EVs can't work, and are just stepping stones to banning all personal transportation

[pcosmar]

Over a Decade of kicking Gass..

it works. And it inspired more.

 

[A Son of Liberty]

Ok

I am seeing more around,, so apparently they Do Phucking Work..

go kick rocks

You just don't get to make sh!t up... There is no reliable, legitimate replacement for ICE vehicles right now. Maybe someday.

In the meantime, feel free to keep supporting an industry that preys upon child exploitation (to be differentiated from child labor, mind you), and an industrial process which does more to despoil the planet than anything the oil and gas industry could ever imagine.

Pardon me while I go kick rocks. :eyeroll:

 

[pcosmar]

, feel free to keep supporting an industry that preys upon child exploitation (to be differentiated from child labor,

Australia is the Major Producer of Lithium.

Adult miners.
https://capital.com/lithium-miners-in-australia

You are talking about Third world,, where slavery is common,, but who only produce a small percentage of the worlds Lithium..

Try Honesty.

 

[unknown]

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/07/3-circular-approaches-to-reduce-demand-for-critical-minerals/

Be honest, you likely have at least one old mobile phone tucked in the bottom of a drawer. Possibly an unused hard drive taking up space too. You aren’t alone. The average car or van in England is driven just 4% of the time. While most already have a personal phone, 39% of workers globally have employer-provided laptops and mobile phones.

This is not at all resource efficient. More sharing can reduce ownership of idle equipment and thus material usage. Car sharing platforms such as Getaround and BlueSG have already seized that opportunity to offer vehicles where you pay per hour used.

 

[CaptUSA]

Australia is the Major Producer of Lithium.

Adult miners.
https://capital.com/lithium-miners-in-australia

You are talking about Third world,, where slavery is common,, but who only produce a small percentage of the worlds Lithium..

Try Honesty.

Cool. Now do cobalt.

 

[A Son of Liberty]

Cool. Now do cobalt.

I'm almost positive he's aware that I didn't say anything about Lithium, but he has carefully avoided the Rogan clip. Noticeably.

 

[CaptUSA]

I'm almost positive he's aware that I didn't say anything about Lithium, but he has carefully avoided the Rogan clip. Noticeably.

Well, unfortunately, obfuscation happens on both sides.

There is no reliable, legitimate replacement for ICE vehicles right now. Maybe someday.

If we're being honest here, there doesn't need to be a one-for-one "replacement". I go out to my garage and grab battery-powered tools as often as I grab my gas-powered tools. I'm always trying to use the right tool for the right job. EV's work extremely well for daily commutes. Unfortunately, most manufacturers are trying to get them to "replace" ICE vehicles so they load up on range and features you don't need for that daily commute.

I try to get people to think in terms of diversification, not replacement. It makes good sense to have these technologies coexist with each other. Especially, for the geopolitical implications. And what Siddharth Kara ignores is that even in the Congo, the reason why the labor is able to be "exploited" is because the cobalt mines are better than the economic alternatives in the region. These people are at the initial stages of economic development and are already benefitting. That will continue as competition continues.

 

[A Son of Liberty]

If we're being honest here, there doesn't need to be a one-for-one "replacement". I go out to my garage and grab battery-powered tools as often as I grab my gas-powered tools. I'm always trying to use the right tool for the right job. EV's work extremely well for daily commutes. Unfortunately, most manufacturers are trying to get them to "replace" ICE vehicles so they load up on range and features you don't need for that daily commute.

The state has manipulated the natural course of the market and pushed EV's well ahead of their demand curve. There is (and I'm not suggesting that you aren't aware of this or are suggesting otherwise) a YUGE difference between battery-powered hand tools and EV's. EV's may well have their place in today's market for daily commutes of less than 25 miles or so (assuming those 25 miles are not in negative temperatures, and while the vehicle is parked it can be charged), but for probably 3/4 of the country (if not more) that's not a reality.

I try to get people to think in terms of diversification, not replacement. It makes good sense to have these technologies coexist with each other. Especially, for the geopolitical implications. And what Siddharth Kara ignores is that even in the Congo, the reason why the labor is able to be "exploited" is because the cobalt mines are better than the economic alternatives in the region. These people are at the initial stages of economic development and are already benefitting. That will continue as competition continues.

