Mike
I don't think many will try.
Of course, how did the 1st generation F-150s do, compared to their modern day equivilents, or to the 1st generation EVs?
Like many products, people nowadays want and expect instant perfection and gratification when something is introduced. 10 years ago, EVs really didn't even exist, and now there's a few million on the road. I'm not surprised at the number of people that compare and instantly poo-poo 1st generation EVs comparing them to products that have been out for decades (and still often have considerable issues). Would love to see everyone's attitude who are against EVs now in a decade when EV market share is tremendously higher.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 09:14:26 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2022, 06:35:22 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 16, 2022, 03:38:19 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 16, 2022, 11:29:20 AM
The cannonball runs have also been done with gasoline engines that have been updated and improved upon for a hundred years. Modern EVs have been around a decade or so. Really no comparison, and future EVs will have greatly reduced distance times.
The first successful EV in America dates back to 1890 when William Morrison debuted his 6-passenger electrified vehicle capable of top speeds of 14 mph. A working prototype has been around for over 130 years with the opportunity during that time for people to tinker and improve its design. Yet after 130 years a production EV struggles to drive over 100 miles between charges when towing a trailer at freeway speeds. You may think pointing that out is a cheap shot but it's still a fact.
Of course it's a cheap shot. Something else came along to power vehicles and that became the standard. Nothing unusual about that whatsoever. Standards change over time, and things improve.
So 130 years from now... when you are 177 years old... will they finally be able to push that range up to at least 200 miles between charges when towing a trailer? I guess it won't matter to you by that point.
Joke's on you, it doesn't matter to most people NOW.
I don't think people are going to care about the "five minute" part much either. Most people don't drive several hundred miles with only a stop for gas. They're going to want to go to the bathroom, get snacks, and eat lunch (somewhere other than in their car while driving). Once chargers are more widespread and in more convenient locations, these things will be able to be combined.
Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2022, 08:43:31 PM
I don't think people are going to care about the "five minute" part much either. Most people don't drive several hundred miles with only a stop for gas. They're going to want to go to the bathroom, get snacks, and eat lunch (somewhere other than in their car while driving). Once chargers are more widespread and in more convenient locations, these things will be able to be combined.
One of the biggest points of this thread is that you can only drive about 100 miles while towing a trailer in these new EV pickups coming to market. Do you really want to stop and eat lunch every 100 miles while you are towing your camper to Yosemite? That's a lot of lunches during the day.
Believe it or not, there are people who already stop to stretch and use the restroom that often. And again, you're assuming no improvements over the next decade.
Me pointing out that current EV pickups only get about 100 miles of range while towing a trailer doesn't mean that I'm assuming there will be no battery improvements over the next decade. You are assuming that I'm assuming that.
Assuming a doubling of energy density in batteries every decade, by 2032 with the same sized battery pack you could expect to see a driving range of about 200 miles while towing a camper in an EV pickup as opposed to the 100 miles we see today. Still not overly impressive considering you can currently drive over 300 miles while towing a camper in most ICE pickups.
(https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-40b4daa51b85c138815bfa972e921459-pjlq)
Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2022, 09:21:42 PM
Believe it or not, there are people who already stop to stretch and use the restroom that often. And again, you're assuming no improvements over the next decade.
Just drove my family from LA to Sedona. If I had stopped every 100 miles to take a 50-to-90 minute stretch and pee break, it would have added a minimum of four additional hours to the trip and I would have had a mutiny on my hands. No thanks.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 10:07:52 PM
(https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-40b4daa51b85c138815bfa972e921459-pjlq)
I mean, I know it
feels like history ended in 2015, but I don't think it actually did...
Google returns a lot of results showing that the cost per kWh in 2021 was $132, and the University of Washington says gravitational energy density has reached 265 Wh/kg.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 17, 2022, 10:55:03 PM
Google returns a lot of results showing that the cost per kWh in 2021 was $132, and the University of Washington says gravitational energy density has reached 265 Wh/kg.
What University of Washington study are you citing where it says the energy density has reached 265 Wh/kg? The chart i cited from 2015 looks like it has a density of around 250 Wh/kg... so 7 years later it's only up to 265 Wh/kg? That would be only a 6% improvement in 7 years. Or are you citing a study that is from 2015 too? A 6% improvement in energy density over 7 years wouldn't be game-changing.
https://www.cei.washington.edu/education/science-of-solar/battery-technology/
This is an informational page, so it may well be saying that 265 is what's commercially available, and not actually the top of the range of what's technologically possible. I don't care enough to look for specs any longer than it takes to show that your little chart is outdated, you see.
Of course, the price is the important thing–if they're $1 each you just can put two of them on there.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 02:06:20 AM
Of course, the price is the important thing–if they're $1 each you just can put two of them on there.
Gross vehicle weight is also important. Moving 1,200 lbs of batteries down the road (weight of a current Tesla battery pack) is obviously less efficient than moving 120 lbs worth of gasoline (the weight of 20 gallons of gas). It's another order of magnitude extreme that you don't want to see with EVs. The biggest order of magnitude extreme is still the charge time though... 2 to 3 minute fill ups with ICE vehicles have turned into 20 to 30 minute charge times with EVs. That's unacceptably long for many consumers and one of the biggest factors why they may not want to switch to an EV.
I can already feel this turning into another crash-prone modern roundabouts-type argument thread...
Quote from: 1 on July 18, 2022, 08:20:41 AM
I can already feel this turning into another crash-prone modern roundabouts-type argument thread...
Your previous post has already indicated your disregard and disinterest to EV towing range. It's not important to you as "most people don't tow trailers". If that's your mindset, any post you make regarding this topic is not likely to be constructive. Find another thread to cause drama in.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 01:13:51 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 12:52:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 12:09:02 PM
The 36 gallon tank ain't standard. 23 & 26 gallon tanks are, giving you a third less ramge than you tried claiming. You're looking at the premium F-150 truck lines, which start around $75,000.
Nice try compaing apples with bananas buddy.
With the 23 gallon tank and the 15.7 MPG fuel mileage while towing that you cited, the F-150 will go 361.1 miles on a full tank. More importantly it only takes 5 minutes to fill up. The EV F-150 Lightning has a long way to go before matching that.
Except on the rare long-haul trips, most will charge them overnight at home, taking a few seconds to plug in and unplug, without needs to stop on the road at all.
I don't necessarily consider 100 miles a "long-haul trip" when someone is towing their trailer in a F-150 Lightning. Imagine a contractor who is towing heavy equipment to a job site... you can't see them having to drive over 100 miles during the course of the day? Instead of a quick 5-minute fill up they are burning daylight waiting 45-minutes to charge up. And with the F-150 Lightning they are burning 45-minutes of daylight for every 100 miles they have to drive during their day...
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:45:41 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 01:13:51 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 12:52:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 12:09:02 PM
The 36 gallon tank ain't standard. 23 & 26 gallon tanks are, giving you a third less ramge than you tried claiming. You're looking at the premium F-150 truck lines, which start around $75,000.
Nice try compaing apples with bananas buddy.
With the 23 gallon tank and the 15.7 MPG fuel mileage while towing that you cited, the F-150 will go 361.1 miles on a full tank. More importantly it only takes 5 minutes to fill up. The EV F-150 Lightning has a long way to go before matching that.
Except on the rare long-haul trips, most will charge them overnight at home, taking a few seconds to plug in and unplug, without needs to stop on the road at all.
I don't necessarily consider 100 miles a "long-haul trip" when someone is towing their trailer in a F-150 Lightning. Imagine a contractor who is towing heavy equipment to a job site... you can't see them having to drive over 100 miles during the course of the day? Instead of a quick 5-minute fill up they are burning daylight waiting 45-minutes to charge up. And with the F-150 Lightning they are burning 45-minutes of daylight for every 100 miles they have to drive during their day...
Sounds like they purchased the wrong vehicle then.
Here's a great list of F-150 towing capacities. https://www.cornerstoneplymouth.com/ford-f-150-towing-capacities/ . If the contractor went cheap with a 3.3L Ti-VCT V6, they would be screwed if the job required them to be towing a 10,000 lb piece of equipment. Instead, they'd be burning daylight going to the rental depot to get another vehicle that could tow what was needed to be towed, or paying someone else, burning cash.
You can always make strawman arguments to fit your beliefs. Anyone looking to purchase a vehicle should be looking at all vehicles on the market today that'll fit their needs, and write-off the ones that don't.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 10:07:52 PM
Assuming a doubling of energy density in batteries every decade, by 2032 with the same sized battery pack you could expect to see a driving range of about 200 miles while towing a camper in an EV pickup as opposed to the 100 miles we see today. Still not overly impressive considering you can currently drive over 300 miles while towing a camper in most ICE pickups.
But that's my point - how many people are going to be interested in going 300 miles without stopping (whether towing or not)? I've done it on all-interstate driving before, but only the first 150 miles is really comfortable, the next 150 is with my bladder being a nuisance. And if I had a whole glass of water or something before that driving leg, the comfortable range drops down to 100 miles, maybe even less.
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on July 17, 2022, 10:39:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2022, 09:21:42 PM
Believe it or not, there are people who already stop to stretch and use the restroom that often. And again, you're assuming no improvements over the next decade.
Just drove my family from LA to Sedona. If I had stopped every 100 miles to take a 50-to-90 minute stretch and pee break, it would have added a minimum of four additional hours to the trip and I would have had a mutiny on my hands. No thanks.
