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

[GomerPile]

Stop changing the argument...like fucking elizabeth warren.

EV's lose range in winter. So do ICE vehicles. Range is compared against the EPA methodology (for reasons cited in link). Most of the EPA test is conducted at 68-86 degrees with short runs at 95 and 20 degrees. A cold winter morning is way outside the range of the EPA testing and as a result you actual MPG will be lower. So your simple brain can understand...ALL CARS ARE LESS FUEL EFFICIENT IN COLD WEATHER.

You said: "My ICE engine is MORE efficient in cold..." well that's simply not true. Your ICE vehicle needs to warm up in cold weather. Warming up, the engine runs fuel-rich (~25% more fuel) in order to get the cats and oils up to temp. Running rich also helps the car to idle, especially when it's cold. Lots of short trips will use more fuel than few long trips.

EVs have lubricant too. And those things do warm up.

How do EVs operate those without power? Or do you imagine no EV has them? Do you really believe any of those accessories puts enough drag on the alternator to affect range as significantly as an electric cabin heater (necessary only in EVs) does?

How do EVs avoid that? Do they heat up the air before passing through it? They try with miles and miles of wires radiating heat due to resistance. But if that has an effect, does it warm and thin out only the air EVs pass through?

Which EVs use solid rubber tires? Or do they heat up their tires through some energy-free method, like the air they shove aside in passing?

Two thirds of the criticisms you just aimed at gas buggies apply equally to zap buggies. <<<<EQUALLY

I love armchair engineers too.

 

[GomerPile]

Another whackjob argument...

ICE car you CAN NOT practically produce fuel to make it go....(sorry biodiesel and ethanol are not practical sources of fuel).

EV you can install solar panels and travel 3-4 miles per kwH....(a 250 watt PV panel will "make" 3 miles of power even in the dead of winter).

EV's = more freedom not less!

These cars are being pushed by the Globalists for a reason and not because they care about "US"

Its about limiting US but not them.

 

[CaptUSA]

Another whackjob argument...

ICE car you CAN NOT practically produce fuel to make it go....(sorry biodiesel and ethanol are not practical sources of fuel).

EV you can install solar panels and travel 3-4 miles per kwH....(a 250 watt PV panel will "make" 3 miles of power even in the dead of winter).

EV's = more freedom not less!

As a policy expert in this space, I can tell you what's really going on now. And it's what the OP originally stated. Those who have been "driving" the policies are starting to acknowledge that these vehicles are not better for the environment and they are not more efficient. Those claims would have been dismissed out of hand just 2 years ago. When you remove the subsidies, the vehicles are crazy expensive (which is why the elite want other people to pay for their toys.)

A mix of EV's and ICE vehicles may equal more freedom for the drivers, but they equal way less freedom for those that are forced to pay for them.

But because the veil is being lifted, we're starting to see more and more calls for limiting the number of personal vehicles altogether. It's not just the diehards either. My LinkedIn feed is littered with these well-intentioned central planners' goals of what "we" NEED to do.

 

[WarriorLiberty]

Another whackjob argument...

ICE car you CAN NOT practically produce fuel to make it go....(sorry biodiesel and ethanol are not practical sources of fuel).

EV you can install solar panels and travel 3-4 miles per kwH....(a 250 watt PV panel will "make" 3 miles of power even in the dead of winter).


EV's = more freedom not less!

EVs are more freedom? why you think globalists, and those on the left keep pushing us to have EVs? for less freedom not more.

They will be pushing for vehicles to be automated next.

 

[GomerPile]

EVs are more freedom? why you think globalists, and those on the left keep pushing us to have EVs? for less freedom not more.

They will be pushing for vehicles to be automated next.

Does an electric bike give you more or less freedom compared to a pedal bike? What about an electric motorcycle?

All kinds of vehicles can be automated thats not limited to EV's. When they talk about banning private ownership of cars then you have a point

 

[WarriorLiberty]

Does an electric bike give you more or less freedom compared to a pedal bike? What about an electric motorcycle?