Understood and agreed. This is a point that Tom Woods and several other fellows at the MI have made regarding "sweat shops" (and also why I carefully distinguished between 'child labor' and 'child exploitation'). However, this has to be considered within the context of the fact that, were it not for statist intervention, we probably wouldn't even be talking about EV's to any considerable degree at this point in time. There simply wouldn't be any marketable demand for EV's right now were it not for the environmentalist narrative, and that narrative's regulatory capture.

 

[pcosmar]

Cool. Now do cobalt.

Cobalt has been in use for Hundreds of years before current outrage..
I have personally used it as a Paint Tint ,, and in Ceramics..

https://www.refractorymetal.org/uses-of-cobalt/

China gets Most of the Congo Cobalt..

US is just starting.
https://lmtribune.com/northwest/ida...cle_ad7e97d6-626f-58c8-a513-249c5efefb6f.html

and for Education.
https://www.statista.com/topics/2276/cobalt/#topicHeader__wrapper

Cobalt as a free element is a hard, lustrous gray metal. Almost all of cobalt’s land-based deposits are found in combination with nickel or copper. In fact, as of 2020, only about 14 percent of the global cobalt produced was not produced as a by-product of nickel, copper, or platinum group metals. Thus, cobalt production often occurs as a by-product of the copper and nickel mining industries. There are several methods that can be used to separate cobalt from nickel or copper. For example, froth flotation is commonly used, in which a substance is used to bind to different ore components in order to enrich cobalt ores.

a very small part is collected by Children,,,despite Current PROPAGANDA.

 

[ClaytonB]

a very small part is collected by Children,,,despite Current PROPAGANDA.

Not directly related but reminds me of this clip from Fight Club, by association:

 

[pcosmar]

.

There is no reliable, legitimate replacement for ICE vehicles right now.

Electric Motors are Superior to ICE in several ways.. Batteries are Improving.
https://www.evwest.com/catalog/prod...ucts_id=469&osCsid=4a53995s76tl180bf51ccui563

The long awaited AC motor from NetGain is here. The new 9 inch HyPer9 AC motor is based on a new high efficiency design. The motor is a permanent magnet assisted synchronous reluctance design and holds the highest efficiency rating of IE4+ at 94% motor efficiency. The motor is IP56 sealed. The matching controller, an AC-X1 by SME Group will accept a supply side DC voltage of up to 132 Volts, and will output up to 760 Amps output, with a peak 88kW of power. The permanent magnets are a new design that are manufactured without the use of rare earth elements, but still gain a big efficiency advantage with a powerful 173 lb/ft of torque.

In the meantime, feel free to keep supporting an industry that preys upon child exploitation

Yeah ,, the Lefty Crap is opposed to all mining,,So you want to shut down all mining. Copper mines . Nickle, Zinc Gold,,all produce Cobalt..
You want to shut them all down because some kids in the Congo are making money.

That is Dumb $hit.

 

[CaptUSA]

.

Electric Motors are Superior to ICE in several ways.. Batteries are Improving.

Just letting you know that motor efficiency is entirely misleading. They take the efficiency of the stored power in the battery to the motor and call that "efficient". Meanwhile, when they compare to an ICE engine, they take the efficiency of the entire conversion process from fuel to motor. That's a completely dishonest way to calculate. If you wanted to do this fairly, you'd take that energy all the way back to the fuel source and then calculate. I've done the math and it's not very compelling for EV's.

If you get your juice from nuclear, then EV's use less energy. Every other source, they use more. Burning coal loses about 60% at the plant, then about 6% more over the lines, then about 10% going into the vehicle's battery, then the battery loses it slowly over time so the time between charging and operation loses another small %. Those "efficiency comparisons" start once the vehicle is in operation and all the other losses have already taken place. With nukes, you only lose like 8% at the plant. "Renewables" lose the most by far.

Finally, batteries weigh more. So it takes more energy from the motor to move the vehicle the same distance. That's simple physics.

Still, EV's have their purposes. I need to be clear on that. But the efficiency claims are mostly bunk. The motors are VERY efficient. The vehicles are not.

 

[A Son of Liberty]

.