If charging time at a DC fast charger (like Electrify America or a Supercharger) is 50-90 minutes, something is wrong. 10-20 is more normal, depending on the state of charge pulling in and how much is necessary for the next leg of the trip. This is one area where a mindset change from driving an ICE car is needed. With an ICE car, we fill up to 100% every time, unless we're broke and only adding what we can afford. With an EV, one only wants to put in what is needed to get to the next charger or one's destination, not only to save on charging time, but to better preserve the battery. Regularly charging up to 100% not only takes forever (as the charge rate slows to a trickle past around 80% or so depending on the car), it degrades the battery. A battery that is rarely charged past 80% will last a lot longer than one that is charged to 100% every time. I believe 80-20 is the range that most EV owners try to stick between, from what I've read and watched. Believe it or not, stopping more often and charging less at each stop can be faster than stopping less often and filling up more. It's the exact opposite of how things are with ICE cars.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 18, 2022, 09:22:31 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:45:41 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 01:13:51 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 12:52:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 12:09:02 PM
The 36 gallon tank ain't standard. 23 & 26 gallon tanks are, giving you a third less ramge than you tried claiming. You're looking at the premium F-150 truck lines, which start around $75,000.
Nice try compaing apples with bananas buddy.
With the 23 gallon tank and the 15.7 MPG fuel mileage while towing that you cited, the F-150 will go 361.1 miles on a full tank. More importantly it only takes 5 minutes to fill up. The EV F-150 Lightning has a long way to go before matching that.
Except on the rare long-haul trips, most will charge them overnight at home, taking a few seconds to plug in and unplug, without needs to stop on the road at all.
I don't necessarily consider 100 miles a "long-haul trip" when someone is towing their trailer in a F-150 Lightning. Imagine a contractor who is towing heavy equipment to a job site... you can't see them having to drive over 100 miles during the course of the day? Instead of a quick 5-minute fill up they are burning daylight waiting 45-minutes to charge up. And with the F-150 Lightning they are burning 45-minutes of daylight for every 100 miles they have to drive during their day...
Sounds like they purchased the wrong vehicle then.
Here's a great list of F-150 towing capacities. https://www.cornerstoneplymouth.com/ford-f-150-towing-capacities/ . If the contractor went cheap with a 3.3L Ti-VCT V6, they would be screwed if the job required them to be towing a 10,000 lb piece of equipment. Instead, they'd be burning daylight going to the rental depot to get another vehicle that could tow what was needed to be towed, or paying someone else, burning cash.
You can always make strawman arguments to fit your beliefs. Anyone looking to purchase a vehicle should be looking at all vehicles on the market today that'll fit their needs, and write-off the ones that don't.
Every business that has ever been in business goes cheap when it comes to equipment. I deal with the ramifications of that daily. To think that a company or contractor would splurge and buy the most expensive truck to get the most time between charges is fiction. Every company ever sees more expensive tools as a money dump. Lets limp the cheap tool around instead of buying the one that cost 3x more because we can immediately see the impact an expensive tool is on our budget. Buy the cheep version and hope our labor can power through it and/or the tool just was a better made one than the rest on the day it was made!
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on July 17, 2022, 10:39:08 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 17, 2022, 09:21:42 PM
Believe it or not, there are people who already stop to stretch and use the restroom that often. And again, you're assuming no improvements over the next decade.
Just drove my family from LA to Sedona. If I had stopped every 100 miles to take a 50-to-90 minute stretch and pee break, it would have added a minimum of four additional hours to the trip and I would have had a mutiny on my hands. No thanks.
"Sorry honey, we can't make our family trip in the same time as we always have because the powers that be decided we needed an electric vehicle and said it was okay for charging to happen more frequently and take longer than gassing up because most people take breaks more often now, despite the fact that we don't!"
What kind of reasoning is, since most do, now all have to?
I agree with you, if my wife and I had to travel in an electric car and now our entire travel schedule was completely dependent and hijacked by the car's needs, we would be beyond infuriated. "Remember when we used to take a week off for our vacation? Now we have to take two weeks off now, one week just to get where we are going since we can't drive very far each day, but it's okay, because other people don't drive a lot per day. Also, remember how I don't have two weeks vacation? I know, pretty cool, huh!"
Quote from: vdeane on July 18, 2022, 12:47:18 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 10:07:52 PM
Assuming a doubling of energy density in batteries every decade, by 2032 with the same sized battery pack you could expect to see a driving range of about 200 miles while towing a camper in an EV pickup as opposed to the 100 miles we see today. Still not overly impressive considering you can currently drive over 300 miles while towing a camper in most ICE pickups.
But that's my point - how many people are going to be interested in going 300 miles without stopping (whether towing or not)? I've done it on all-interstate driving before, but only the first 150 miles is really comfortable, the next 150 is with my bladder being a nuisance. And if I had a whole glass of water or something before that driving leg, the comfortable range drops down to 100 miles, maybe even less.
I know I'm probably abnormal, but even drinking a decent amount of water, I can regularly go two fill-ups in when driving before I need to pee. I get I'm only 40 and my prostate seems to be a normal size, but I can't imagine it's that normal for people to need to stop every 150 miles when driving on the interstate. My wife and I drive to Kansas City a lot to see family, and we never stop before Colby which is 224 miles away, most of the time pushing onwards to Hays (330 miles).
Quote from: vdeane on July 18, 2022, 12:47:18 PM
But that's my point - how many people are going to be interested in going 300 miles without stopping (whether towing or not)? I've done it on all-interstate driving before, but only the first 150 miles is really comfortable, the next 150 is with my bladder being a nuisance. And if I had a whole glass of water or something before that driving leg, the comfortable range drops down to 100 miles, maybe even less.
Hmmm... i never thought of it this way. The EV is actually doing us all a favor by making us stop more frequently to use the bathroom and save our bladders. I should be thankful i can only drive 100 miles between charges (while towing) when previously i could go 300 miles between fill-ups (while towing). Thank you EVs, you are so helpful!
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 18, 2022, 12:51:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 18, 2022, 09:22:31 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:45:41 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 01:13:51 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 17, 2022, 12:52:38 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 17, 2022, 12:09:02 PM
The 36 gallon tank ain't standard. 23 & 26 gallon tanks are, giving you a third less ramge than you tried claiming. You're looking at the premium F-150 truck lines, which start around $75,000.
Nice try compaing apples with bananas buddy.
With the 23 gallon tank and the 15.7 MPG fuel mileage while towing that you cited, the F-150 will go 361.1 miles on a full tank. More importantly it only takes 5 minutes to fill up. The EV F-150 Lightning has a long way to go before matching that.
Except on the rare long-haul trips, most will charge them overnight at home, taking a few seconds to plug in and unplug, without needs to stop on the road at all.
I don't necessarily consider 100 miles a "long-haul trip" when someone is towing their trailer in a F-150 Lightning. Imagine a contractor who is towing heavy equipment to a job site... you can't see them having to drive over 100 miles during the course of the day? Instead of a quick 5-minute fill up they are burning daylight waiting 45-minutes to charge up. And with the F-150 Lightning they are burning 45-minutes of daylight for every 100 miles they have to drive during their day...
Sounds like they purchased the wrong vehicle then.
Here's a great list of F-150 towing capacities. https://www.cornerstoneplymouth.com/ford-f-150-towing-capacities/ . If the contractor went cheap with a 3.3L Ti-VCT V6, they would be screwed if the job required them to be towing a 10,000 lb piece of equipment. Instead, they'd be burning daylight going to the rental depot to get another vehicle that could tow what was needed to be towed, or paying someone else, burning cash.
You can always make strawman arguments to fit your beliefs. Anyone looking to purchase a vehicle should be looking at all vehicles on the market today that'll fit their needs, and write-off the ones that don't.
Every business that has ever been in business goes cheep when it comes to equipment. I deal with the ramifications of that daily. To think that a company or contractor would splurge and buy the most expensive truck to get the most time between charges is fiction. Every company ever sees more expensive tools as a money dump. Lets limp the cheep tool around instead of buying the one that cost 3x more because we can immediately see the impact an expensive tool is on our budget. Buy the cheep version and hope our labor can power through it and/or the tool just was a better made one than the rest on the day it was made!
Every business that produces high end equipment doesn't sell anything and goes out of business? Who's buying those high-end F-150 trucks...the same ones people claim don't have money to spend on an EV, but can spend the money on a $90,000 F-150?
No doubt quite a number of businesses go cheap (and probably end up being businesses that don't last or don't have great ratings, employees, etc), but certainly not every business has this mindset.
If a business is going to buy a cheap EV and not get that much time between charges, they're also going to buy a cheap ICE truck and probably get lower fuel mileage and more transmission issues hauling and towing above their rated payload.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on July 18, 2022, 01:53:45 PM
I know I'm probably abnormal, but even drinking a decent amount of water, I can regularly go two fill-ups in when driving before I need to pee. I get I'm only 40 and my prostate seems to be a normal size, but I can't imagine it's that normal for people to need to stop every 150 miles when driving on the interstate. My wife and I drive to Kansas City a lot to see family, and we never stop before Colby which is 224 miles away, most of the time pushing onwards to Hays (330 miles).