All kinds of vehicles can be automated thats not limited to EV's. When they talk about banning private ownership of cars then you have a point

Do you know why they wanted war and Russians gone in Ukraine? resource for the EVs are in Eastern Ukraine and they want Russians gone so they could dig it up.

The EV resource is also in Africa.

What about an electric motorcycle

All those EVs would be gov controlled and will know how much your using your electricity.


Thus charging you more.

 

[acptulsa]

Stop changing the argument....

The only argument you were making is that things that apply to all cars only apply to those with ICE power.

That's not happening on my watch. It's too ridiculous.

 

[GomerPile]

They actually are more efficient and when combined with an overhauled power grid they are much more efficient.

You waste 75% of the energy in a gallon of gasoline. EV's can have efficiencies in the 90's with the correct conditions.

The ICE infrastructure has taken 100 years to fine-tune. Auto manufacturing has been stagnant for decades. EV development is crushing the cost of battery storage and creating new automotive manufacturing technology. Future ICE cars will benefit from this new technology.

The drivetrain in an ICE car has thousands of parts while the drivetrain in a Tesla has 20. If you can't see the potential to make EV manufacturing more efficient, you're in the wrong business. GM and others are just figuring this out and are on the road to bankruptcy IMO.

And BTW a Tesla can be had for $39K with no incentives. Cheaper cars are coming. How many people will say NO to a $25K electric car?

As a policy expert in this space, I can tell you what's really going on now. And it's what the OP originally stated. Those who have been "driving" the policies are starting to acknowledge that these vehicles are not better for the environment and they are not more efficient. Those claims would have been dismissed out of hand just 2 years ago. When you remove the subsidies, the vehicles are crazy expensive (which is why the elite want other people to pay for their toys.)

A mix of EV's and ICE vehicles may equal more freedom for the drivers, but they equal way less freedom for those that are forced to pay for them.

But because the veil is being lifted, we're starting to see more and more calls for limiting the number of personal vehicles altogether. It's not just the diehards either. My LinkedIn feed is littered with these well-intentioned central planners' goals of what "we" NEED to do.

 

[CaptUSA]

They actually are more efficient and when combined with an overhauled power grid they are much more efficient.

You waste 75% of the energy in a gallon of gasoline. EV's can have efficiencies in the 90's with the correct conditions.

The ICE infrastructure has taken 100 years to fine-tune. Auto manufacturing has been stagnant for decades. EV development is crushing the cost of battery storage and creating new automotive manufacturing technology. Future ICE cars will benefit from this new technology.

The drivetrain in an ICE car has thousands of parts while the drivetrain in a Tesla has 20. If you can't see the potential to make EV manufacturing more efficient, you're in the wrong business. GM and others are just figuring this out and are on the road to bankruptcy IMO.

And BTW a Tesla can be had for $39K with no incentives. Cheaper cars are coming. How many people will say NO to a $25K electric car?

Dude. Go back and read the thread. They are NOT more efficient. Not even close. You have those same losses generating the power plus transmitting it over the lines, putting it in the battery and storing it. Then you NEED more energy to move the much heavier vehicle.

Face it. You are talking out of your ass and have no idea what you’re talking about.

And every Tesla vehicle ever sold has gotten HUGE subsidies. In regulatory credits, in tax incentives, in battery materials sourcing, in refining, in manufacturing and in subsidized infrastructure.

 

[acptulsa]

GM and others are just figuring this out and are on the road to bankruptcy IMO.

GM has been playing at this for decades, long enough that Ed Begley, Jr. raved about the GM EV1 Impact in that silly propaganda "documentary" seventeen years back. All it has gotten them is a pile of impending lawsuits over the Volt, which is the real reason they're looking at another brush with bankruptcy. The only thing keeping them afloat is ICE sales.

Considering GM just made a public announcement to this effect, you seem to be posting the whackjob stuff completely in defiance of reality.

 

[Anti Federalist]

These cars are being pushed by the Globalists for a reason and not because they care about "US"

Its about limiting US but not them.

An EV is easier to track, trace, limit and "brick" from a distant point than an ICEV.