Yeah ,, the Lefty Crap is opposed to all mining,,So you want to shut down all mining. Copper mines . Nickle, Zinc Gold,,all produce Cobalt..
You want to shut them all down because some kids in the Congo are making money.

That is Dumb $hit.

lolwut!?

 

[pcosmar]

The motors are VERY efficient. The vehicles are not.

They can be.. most aren't built for efficiency..

Check out Aptera. It is efficient. The entire car weighs less than the eHummer battery pack.

 

[TheCount]

Just letting you know that motor efficiency is entirely misleading. They take the efficiency of the stored power in the battery to the motor and call that "efficient". Meanwhile, when they compare to an ICE engine, they take the efficiency of the entire conversion process from fuel to motor. That's a completely dishonest way to calculate. If you wanted to do this fairly, you'd take that energy all the way back to the fuel source and then calculate. I've done the math and it's not very compelling for EV's.

It's not just the motor efficiency - although ICE in cars are hideously inefficient by design. There's also, for example, drivetrain losses, idle time, etc.

The part of the equation that you are ignoring is the energy cost of 'all the way back to the fuel source' of the gasoline. How much energy is consumed in getting a gallon of gasoline to the inside of your fuel tank? What's the transmission loss of a tanker? A pipeline? A fuel truck driving down the highway? A 24/7 gas station?

It's not none. If you're going to count losses for electric energy transmission, for example, then you need to consider the costs of nationwide gasoline distribution.


Many of these things are so ingrained in our lives that I think many people do not pause to consider the fact that they do not necessarily need to exist.

It's similar to the charge time problem. People say - oh well the car takes X time to charge what if I need to recharge? Yes, that's an issue. However, what about the opposite - what about the time that it takes to refuel your car? For a person whose normal use is comfortably within the range of an EV, how much time will they save not going to gas stations? It's not something that we think about because regularly going to a gas station is simply part of every day life.

If you get your juice from nuclear, then EV's use less energy. Every other source, they use more. Burning coal loses about 60% at the plant, then about 6% more over the lines, then about 10% going into the vehicle's battery, then the battery loses it slowly over time so the time between charging and operation loses another small %.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/truth-about-electric-cars-ad-why-you-are-being-lied-to/

To summarize, replacing gasoline with coal (which, for the record, is an abysmal idea) would reduce energy usage by 31 percent. Another way to think about it: Right now, Americans use about 9 million barrels of oil a day for our automotive transportation needs. Magically switching to EVs charged via burning coal would result in only needing the equivalent of about 6 million barrels. That's a big reduction. Replacing gasoline with EVs charged via natural gas would use 48 percent less energy. Green energy (hydro, solar, wind, etc.) instead of gasoline would reduce the amount of energy needed by nearly 75 percent, or 6.7 million barrels of gasoline equivalent, as only 2.3 million barrels equivalent would be needed.

 

[CaptUSA]

It's not just the motor efficiency - although ICE in cars are hideously inefficient by design. There's also, for example, drivetrain losses, idle time, etc.

The part of the equation that you are ignoring is the energy cost of 'all the way back to the fuel source' of the gasoline. How much energy is consumed in getting a gallon of gasoline to the inside of your fuel tank? What's the transmission loss of a tanker? A pipeline? A fuel truck driving down the highway? A 24/7 gas station?

It's not none. If you're going to count losses for electric energy transmission, for example, then you need to consider the costs of nationwide gasoline distribution.


Many of these things are so ingrained in our lives that I think many people do not pause to consider the fact that they do not necessarily need to exist.

Nope. I do NOT ignore those costs. It's just that if you want to include the costs of getting the fuel to the vehicle's engine, you also have to include the costs of getting the fuel to the power plant turbines. Then, you have to include the costs of extracting the fuel... It goes on and on. And if you include the costs of extracting the fuel, you also have to include the costs of extracting the battery materials which will eventually store the energy that was generated.

You can really get into an I, Pencil-type matrix of costs, but my post was about the fuel to motion efficiency.

It's similar to the charge time problem. People say - oh well the car takes X time to charge what if I need to recharge? Yes, that's an issue. However, what about the opposite - what about the time that it takes to refuel your car? For a person whose normal use is comfortably within the range of an EV, how much time will they save not going to gas stations? It's not something that we think about because regularly going to a gas station is simply part of every day life.