In the newspaper last week was a large ad for traveling to various National Parks. They interviewed AAA for a small story, which said that motorists should stop every 60 - 90 minutes to stretch and walk around. For them to suggest such a short time frame means that, for many people with long commutes, they would need to stop just on their commute to work. Has the AAA been suggesting rest areas in urban locations? Or maybe nearly every single movie needs an intermission, since they'll last over 90 minutes. Nearly every single flight should see everyone get up and walk around the cabin. For what it's worth, everytime AAA gets their business in the paper, there's going to be some head-scratching comment that reminds me why I won't spend my money with them.
Semi-trucks have upwards to 300 gallon tanks. Assuming 6 mpg, a semi can travel 1800 miles between fill ups. Similarly, a gallon of gas weighs 6 lbs so the energy density to travel those 1800 miles would equal 1800 lbs. How much would a Tesla semi weigh assuming an equivalent 1800 mile range?
Edit: i didn't expect much difference but a gallon of diesel weighs around 7 lbs, not 6 lbs like for a gallon of gas.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 18, 2022, 02:15:59 PM
In the newspaper last week was a large ad for traveling to various National Parks. They interviewed AAA for a small story, which said that motorists should stop every 60 - 90 minutes to stretch and walk around. For them to suggest such a short time frame means that, for many people with long commutes, they would need to stop just on their commute to work. Has the AAA been suggesting rest areas in urban locations? Or maybe nearly every single movie needs an intermission, since they'll last over 90 minutes. Nearly every single flight should see everyone get up and walk around the cabin. For what it's worth, everytime AAA gets their business in the paper, there's going to be some head-scratching comment that reminds me why I won't spend my money with them.
And apparently all people should wake up at least three times throughout the night to stretch too.
This thread is mud.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:32:17 AM
Quote from: 1 on July 18, 2022, 08:20:41 AM
I can already feel this turning into another crash-prone modern roundabouts-type argument thread...
Your previous post has already indicated your disregard and disinterest to EV towing range. It's not important to you as "most people don't tow trailers". If that's your mindset, any post you make regarding this topic is not likely to be constructive. Find another thread to cause drama in.
Don't tell people what to do.
When the first gas powered car came out, the governments didn't announce they would ban horses in ten years of them coming out.
In fact the opposite happened. Many people weren't convinced about the new cars and continued to use their horse. The other reason was until Henry Ford made the assembly line more streamline, causing the price to go down, only the rich could afford them.
I am telling you right now, I can't afford a Tesla, and I don't have much confidence I can afford one in 10 years.
That's because horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow.
I can't afford a Tesla either, and wouldn't buy one if I could. I can't afford a Cadillac either. There are other manufacturers, though.
I've spent quite a bit of time this year road-tripping with friends in an EV and can say that it does have an effect on what we can and can't see, but it's not that pronounced. We'd typically have to stop every few hours anyway for a sit-down meal or a restroom break due to individual needs, and the chargers weren't too out of the way for either.
One additional thing that had to be considered, however, was charging at night to prep for a full day of driving. I would usually take the EV myself to the nearest supercharger (which might be 10 minutes from the hotel) and just rest there for 20-30 minutes watching a TV episode or sorting photos. Had I been solo driving in my ICE vehicle, I would've spent that time in the hotel room anyway, so it's not much of a loss personally but I could see it being annoying for others.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 04:51:15 PM
That's because horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow.
Unless it's a gift from the Trojans.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 18, 2022, 04:16:38 PM
When the first gas powered car came out, the governments didn't announce they would ban horses in ten years of them coming out.
If this statement was true, ICE vehicles would have already been banned.
Quote from: formulanone on July 18, 2022, 05:51:23 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 04:51:15 PM
That's because horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow.
Unless it's a gift from the Trojans.
A horse produces 20.7 kilograms of methane gas per year. Methane is a greenhouse gas that increases the potential for global warming.
One thing that I don't see coming up here is the efficiency of vehicles propelled by electric drive trains vs. ICE. The internal combustion engine is limited in how much mechanical energy it can extract from fuel (the Carnot limit, which in automotive applications is very difficult to come close to). Also one has to add in the drive train losses from needing a multi gear transmission. Even though you are carrying a heavy battery, you are getting much better use of the energy stored in that battery vs. that tank of gasoline.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 06:10:32 PM
Quote from: formulanone on July 18, 2022, 05:51:23 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 04:51:15 PM
That's because horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow.
Unless it's a gift from the Trojans.
A horse produces 20.7 kilograms of methane gas per year. Methane is a greenhouse gas that increases the potential for global warming.
Yeah, and if everyone still rode a horse to work that might be a problem.
You do realize there are still horses in the world right? They don't only produce kilograms of methane gas when pushing a buggy around.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:30:41 PM
You do realize there are still horses in the world right? They don't only produce kilograms of methane gas when pushing a buggy around.
You do realize your argument is horseshit, right?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 08:44:23 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:30:41 PM
You do realize there are still horses in the world right? They don't only produce kilograms of methane gas when pushing a buggy around.
You do realize your argument is horseshit, right?
Bovine flatulence is a large contributor to global warming:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6z8BqsHQl0
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 09:02:46 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 08:44:23 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:30:41 PM
You do realize there are still horses in the world right? They don't only produce kilograms of methane gas when pushing a buggy around.
You do realize your argument is horseshit, right?
Bovine flatulence is a large contributor to global warming:
And Salt Lake City is the capital of Utah. So what?
I don't think anyone's planning on coming out with electric cows any time soon so it's not relevant to what's being discussed.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 04:51:15 PM
That's because horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow.
I can't afford a Tesla either, and wouldn't buy one if I could. I can't afford a Cadillac either. There are other manufacturers, though.
Scott, you are the one that stated that horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow. Yet methane gas (think horse and cow farts) can be a big contributor to global warming and is something scientists are seriously considering. Who's full of shit now?
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 02:14:19 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 18, 2022, 12:47:18 PM
But that's my point - how many people are going to be interested in going 300 miles without stopping (whether towing or not)? I've done it on all-interstate driving before, but only the first 150 miles is really comfortable, the next 150 is with my bladder being a nuisance. And if I had a whole glass of water or something before that driving leg, the comfortable range drops down to 100 miles, maybe even less.
Hmmm... i never thought of it this way. The EV is actually doing us all a favor by making us stop more frequently to use the bathroom and save our bladders. I should be thankful i can only drive 100 miles between charges (while towing) when previously i could go 300 miles between fill-ups (while towing). Thank you EVs, you are so helpful!
That's why I no longer go to the movies. I can't make it more than 90 minutes in theater-level AC without needing to hit the rest room just as Luke blows up the Death Star.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 09:14:23 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 04:51:15 PM
That's because horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow.
I can't afford a Tesla either, and wouldn't buy one if I could. I can't afford a Cadillac either. There are other manufacturers, though.
Scott, you are the one that stated that horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow. Yet methane gas (think horse and cow farts) can be a big contributor to global warming and is something scientists are seriously considering. Who's full of shit now?
You are, because you're throwing red herrings out about horse farts in a thread about electric vehicles. Agriculture is only responsible for 11% of greenhouse gas emissions (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions#agriculture), and of that 11%, just over half is due to soil management practices. So let's say 5.5% horse farts. By comparison, 27% of greenhouse gas emissions are from transportation.
If you were tasked on coming up with a way to lower greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and you decide to focus on horse farts, you're a moron.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 19, 2022, 01:17:03 AM
You are, because you're throwing red herrings out about horse farts in a thread about electric vehicles. Agriculture is only responsible for 11% of greenhouse gas emissions (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions#agriculture), and of that 11%, just over half is due to soil management practices. So let's say 5.5% horse farts. By comparison, 27% of greenhouse gas emissions are from transportation.
If you were tasked on coming up with a way to lower greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and you decide to focus on horse farts, you're a moron.
Your statistics only account for U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Globally the agricultural industry accounts for 24% of greenhouse gases while transportation accounts for 14%. So the agricultural sector produces nearly double the amount of greenhouse gases than the transportation sector globally. If you want to have the greatest impact on reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, it's not moronic at all to focus on the sectors that produce the greatest greenhouse gases.
(https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-05/global_emissions_sector_2015.png)
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data
Hey, look at this graph you scrolled past to cherry-pick that one.
(https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-05/global_emissions_gas_2015.png)
I posted a graph of global greenhouse gas emissions by sector whereas you had cited a graph of U.S greenhouse gas emissions by sector. It was the same EPA source you had cited. Climate change is a global issue and it's important to realize that the agriculture sector produces more greenhouse gas emissions than the transportation sector. In response you just post a random graph that isn't directly related to the conversation we were having. Not to mention the graph you cited shows methane gas contributing to 16% of global greenhouse gas emissions while the transportation sector accounts for just 14% of global greenhouse gas emissions. You are further proving the points I've been making all along with you.
Quit bullshitting, tradephoric. You're the one who's so hung up on methane gas emissions from horse farts. Methane is 16% of global emissions. Carbon dioxide is 65%. Cars produce carbon dioxide, not methane. All of that 65% isn't from cars, but if you're going to cut emissions it makes sense to start with carbon dioxide emissions rather than methane.
If you're not going to make an honest argument, you don't need to be posting on this forum.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 12:24:19 AM
Quit bullshitting, tradephoric. You're the one who's so hung up on methane gas emissions from horse farts. Methane is 16% of global emissions. Carbon dioxide is 65%. Cars produce carbon dioxide, not methane. All of that 65% isn't from cars, but if you're going to cut emissions it makes sense to start with carbon dioxide emissions rather than methane.
If you're not going to make an honest argument, you don't need to be posting on this forum.
You are right only about one-fifth of global Co2 emissions is caused from transport. So 1/5th of 65% is only 13%... which is less than the 16% global greenhouse gas emissions caused by methane gas.
Uh-huh. So explain why banning horses makes more sense than banning cars?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 12:45:33 AM
Uh-huh. So explain why banning horses makes more sense than banning cars?
It can be hard to answer such open-ended questions. For one you mention "banning cars". An electric vehicle is a car so no i don't think we should ban electric vehicles, but a mix of EVs and ICE vehicles makes a lot of sense to me. I personally don't want to struggle to drive 100 miles between charges when towing a camper at freeway speeds in an EV pickup. Would you want to deal with that?
Okay, here's one that's less open ended: why do you misrepresent data to support your own pre-ordained conclusions?
Earlier you made the assumption that half of all agricultural greenhouse gas emissions was due to horse farts. That was misrepresentative as it massively overestimates the impact horse farts have on greenhouse gas emissions. But let's just go with it. When you account for global greenhouse gas emissions horse farts would account for 12% of global greenhouse gas emissions (half of total agriculture emissions). That's almost on par with the 14% of greenhouse gases the transportation sector emits globally. You then conclude that anyone tasked on coming up with a way to lower greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that focuses on horse farts is a moron. The problem is once you locked yourself into that assumption about horse farts the rest of your argument fell apart.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 19, 2022, 01:17:03 AM
Agriculture is only responsible for 11% of greenhouse gas emissions (https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions#agriculture), and of that 11%, just over half is due to soil management practices. So let's say 5.5% horse farts. By comparison, 27% of greenhouse gas emissions are from transportation.
If you were tasked on coming up with a way to lower greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and you decide to focus on horse farts, you're a moron.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 10:33:27 AM
Okay, here's one that's less open ended: why do you misrepresent data to support your own pre-ordained conclusions?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 12:24:19 AM
Quit bullshitting, tradephoric. You're the one who's so hung up on methane gas emissions from horse farts. Methane is 16% of global emissions. Carbon dioxide is 65%. Cars produce carbon dioxide, not methane. All of that 65% isn't from cars, but if you're going to cut emissions it makes sense to start with carbon dioxide emissions rather than methane.
If you're not going to make an honest argument, you don't need to be posting on this forum.
Just over a century ago, gasoline powered cars were regarded as the GODSEND solution to the transportation related pollution problem that had been vexing municipal public works officials going all the way back to well before the Romans. Any idea what it was?
Mike
Methane stays in the atmosphere for 12 years. Carbon dioxide stays in the atmosphere for 300-1000 years. (Both numbers were from quick Google searches.) Carbon dioxide is going to build up in a way that methane won't.
Quote from: mgk920 on July 20, 2022, 11:44:01 AM
Just over a century ago, gasoline powered cars were regarded as the GODSEND solution to the transportation related pollution problem that had been vexing municipal public works officials going all the way back to well before the Romans.
Do you have a source that they even considered there to be a pollution problem?
Even if there was, temperatures didn't start rising significantly until 1910 or so. (I would attribute the earliest increases to industrialization, though.) Local pollution is different from the global climate.
Anyway, horses are very rarely used for transportation anymore, and they don't emit more methane when they're being ridden. We need to look at the 21st century, not the 20th.
Quote from: 1 on July 20, 2022, 12:03:22 PM
Do you have a source that they even considered there to be a pollution problem?
Pictures of manure piling up along the streets of New York is the source. It even has a name... "The Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894". It was a real shit-show back then.
(https://itwassanitationnotvaccinesstupid.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/sanitation-41.jpg?w=532&h=500&crop=1)
(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/b7/31/c5/b731c590bd70253e64606ffe90492027--city-streets-new-york-city.jpg)
Yes, manure was a problem but it was mostly aesthetic, which is to say it smelled really bad and hard to avoid while walking on the street sometimes. About 500 tons of manure was collected daily in NYC (https://www.nyhistory.org/community/horse-manure) and processed into fertilizer, metaphorically turning lemons into lemonade.
Quote from: mgk920 on July 20, 2022, 11:44:01 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 10:33:27 AM
Okay, here's one that's less open ended: why do you misrepresent data to support your own pre-ordained conclusions?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 12:24:19 AM
Quit bullshitting, tradephoric. You're the one who's so hung up on methane gas emissions from horse farts. Methane is 16% of global emissions. Carbon dioxide is 65%. Cars produce carbon dioxide, not methane. All of that 65% isn't from cars, but if you're going to cut emissions it makes sense to start with carbon dioxide emissions rather than methane.
If you're not going to make an honest argument, you don't need to be posting on this forum.
Just over a century ago, gasoline powered cars were regarded as the GODSEND solution to the transportation related pollution problem that had been vexing municipal public works officials going all the way back to well before the Romans. Any idea what it was?
Mike
OK it was considered a godsend. No doubt. But that doesn't preclude that as its use grew, significant impacts became evident.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 20, 2022, 04:47:54 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on July 20, 2022, 11:44:01 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 10:33:27 AM
Okay, here's one that's less open ended: why do you misrepresent data to support your own pre-ordained conclusions?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 12:24:19 AM
Quit bullshitting, tradephoric. You're the one who's so hung up on methane gas emissions from horse farts. Methane is 16% of global emissions. Carbon dioxide is 65%. Cars produce carbon dioxide, not methane. All of that 65% isn't from cars, but if you're going to cut emissions it makes sense to start with carbon dioxide emissions rather than methane.
If you're not going to make an honest argument, you don't need to be posting on this forum.
Just over a century ago, gasoline powered cars were regarded as the GODSEND solution to the transportation related pollution problem that had been vexing municipal public works officials going all the way back to well before the Romans. Any idea what it was?
Mike
OK it was considered a godsend. No doubt. But that doesn't preclude that as its use grew, significant impacts became evident.
Also, thalidomide was once considered a godsend to pregnant mothers dealing with morning sickness and other discomforts associated with pregnancy. That didn't turn out so well.
(https://consumerist.com/consumermediallc.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/asbestosad.jpg)
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 05:01:44 PM
(https://consumerist.com/consumermediallc.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/asbestosad.jpg)
FWIW Asbestos is pretty good at being flame resistant. I still have my asbestos lined fireproof lockbox.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 20, 2022, 05:04:40 PM
FWIW Asbestos is pretty good at being flame resistant. I still have my asbestos lined fireproof lockbox.
Oh, no doubt. And lead was very good at making paint more durable and faster-drying.
In Search of The Coming Ice Age (1978):
There is little doubt that someday the ice will return. At least 8 times in the past million years, it has advanced and retreated with clockwork regularity. If we are unprepared for the next advance, the result could be hunger and death on a scale unprecedented in all of history. What scientists are telling us now is that the threat of an ice age is not as remote as they once thought. During the lifetime of our grandchildren, arctic cold and perpetual snow could turn most of the inhabitable portions of our planet into a polar desert.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tAYXQPWdC0
Yeah, and some day I might shit out a strap of sequentially-numbered red-seal $100 bills.
What about random Gamma Ray Bursts and Super Volcano explosions? One or both could happen at any time...
Solar flares are an actual threat. 1 in 500 150 chance per year. Last one was in 1859, and if it happened again but with current technology, it would cause months-long disruption similar to what COVID did, only with everyone moving away from technology instead of toward it.
EDIT July 21: more common than I remembered
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a solar storm is heading towards earth that may cause power grid fluctuations and interruptions to satellite operations between July 20-22.
QuoteOn July 19, parts of North America got the chance to see the northern lights in lower latitudes than usual thanks to a solar storm and now another solar storm is due to hit Earth on July 20.
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), solar winds caused by two recently observed holes in the Sun's corona will arrive between July 20-22, resulting in a G1 geomagnetic storm.
A G1 geomagnetic storm is caused by solar winds hitting the Earth's magnetic field and may result in power grid fluctuations, interruptions to satellite operations and the storm could also cause changes to the behavior of migratory animals.
https://www.newsweek.com/solar-storm-aurora-sun-corona-holes-1726304
Quote from: tradephoric on July 20, 2022, 11:10:00 PM
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a solar storm is heading towards earth that may cause power grid fluctuations and interruptions to satellite operations between July 20-22.
QuoteOn July 19, parts of North America got the chance to see the northern lights in lower latitudes than usual thanks to a solar storm and now another solar storm is due to hit Earth on July 20.
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), solar winds caused by two recently observed holes in the Sun's corona will arrive between July 20-22, resulting in a G1 geomagnetic storm.
A G1 geomagnetic storm is caused by solar winds hitting the Earth's magnetic field and may result in power grid fluctuations, interruptions to satellite operations and the storm could also cause changes to the behavior of migratory animals.
https://www.newsweek.com/solar-storm-aurora-sun-corona-holes-1726304
There's been stronger geomagnetic storms this year alone. Hardly news.