This is why I say that EV's have their uses. They can be a very useful tool if you use it right. But if you're not, then the opposite is true. Best use case for an EV is to trickle charge it at Level 1 to replace your daily commute miles and use your ICE vehicle for everything else. Worst case for an EV would be towing on a long trip.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/truth-about-electric-cars-ad-why-you-are-being-lied-to/

That link is entirely irrelevant to the conversation here. We're talking about efficiency - not emissions. Even when the article tangentially gets to the efficiency question, it repeats the same tired mistakes mentioned above. Trust me, I'm in the industry. It's a pandemic of BS.

But you see, this is what happens when cognitive dissonance sets in. Instead of trying to accept the new information, you completely change the topic of the conversation to something you think will better serve your point. It didn't. You just look foolish. This is a typical "fact check" that has nothing to do with truth, but trying to convince people of their lies.

ETA: Let's break down this lie...

Kirk goes on to say, "Replacing gasoline-powered cars with EVs saves energy, regardless of the energy source used to recharge EVs." Please take note of the word "regardless," as that's how "coal-powered cars" are in fact cleaner than gas-powered cars. Efficiency: EVs have it, ICE cars don't.

To summarize, replacing gasoline with coal (which, for the record, is an abysmal idea) would reduce energy usage by 31 percent. Another way to think about it: Right now, Americans use about 9 million barrels of oil a day for our automotive transportation needs. Magically switching to EVs charged via burning coal would result in only needing the equivalent of about 6 million barrels. That's a big reduction. Replacing gasoline with EVs charged via natural gas would use 48 percent less energy. Green energy (hydro, solar, wind, etc.) instead of gasoline would reduce the amount of energy needed by nearly 75 percent, or 6.7 million barrels of gasoline equivalent, as only 2.3 million barrels equivalent would be needed.

EV's need MORE energy to move them; not less. The vehicles weigh more, so there needs to be more energy to move them the same distance. Simple physics that the special interests choose to ignore.

"Green energy" is even MORE inefficient! Solar and wind have lower capacity factors than coal and hydro is almost identical. Yes, those are sources of energy that are easily acquired, but we're not very good at converting them. So to suggest that we would "reduce the mount of energy needed" by using a less efficient source and moving a heavier vehicle is JUST A LIE. Maybe try using some discretion before believing nonsense. That's a propaganda piece - not a scientific piece.

 

[Working Poor]

I am thinking about buying a propane conversion kit for my car and using the methane system I am developing from my septic to power the car, heat my water tank,cooking and, heat. The power of poop babe...

 

[CaptUSA]

They can be.. most aren't built for efficiency..

Check out Aptera. It is efficient. The entire car weighs less than the eHummer battery pack.

I like the Aptera vehicle, but even that isn't as efficient as it would be if the same vehicle ran on gas or diesel. The cool thing about that car is that you can leave it out in the sun and let it very slowly build up enough energy to move it again. But if it had a motorcycle engine, it would take less energy to move it.

 

[pcosmar]

I like the Aptera vehicle, but even that isn't as efficient as it would be if the same vehicle ran on gas or diesel. The cool thing about that car is that you can leave it out in the sun and let it very slowly build up enough energy to move it again. But if it had a motorcycle engine, it would take less energy to move it.

LOL.. The first model did have a gas engine.. got 200 miles per gal.

This one gives you 40 miles of charge every day...

https://aptera.nu/?p=67

 

[Anti Federalist]

The fact of the matter is this:

If EVs were in all ways superior to and better than ICE vehicles, the marketplace would have responded accordingly.

But it has not.

New subsidies of over $7000 per vehicle are in the new bloated spending package and even with that market share is not exploding.

Government fatwas and handouts are not the way to build a transportation system.

There are many small EV designs that make sense for an inner city/short haul commuter vehicle, that would make zero sense for a long haul heavy hauler.

Weather, weight, availability, cost...there are hundreds of factors to consider in which to choose one or the other.

Only an informed driver, in a free market, could make these decisions.

Central planning by government dicktat will be a disaster.

But, since we've turned into the USSR, I guess that is exactly how it's going to be.