I am waiting for the solar poles to reverse.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 20, 2022, 05:45:22 PM
In Search of The Coming Ice Age (1978):
There is little doubt that someday the ice will return. At least 8 times in the past million years, it has advanced and retreated with clockwork regularity. If we are unprepared for the next advance, the result could be hunger and death on a scale unprecedented in all of history. What scientists are telling us now is that the threat of an ice age is not as remote as they once thought. During the lifetime of our grandchildren, arctic cold and perpetual snow could turn most of the inhabitable portions of our planet into a polar desert.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tAYXQPWdC0
Yet another fallacy you incorporate in this discussion. If science was wrong once, they are clearly are wrong all the time. It's just logical dishonesty.
If we could make a vehicle that ran on whataboutisms, we'd have a perpetual motion machine.
Quote from: formulanone on July 21, 2022, 09:30:53 AM
If we could make a vehicle that ran on whataboutisms, we'd have a perpetual motion machine.
LOL...yup...
Quote from: tradephoric on July 20, 2022, 12:43:13 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 20, 2022, 12:03:22 PM
Do you have a source that they even considered there to be a pollution problem?
Pictures of manure piling up along the streets of New York is the source. It even has a name... "The Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894". It was a real shit-show back then.
(https://itwassanitationnotvaccinesstupid.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/sanitation-41.jpg?w=532&h=500&crop=1)
When archeologists were excavating Pompeii a few decades ago, they found that the local Roman city officials there and then had set raised stones in the street intersections, spaced at intervals that allowed the wheels of horse-drawn carts to easily pass between them, in the pattern of modern-day painted crosswalks - and could not figure out why they did that. A few short minutes of my thinking that through told me that that was so that the everyday local Romans could cross the streets without every time having go wading through the accumulated horse....
Mike
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 21, 2022, 08:47:02 AM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 20, 2022, 05:45:22 PM
In Search of The Coming Ice Age (1978):
There is little doubt that someday the ice will return. At least 8 times in the past million years, it has advanced and retreated with clockwork regularity. If we are unprepared for the next advance, the result could be hunger and death on a scale unprecedented in all of history. What scientists are telling us now is that the threat of an ice age is not as remote as they once thought. During the lifetime of our grandchildren, arctic cold and perpetual snow could turn most of the inhabitable portions of our planet into a polar desert.
Yet another fallacy you incorporate in this discussion. If science was wrong once, they are clearly are wrong all the time. It's just logical dishonesty.
I wouldn't say they were necessarily wrong back then. From the 1950s through the 1970s average temperatures were dropping. The data was there to suggest that the world might be heading into an ice-age. But that trend reversed and over the past 40 years recorded temperatures have been going up. Now instead of an ice age all we hear about is global warming. But are the smartest people in the room going to be caught off guard when the temperatures inexplicably begin to drop again?
It reminds me of economists that were projecting massive government surpluses in the late 1990s just before the dot com bubble burst. The Congressional Budget Office were using baseline estimates assuming that the surpluses of the late 90s would continue in perpetuity. If economists have trouble projecting government surpluses/deficits than how can we reasonably expect climatologists to project what the temperature of the world is going to be in 100 years? There are just way too many variables to predict and one bad assumption throws everything off. Their word shouldn't be taken as gospel that is for certain. But for some climate is their god and they become zealots, that if you don't believe everything they believe than you are trying to destroy the world.
While there were ice age predictions in the 1970s, they were in the minority. The majority still believed there would be more warming.
https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
Re. the methane vs. carbon dioxide debate:
Isn't methane a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide? Isn't that why governments have been pushing to reduce cattle emissions so hard as of late? I might be wrong.
Quote from: CoreySamson on July 21, 2022, 12:34:42 PM
Isn't methane a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide? Isn't that why governments have been pushing to reduce cattle emissions so hard as of late? I might be wrong.
As I mentioned earlier, methane lasts 12 years in the atmosphere. This means if methane emissions stay constant, its effect will stay constant, since it's been much longer than 12 years. Carbon dioxide lasts much longer (300-1000 years), so if carbon dioxide emissions stay constant, its percentage in the atmosphere will continue to grow.
Here's a good write up explaining methane gas and how it impacts global warming. Methane is basically much more potent than CO2 but escapes the atmosphere much quicker.
QuoteFocusing on carbon emissions is only half the battle — or 74 percent of total emissions to be exact — but, focusing on the percentage of total emissions is extremely misleading because it ignores global warming potential altogether.
We've seen that methane, which accounts for only 14 percent of emissions worldwide, traps up to 100 times more heat than carbon dioxide over a 5-year period. This means that even though carbon dioxide molecules outnumber methane 5 to 1, this comparatively smaller amount of methane is still 19 times greater a problem for climate change over a 5 year period, and 4 times greater over a 100 year period.
To put it another way, any methane molecule released today is 100 times more heat-trapping than a molecule of carbon dioxide, or potentially even higher according to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
With the UN establishing various tipping points for irreversible climate change damage on the horizon, it's time that methane enters mainstream consideration. And better yet, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that livestock production is responsible for 14.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, while other organizations like the Worldwatch Institute have estimated it could be as much as 51 percent — it's time that we look beyond our gas tanks and on to our plates
https://www.onegreenplanet.org/animalsandnature/methane-vs-carbon-dioxide-a-greenhouse-gas-showdown/
Quote from: 1 on July 21, 2022, 12:31:57 PM
While there were ice age predictions in the 1970s, they were in the minority. The majority still believed there would be more warming.
https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
It's useless arguing with tradephoric. We should just rest assured that the bias inherent in his statements on roundabouts or climate change or whatever else at this point is as obvious as the big nose on my face.
Quote from: formulanone on July 07, 2022, 03:37:05 PM
No current electric pickup owner is going to tow for any significant distances. They'll use it to go back and forth to their office complex, posing as a fake cowboy on their way back to their suburban tract. Or it will be guided by a shopaholic with with an inferiority complex but will leave it plugged in longer than necessary just to piss off other EV owners.
Check back in 10-20 years.
It's why I am hoping that Ford and other automakers don't put all of their eggs into the EV basket. There will always be a need for alternate forms of propulsion, whether it's conventional gasoline, diesel, electric, or hydrogen fuel cells. EVs offer a lot of torque but not a lot of range, especially if you are hauling anything heavy or towing practically anything.
We tow a lot with our Toyota Tacoma, and it doesn't break the bank considering that all it can do and does. We can make it to our campsite and back on one tank. Considering the fueling infrastructure that currently exists, there would be no way that a truck could tow anything out to the campground and make it to any charging point. Campground regulations also prohibit EV charging because of the risk of fires.
Quote from: Rothman on July 21, 2022, 01:02:47 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 21, 2022, 12:31:57 PM
While there were ice age predictions in the 1970s, they were in the minority. The majority still believed there would be more warming.
https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
It's useless arguing with tradephoric. We should just rest assured that the bias inherent in his statements on roundabouts or climate change or whatever else at this point is as obvious as the big nose on my face.
I actually agreed with him on the stock market threads at the time. But yes, he's wrong about roundabouts and climate change. "Whatever else" was more of an opinion than right vs. wrong, but I still disagreed with him on that.
Don't forget the covid thread where he had all those cooked-up graphs showing that it was no big deal. "Only" a million people ended up dying of it after that.
Scott is the one that stated "horse emissions don't effect the weather". They do...
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 04:51:15 PM
That's because horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow.
I can't afford a Tesla either, and wouldn't buy one if I could. I can't afford a Cadillac either. There are other manufacturers, though.
Scott suggested that a horse producing 20.7 kilgrams of methane gas per year is only a problem if everyone still rode a horse to work...
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 07:22:20 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 06:10:32 PM
Quote from: formulanone on July 18, 2022, 05:51:23 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 04:51:15 PM
That's because horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather you're forecast to have tomorrow.
Unless it's a gift from the Trojans.
A horse produces 20.7 kilograms of methane gas per year. Methane is a greenhouse gas that increases the potential for global warming.
Yeah, and if everyone still rode a horse to work that might be a problem.
After explaining that horses still produce kilograms of methane gas even when someone isn't using the horse as transport, he accuses my argument is horseshit. So I guess horses don't produce methane gas when just chilling in the pasture?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 08:44:23 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:30:41 PM
You do realize there are still horses in the world right? They don't only produce kilograms of methane gas when pushing a buggy around.
After posting a video about Bill Gates talking about bovine flatulence and how it is a large contributor to global warming, Scott was dismissive talking about how Salt Lake City is the capital of Utah and bringing up electric cows...
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 09:04:56 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 09:02:46 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 18, 2022, 08:44:23 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 18, 2022, 08:30:41 PM
You do realize there are still horses in the world right? They don't only produce kilograms of methane gas when pushing a buggy around.
You do realize your argument is horseshit, right?
Bovine flatulence is a large contributor to global warming:
And Salt Lake City is the capital of Utah. So what?
I don't think anyone's planning on coming out with electric cows any time soon so it's not relevant to what's being discussed.
I could go on but just give me a litany of things I was wrong about in this thread and cite the post completely.
I'm wondering what this has to do with EV's.
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
I wonder if any college aged frat bro cows light their farts.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
You seem to be teeing them up for a joke directed in my direction. You can all get a good laugh at my expense!
Quote from: tradephoric on July 21, 2022, 03:06:59 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
You seem to be teeing them up for a joke directed in my direction. You can all get a good laugh at my expense!
This thread keeps showing up on my list of threads with replies and seems to mostly be about farts now, so why not run with it?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
According to this (https://blogs.nicholas.duke.edu/citizenscientist/silent-but-deadly/), about half a million tons. So that works out to be 0.1% of the 500 million tons emitted per year from all sources.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on July 21, 2022, 03:20:19 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
According to this (https://blogs.nicholas.duke.edu/citizenscientist/silent-but-deadly/), about half a million tons. So that works out to be 0.1% of the 500 million tons emitted per year from all sources.
So you're saying people don't need to be equipped with emission controls?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:27:49 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on July 21, 2022, 03:20:19 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
According to this (https://blogs.nicholas.duke.edu/citizenscientist/silent-but-deadly/), about half a million tons. So that works out to be 0.1% of the 500 million tons emitted per year from all sources.
So you're saying people don't need to be equipped with emission controls?
I don't really want to debate policy. :-D
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
Where is Tim Brown at!?
Quote from: seicer on July 21, 2022, 04:32:04 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
Where is Tim Brown at!?
I was thinking the same exact thing. This is exactly the topic that would have summoned him back in the old misc.transport.road days. I hope nobody brings up Federal Highways, then it's really gonna smell like mtr in here.
Quote from: jdbx on July 21, 2022, 06:36:48 PM
Quote from: seicer on July 21, 2022, 04:32:04 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
Where is Tim Brown at!?
I was thinking the same exact thing. This is exactly the topic that would have summoned him back in the old misc.transport.road days. I hope nobody brings up Federal Highways, then it's really gonna smell like mtr in here.
I did some farting on Federal Highways not too long. Granted, they were Federal Highways in Mexico and didn't involve a little green shrub.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 06:38:54 PM
Quote from: jdbx on July 21, 2022, 06:36:48 PM
Quote from: seicer on July 21, 2022, 04:32:04 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 21, 2022, 03:02:04 PM
Since we are talking about methane emissions from animal farts, does anyone know how much humans contribute to green gas emissions annually by way of farting?
Where is Tim Brown at!?
I was thinking the same exact thing. This is exactly the topic that would have summoned him back in the old misc.transport.road days. I hope nobody brings up Federal Highways, then it's really gonna smell like mtr in here.
I did some farting on Federal Highways not too long. Granted, they were Federal Highways in Mexico and didn't involve a little green shrub.
There's probably much more farting going on along turnpikes with service areas. Especially if they have something like Taco Bell.
Quote from: 1 on July 21, 2022, 12:31:57 PM
While there were ice age predictions in the 1970s, they were in the minority. The majority still believed there would be more warming.
https://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
A website devoted to global warming writes a story that global warming was more talked about than an ice age? I'm a bit skeptical about their sources.
Quote from: CoreySamson on July 21, 2022, 12:34:42 PM
Re. the methane vs. carbon dioxide debate:
Isn't methane a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide? Isn't that why governments have been pushing to reduce cattle emissions so hard as of late? I might be wrong.
Isn't water vapor a very powerful 'greenhouse' gas?
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on July 22, 2022, 01:13:02 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on July 21, 2022, 12:34:42 PM
Re. the methane vs. carbon dioxide debate:
Isn't methane a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide? Isn't that why governments have been pushing to reduce cattle emissions so hard as of late? I might be wrong.
Isn't water vapor a very powerful 'greenhouse' gas?
Mike
Yes. It lasts a few days only, and the more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the more water vapor that the atmosphere can hold. This means that more greenhouse gases = higher humidity.
If a stockbroker with covid stood in the middle of a roundabout and farted, would it cause a thread on this forum?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 22, 2022, 03:18:20 PM
If a stockbroker with covid stood in the middle of a roundabout and farted, would it cause a thread on this forum?
Only if travelling thru a DDI from a SPUI turning into a Parclo B4 on a FYA.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 22, 2022, 03:18:20 PM
If a stockbroker with covid stood in the middle of a roundabout and farted, would it cause a thread on this forum?
Seemingly yes, even just hypothetically:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=31864.0
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 22, 2022, 03:18:20 PM
If a stockbroker with covid stood in the middle of a roundabout and farted, would it cause a thread on this forum?
Only if the roundabout was flat.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 22, 2022, 03:18:20 PM
If a stockbroker with covid stood in the middle of a roundabout and farted, would it cause a thread on this forum?
Is this roundabout in a place with permanent DST?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 22, 2022, 03:18:20 PM
If a stockbroker with covid stood in the middle of a roundabout and farted, would it cause a thread on this forum?
I hadn't been following this thread until it was linked in Max's "flatulence" thread, but it reminds me of one of the more interesting conspiracy theories I've read on Twitter.
There are people who actually believe that Jenna Ellis caught covid from flatulence emitted by Rudy Giuliani.
I feel like there is potential intrigue in getting a comprehensive list of diseases which can be transmitted by flatulence.
From the other thread:
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 22, 2022, 03:18:20 PM
If a stockbroker with covid stood in the middle of a roundabout and farted, would it cause a thread on this forum?
Quote from: hbelkins on July 22, 2022, 08:17:49 PMI hadn't been following this thread until it was linked in Max's "flatulence" thread, but it reminds me of one of the more interesting conspiracy theories I've read on Twitter.
There are people who actually believe that Jenna Ellis caught covid from flatulence emitted by Rudy Giuliani.
It has long been stated that the primary cause of coal mine accidents in my home county of Putnam in West Virginia was due to mule flatulence. All of the coal mines there were small and the industry abandoned Putnam County by the mid-1940s. There's now a tribute to the coal mining industry in the community park in Hometown, which states that there were "at least 53 fatalities recorded in the region's mines, with falling slate and electrocution being the most common cause". All of which does not specifically deny what might have caused the roof to fall.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 12:24:19 AM
Quit bullshitting, tradephoric. You're the one who's so hung up on methane gas emissions from horse farts. Methane is 16% of global emissions. Carbon dioxide is 65%. Cars produce carbon dioxide, not methane. All of that 65% isn't from cars, but if you're going to cut emissions it makes sense to start with carbon dioxide emissions rather than methane.
If you're not going to make an honest argument, you don't need to be posting on this forum.
That statement in bold is riddled with logic fallacy. Yet the very next line you are talking about making an honest argument.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 24, 2022, 10:36:35 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 20, 2022, 12:24:19 AM
Quit bullshitting, tradephoric. You're the one who's so hung up on methane gas emissions from horse farts. Methane is 16% of global emissions. Carbon dioxide is 65%. Cars produce carbon dioxide, not methane. All of that 65% isn't from cars, but if you're going to cut emissions it makes sense to start with carbon dioxide emissions rather than methane.
If you're not going to make an honest argument, you don't need to be posting on this forum.
That statement in bold is riddled with logic fallacy. Yet the very next line you are talking about making an honest argument.
Where's the fallacy? I'm not seeing one other than a minor error in word order.
The ad hominem fallacy occurs where someone attacks the person instead of addressing someone's argument or position. Earlier in the thread i stated that a horse produces 20.7 kilograms of methane gas per year after Steve had stated "horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather". Apparently Steve doesn't like being corrected as now I'm being accused of "bullshitting" for being hung up on horse farts. Nevermind the fact i wasn't the one to bring up horses into this thread.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 24, 2022, 01:20:03 PM
The ad hominem fallacy occurs where someone attacks the person instead of addressing someone's argument or position. Earlier in the thread i stated that a horse produces 20.7 kilograms of methane gas per year after Steve had stated "horse emissions aren't responsible for the weather". Apparently Steve doesn't like being corrected as now I'm being accused of "bullshitting" for being hung up on horse farts. Nevermind the fact i wasn't the one to bring up horses into this thread.
The bolded statement contains no accusations against anyone else. The bolded statement is accurate. Even if you look at the unbolded parts, that's not ad hominem, which is attacking someone
as a way to discredit them. Calling out someone for bullshitting doesn't advance the argument any.
Also, horses
aren't responsible for the weather, as shown by the bolded statement, which you have not refuted.
I wonder if you could fart hard enough to increase the range of an EV pickup. Now that's a tailwind!
Let's say I'm arguing we need to reduce concerts throughout the world. Does this logic make sense?
Jazz is 16% of global concerts. Rock music is 65%. Aerosmith produces rock music, not Jazz. All of that 65% isn't from Aerosmith, but if you're going to cut concerts it makes sense to start with rock music rather than Jazz.
Yes. Sounds reasonable to me, although solely due to the percentages and having nothing to do with Aerosmith.
Quote from: tradephoric on July 24, 2022, 01:57:54 PM
Let's say I'm arguing we need to reduce concerts throughout the world. Does this logic make sense?
Jazz is 16% of global concerts. Rock music is 65%. Aerosmith produces rock music, not Jazz. All of that 65% isn't from Aerosmith, but if you're going to cut concerts it makes sense to start with rock music rather than Jazz.
Rock music generally doesn't vary much from performance to performance; the live version is usually fairly close to the album version. Therefore, there is an easy replacement for a rock concert–a rock album. If you were to replace all of the rock concerts with rock albums, you could eliminate 65% of the concerts without much hassle.
On the other hand, jazz has a tradition of improvisation that is important to the genre as an art form. Every time you hear a jazz performance of a song, it will sound different because the musician is making the music up as they go along. Thus, a jazz performance cannot be so easily replaced with a jazz album–the function a jazz album serves does not serve the needs of the listener as well, and some listeners may well say that a recording isn't a functional replacement for a live jazz performance at all.
Thus it would be sensible, if the goal were to reduce (but not entirely eliminate) concerts, to focus on replacing the more easily-replaced rock concerts that make up the majority of the concerts, rather than the less easily-replaced jazz concerts that make up a minority of the concerts. If you spend all of your time going after the jazz concerts, you're just going to spend your time arguing with people instead of actually making a difference in the number of concerts–and that would be pretty damn stupid.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 24, 2022, 01:43:23 PM
I wonder if you could fart hard enough to increase the range of an EV pickup. Now that's a tailwind!
Would farts being considered renewable energy or fossil fuels?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 24, 2022, 02:20:07 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 24, 2022, 01:43:23 PM
I wonder if you could fart hard enough to increase the range of an EV pickup. Now that's a tailwind!
Would farts being considered renewable energy or fossil fuels?
It depends on whether the food you ate to produce the farts was before or after the expiration date, I'd wager.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 24, 2022, 02:18:49 PM
Quote from: tradephoric on July 24, 2022, 01:57:54 PM
Let's say I'm arguing we need to reduce concerts throughout the world. Does this logic make sense?
Jazz is 16% of global concerts. Rock music is 65%. Aerosmith produces rock music, not Jazz. All of that 65% isn't from Aerosmith, but if you're going to cut concerts it makes sense to start with rock music rather than Jazz.
Rock music generally doesn't vary much from performance to performance; the live version is usually fairly close to the album version. Therefore, there is an easy replacement for a rock concert–a rock album. If you were to replace all of the rock concerts with rock albums, you could eliminate 65% of the concerts without much hassle.
On the other hand, jazz has a tradition of improvisation that is important to the genre as an art form. Every time you hear a jazz performance of a song, it will sound different because the musician is making the music up as they go along. Thus, a jazz performance cannot be so easily replaced with a jazz album–the function a jazz album serves does not serve the needs of the listener as well, and some listeners may well say that a recording isn't a functional replacement for a live jazz performance at all.
Thus it would be sensible, if the goal were to reduce (but not entirely eliminate) concerts, to focus on replacing the more easily-replaced rock concerts that make up the majority of the concerts, rather than the less easily-replaced jazz concerts that make up a minority of the concerts. If you spend all of your time going after the jazz concerts, you're just going to spend your time arguing with people instead of actually making a difference in the number of concerts–and that would be pretty damn stupid.
That was a very thought-provoking post Steve. I do appreciate that! I may not agree with you all the time, but I think i understand your overarching point. I mean i get it, it's much easier to convert ICE vehicles to EVs than to hook up some contraption to every cow's ass in the world to capture their farts! Although going back to concerts, when was the last time you saw a Jazz artist bite a bats head off on stage or lite their guitar on fire? There are definitely antics you see at a rock show that just can't be replicated by listening to the album!
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 24, 2022, 02:20:07 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 24, 2022, 01:43:23 PM
I wonder if you could fart hard enough to increase the range of an EV pickup. Now that's a tailwind!
Would farts being considered renewable energy or fossil fuels?
Well, dinosaur farts are non-renewable. They're called natural gas.
Quote from: US 89 on July 24, 2022, 02:49:52 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 24, 2022, 02:20:07 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 24, 2022, 01:43:23 PM
I wonder if you could fart hard enough to increase the range of an EV pickup. Now that's a tailwind!
Would farts being considered renewable energy or fossil fuels?
Well, dinosaur farts are non-renewable. They're called natural gas.
Yes, that was my initial thought on farts as a fuel source. Thing is though, all anyone would need to do to keep farting is eat flatulence inducing foods. Given the food chain is generally fairly sustainable then fart fuels could easily be renewed.
Now the trick is somehow getting close to/or 100% energy efficiency out of fart fuels. As noted above current levels of human flatulence is a nominal pollution source. I would imagine this cannot ever be done by any kind of advanced internal combustion engine, it would have to be something like a fusion reaction.
The only thing that kept me from going with a full-on electric vehicle this time around: no ability to at-home charge at my apartment. That is a killer feature that makes an EV *more* practical than its gas vehicle counterpart. Eventually the market will make chargers at apartments a standard feature, but it's way too early yet for that.
Otherwise, an electric vehicle would be nearly perfect for my needs. Most of my trips are under 100 miles a day, which even in the dead of winter most EVs will easily handle. Even without the option to charge at work and the need for itself to burn energy to stay warm in winter, an EV's range is more than enough for my needs. I go home, plug it into the outlet in my garage, and even on a 110V outlet my battery gets topped back up to repeat the next day. I never have to visit a gas station.
Even for roadtripping an EV is hardly worthless. Say I purchase a state-of-the-art Kia EV6 with the large battery, good for 310 miles of range via the EPA. It has an 800 volt electrical system for rapid charging. Assuming I left at 80% charge (so about 250 miles of charge). I can get around Chicago and well into Michigan before having to stop to charge. Then I find a 350kW charger, run to the restroom and grab a drink. By the time I'm back out, about 20 minutes later, it's back to 80% charge. If I'm real nervous about my range (or I didn't bring it up to 80% before I left), I can charge to 100%. Or, I stop just outside Chicago, charge up to 80%, and I'm good to my destination without having to charge again. Or, hell, I rent a car for the handful of times that range won't cut it.
There's way less maintenance, instant torque from the motors, and the cost for me to charge it up at home is a fraction of what a gas vehicle would cost me. It's practical for me and a lot of other people right now, even without the benefit of Tesla's charging infrastructure.
TFL does a good job of showing the obvious edge-case problems (towing long distances, roadtrips into middle-of-nowhere destinations, etc). But a lot of the folks here are too busy poo-pooing the current state of EVs to realize their knowledge about EVs and their attendant infrastructure is 5 to 10 years behind what the actual state-of-the-art is.
I would say generally less maintenance only because there are far fewer moving parts but in some instances, EVs can be more expensive to repair or maintain because that manufacturer decided on using more expensive parts: https://www.slashgear.com/908870/tesla-repair-costs-are-more-than-27-higher-than-the-average-car-heres-why/
EVs won't be adopted on a more global scale until we stop fetishing EVs as a luxury.
Quote from: JREwing78 on July 24, 2022, 11:03:55 PM
good for 310 miles of range via the EPA.
What's that translate to in real life? Most people don't get gas mileage that EPA estimates.
QuoteOr, hell, I rent a car for the handful of times that range won't cut it.
Provided such vehicles still exist. Part of the comments in this thread are about the the proposals for banning ICE in the not so distant future.
When we travel, our rest stops usually take about 10 minutes. Gas fill-ups 5-10 minutes. If you could combine those things - say there are charging stations in rest areas - then a 20 minute charge time doesn't really add to the trip. I can see that tradeoff.
But that still doesn't take into account the fact that millions of residences don't have the possibility of a charging station at home overnight. They don't have off-street parking at all. Others are like me, who have a garage but don't use it for the car because it's full of other stuff - lawn mower, grill, bikes, garbage and recycle barrels, etc. Is there a way to install an outdoor charging station at home next to the driveway?
I'm not saying EV's are impossible for everyone, but that they are darn near impossible for some. Which is OK as long as there are ICE alternatives.
Quote from: seicer on July 25, 2022, 08:57:25 AM
I would say generally less maintenance only because there are far fewer moving parts but in some instances, EVs can be more expensive to repair or maintain because that manufacturer decided on using more expensive parts: https://www.slashgear.com/908870/tesla-repair-costs-are-more-than-27-higher-than-the-average-car-heres-why/
EVs won't be adopted on a more global scale until we stop fetishing EVs as a luxury.
Two take-aways from that article:
"The reason repairs for Teslas are so expensive is because many of the parts aren't as mass-produced as those made for far more high-production vehicles."
This one makes a lot of sense. Tesla is still the new kid of the market, and doesn't have the volume of other legacy car manufacturers. As more Teslas - and more EVs - come to the market, the price to produce and stock individual components will come down.
"(Repairpal) suggests that the average repair cost of any given Tesla vehicle is approximately $832 per year, whereas the average vehicle (across all brands) is closer to $652 per year."
This one is more ambiguous because they give the average for one make, and compares it to the entire population of other makes. An average is just that - an average. Some will be higher; some will be lower. If we were to look at Hondas, the average maintenance/repair cost annually is only $428. But if we were to look at Ford - one of the most common vehicle brands on the road and thus a ton of parts and supplies available, the average annual maintenance/repair cost is $775. That's just $57 less than a Tesla, or using today's pricing, less than the cost of a tank of gas in most Fords.
The cost of ownership - which generally takes into account the various repairs and maintenance one would expect to incur over a 5 year period - has long been a stat available in various publications and websites. I'm going out on a limb though that most people don't consider it when buying a car, and only today use it as an argument against EVs. I bet they probably didn't even review their own vehicle's costs when looking this up, or when they were buying a vehicle!
Quote from: seicer on July 25, 2022, 08:57:25 AM
I would say generally less maintenance only because there are far fewer moving parts but in some instances, EVs can be more expensive to repair or maintain because that manufacturer decided on using more expensive parts: https://www.slashgear.com/908870/tesla-repair-costs-are-more-than-27-higher-than-the-average-car-heres-why/
EVs won't be adopted on a more global scale until we stop fetishing EVs as a luxury.
That's my issue in terms of making a switch to an commuter/daily driving EV coupled with generally available range. I don't think mid-20k range and a reliable 400 mile range are too much to ask as an aspirational measure. Why would I go buy a car that doesn't permit me to go wander out on a 400 mile driving loop on a whim like I'm currently accustomed to? Maybe that that will be a regular thing in 3-5 years as EVs trickle down to tiers lower than the luxury segment?
Time to close this thread now, I see.
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on July 25, 2022, 11:45:54 AM
Time to close this thread now, I see.
:nod:
Mike
It wasn't time to close it when there was talk about animal farts and human flatulence fusion motors?
In what could be a game-changer for EVs if it works out, it may be possible to charge an EV in under 10 minutes (https://www.themanual.com/auto/super-fast-ev-charging/). It won't help the range, but it will make EVs more appealing to the masses when it doesn't require a 20-30 minute pit stop to charge.
Quote from: skluth on September 06, 2022, 07:04:31 PM
In what could be a game-changer for EVs if it works out, it may be possible to charge an EV in under 10 minutes (https://www.themanual.com/auto/super-fast-ev-charging/). It won't help the range, but it will make EVs more appealing to the masses when it doesn't require a 20-30 minute pit stop to charge.
So it will take me twice as long to fill up as I currently do to drive maybe 60 miles down the road to do it again. Not impressed.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on September 07, 2022, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 06, 2022, 07:04:31 PM
In what could be a game-changer for EVs if it works out, it may be possible to charge an EV in under 10 minutes (https://www.themanual.com/auto/super-fast-ev-charging/). It won't help the range, but it will make EVs more appealing to the masses when it doesn't require a 20-30 minute pit stop to charge.
So it will take me twice as long to fill up as I currently do to drive maybe 60 miles down the road to do it again. Not impressed.
if(60==250)
{
$ev_discussion_in_progress = true;
}
It's amazing how many people refuse to believe that there is any EV on the road that isn't just the Nissan Leaf (which itself is in the process of being phased out because it's obsolete) by another name.
Schneider trucking to add fleet of electric trucks to California for short-range trips
https://www.wbay.com/2022/09/07/schneider-introduces-fleet-electric-trucks/
Quote from: Big John on September 07, 2022, 07:48:56 PM
Schneider trucking to add fleet of electric trucks to California for short-range trips
https://www.wbay.com/2022/09/07/schneider-introduces-fleet-electric-trucks/
They'd likely be sitting idle the last hew days with CA back into the 'rolling blackouts' and 'emergency' energy conservation orders thing.
:banghead:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on September 07, 2022, 09:53:44 PM
Quote from: Big John on September 07, 2022, 07:48:56 PM
Schneider trucking to add fleet of electric trucks to California for short-range trips
https://www.wbay.com/2022/09/07/schneider-introduces-fleet-electric-trucks/
They'd likely be sitting idle the last hew days with CA back into the 'rolling blackouts' and 'emergency' energy conservation orders thing.
:banghead:
Mike
Do you expect trucking companies to completely ignore the price of fuel and look toward other sources of energy?
Or they'd charge them in the middle of the night when there isn't the stress on the grid. Duh.
Also the implied assumption that the electrical grid will be exactly the same by the end of the decade as it is today is patently absurd.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 08, 2022, 02:21:43 PM
Or they'd charge them in the middle of the night when there isn't the stress on the grid. Duh.
Also the implied assumption that the electrical grid will be exactly the same by the end of the decade as it is today is patently absurd.
It will be worse judging how population everywhere is rising.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on September 08, 2022, 02:27:23 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 08, 2022, 02:21:43 PM
Or they'd charge them in the middle of the night when there isn't the stress on the grid. Duh.
Also the implied assumption that the electrical grid will be exactly the same by the end of the decade as it is today is patently absurd.
It will be worse judging how population everywhere is rising.
Population rising beats the alternative
Quote from: skluth on September 08, 2022, 04:38:34 PM
Population rising beats the alternative
Aren't we trending toward the alternative anyway?
(https://i.imgur.com/AXgq7pV.jpg)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 08, 2022, 02:21:43 PM
Also the implied assumption that the electrical grid will be exactly the same by the end of the decade as it is today is patently absurd.
Hasn't California been having these rolling blackouts for 20 years?
Quote from: SectorZ on September 09, 2022, 06:29:41 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on September 08, 2022, 02:21:43 PM
Also the implied assumption that the electrical grid will be exactly the same by the end of the decade as it is today is patently absurd.
Hasn't California been having these rolling blackouts for 20 years?
The biggest myth going on in California is that high summer temperatures and seasonal fires a new phenomenon. There are records for highs and consecutive days of high heat which are causing longer periods of the grid reaching capacity the last couple years however.
All the same, there isn't exactly a lot of plans to add huge generation capacity in California outside of the planned off shore wind farm near Morro Bay:
https://m.newtimesslo.com/sanluisobispo/coastal-commission-hears-from-energy-commission-chair-on-offshore-wind-and-grid-challenges/Content?oid=12914951
Basically the idea is to add 2-5 Gigawatts by 2030 and something like 25 gigawatts by 2045. The big hook is to have the power grid consist of 100% renewable energy by 2045. The initial wind farms by 2030 would in theory just be an offset or partial increase in capacity if Canyon Diablo Nuclear Generating Station remains operational until 2030.
https://www.abc10.com/article/news/local/california/calmatters/diablo-canyon-nuke-plant/103-b27513c6-a1fb-4d15-b20f-29a77874651e
Considering how unpopular other recent public works projects in California have been it seems I'll advised to plan the 2035 EV mandate around the assumption that nothing will be challenged. Considering the end end goal is 100% renewables is 2045 to me that would have been the more reasonable passenger EV target. All the same the 2035 mandate has so many loopholes like 20% ICEs via plug-in hybrids and not banning out of state purchases that it hardly is the hard ban it is presented to be in the media.
My understanding is that some of California's problems isn't just power generation, but power storage and contracts that require power to be shipped out of state even during peak usage times.
Saw this linked in an LA Times article regarding peak grid usage by year:
https://www.caiso.com/documents/californiaisopeakloadhistory.pdf
Apparently Tuesday night peaked at 52,061 Megawatts:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/text-asked-millions-californians-save-190553711.html
California is getting creative on future energy projects. The Eagle Mountain project will use an abandoned mine at the far eastern end of Joshua Tree (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8545965,-115.4782568,3430m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) to pump water to an upper reservoir during times of surplus power and produce renewable hydro power when needed (https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/water_quality_cert/eaglemtn_ferc13123.html). This is not new technology; the Taum Sauk Power Station (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taum_Sauk_Hydroelectric_Power_Station) in Missouri has been generating electricity by this method for decades. All renewable doesn't mean a complete dependence on the temporary nature of wind and solar power.
Quote from: skluth on September 09, 2022, 03:24:14 PM
California is getting creative on future energy projects. The Eagle Mountain project will use an abandoned mine at the far eastern end of Joshua Tree (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8545965,-115.4782568,3430m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) to pump water to an upper reservoir during times of surplus power and produce renewable hydro power when needed (https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/water_quality_cert/eaglemtn_ferc13123.html). This is not new technology; the Taum Sauk Power Station (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taum_Sauk_Hydroelectric_Power_Station) in Missouri has been generating electricity by this method for decades. All renewable doesn't mean a complete dependence on the temporary nature of wind and solar power.
If you've ever been to Casper, there is nothing temporary about the wind.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 09, 2022, 05:53:26 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 09, 2022, 03:24:14 PM
California is getting creative on future energy projects. The Eagle Mountain project will use an abandoned mine at the far eastern end of Joshua Tree (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8545965,-115.4782568,3430m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) to pump water to an upper reservoir during times of surplus power and produce renewable hydro power when needed (https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/water_quality_cert/eaglemtn_ferc13123.html). This is not new technology; the Taum Sauk Power Station (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taum_Sauk_Hydroelectric_Power_Station) in Missouri has been generating electricity by this method for decades. All renewable doesn't mean a complete dependence on the temporary nature of wind and solar power.
If you've ever been to Casper, there is nothing temporary about the wind.
That's basically how the San Luis Reservoir at Pacheco Pass presently functions.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on September 09, 2022, 06:10:18 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 09, 2022, 05:53:26 PM
Quote from: skluth on September 09, 2022, 03:24:14 PM
California is getting creative on future energy projects. The Eagle Mountain project will use an abandoned mine at the far eastern end of Joshua Tree (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8545965,-115.4782568,3430m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) to pump water to an upper reservoir during times of surplus power and produce renewable hydro power when needed (https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/water_quality_cert/eaglemtn_ferc13123.html). This is not new technology; the Taum Sauk Power Station (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taum_Sauk_Hydroelectric_Power_Station) in Missouri has been generating electricity by this method for decades. All renewable doesn't mean a complete dependence on the temporary nature of wind and solar power.
If you've ever been to Casper, there is nothing temporary about the wind.
That's basically how the San Luis Reservoir at Pacheco Pass presently functions.
As does the Ludington Pumped Storage plant in Michigan. https://www.consumersenergy.com/company/electric-generation/renewables/hydroelectric/pumped-storage-hydro-electricity (https://www.consumersenergy.com/company/electric-generation/renewables/hydroelectric/pumped-storage-hydro-electricity)