That, and once all the ICEVs are gone, they will ban and restrict EVs for the same reasons.

The ruling class has hated the idea of cheap reliable cars for the masses since Henry Ford sold his first Model T.

 

[Anti Federalist]

GM has been playing at this for decades, long enough that Ed Begley, Jr. raved about the GM EV1 Impact in that silly propaganda "documentary" seventeen years back. All it has gotten them is a pile of impending lawsuits over the Volt, which is the real reason they're looking at another brush with bankruptcy. The only thing keeping them afloat is ICE sales.

At least they built it with lead acid batteries.



LOL Lease only at $640 and that was 30 years ago dollars.

 

[acptulsa]

LOL Lease only at $640 and that was 30 years ago dollars.

They knew how the spoiled carbuyers of the time would react when they had to replace twenty-nine deep cycle marine batteries all at once, at approximately the cost of an automatic transmission.

 

[GomerPile]

I am not talking out my ass, there are gaps in your mental model of EV's.

Lets split the problem in half to make this easier to discuss.

{PART 1}
+ 1 US gallon of gasoline contains 34 kwH of electricity if you could perfectly convert it to electricity.

+ A Toyota Camary can travel 32 miles on that gallon of gas. My Tesla Model 3 (4 miles/kwh) can travel 122 miles on that amount of power, assuming 10% conversion losses.

+ The opportunity for EV's lies in this region between ~25% ICE efficiency and ~90% EV efficiency.

+ The vehicle's weight does not matter because we are comparing real-world results.


{PART 2}
+ Getting gasoline to the station consumes some amount of energy (drilling, distribution, refining, etc)

+ Some electricity generation piggybacks on the logistics used to make gasoline (natural gas, bunker fuel)

+ Some forms of power generation make very little use of the logistics used to make gasoline (Hydro, nuclear, solar, even coal)

+ Before you say it...EVERY SINGLE power plant we build has some inputs from petrol products (coal mines, hydro dams, nuke plants)... the stuff is essential

+ The question becomes "Does the inefficiency in electricity generation and delivery offset the efficiency advantage EV's have?"

{????}
+ The answer is it depends.

+ If you are in Alaska and have bunker fuel brought in by train, and that's your only power source, then it's doubtful.

+ If you are in Arizona or Australia and you have lots of renewables, then EV's are a clear win (there are studies proving this)


{NATURAL GAS}
+ Gas turbines are a popular way to generate electricity for various reasons. They are already used for 40% of US power generation and growing.

+ Gas turbines currently run at 45-55% efficiency. A new Westinghouse model recently hit 62% efficiency (wow).

+ A gas turbine fed with 34 kwh of natural gas will output 17kwh and then lose 10% (1.7 kwh) in transmission with a net of 15.3 kwh which moves my Tesla 61 miles

+ You still can't directly compare a gallon (34 kwH) to NG generated electricity because gasoline requires energy inputs to refine (IDK what those are with any certainty).

+ And yes, how did you get natural gas to the turbine? What are those energy inputs? This is the reason why people argue about EVs vs ICE...the energy inputs are difficult to keep track of, and the data is hard to come by.

{BOTTOM LINE}
+ Everyone agrees that with a good local source of electricity (preferably solar) EV's are more efficient than their petrol-powered siblings.

+ The break-even point for a PV system in terms of EROI is 2-4 years. It takes 2-4 years of production to generate the energy used to manufacture the panels. PV panels last for at least 20-30 years.

Dude. Go back and read the thread. They are NOT more efficient. Not even close. You have those same losses generating the power plus transmitting it over the lines, putting it in the battery and storing it. Then you NEED more energy to move the much heavier vehicle.

Face it. You are talking out of your ass and have no idea what you’re talking about.

And every Tesla vehicle ever sold has gotten HUGE subsidies. In regulatory credits, in tax incentives, in battery materials sourcing, in refining, in manufacturing and in subsidized infrastructure.

 

[acptulsa]

I am not talking out my ass...

Really? Let's see.

{????}
+ The answer is it depends.

+ it's doubtful.

+ You still can't directly compare ... (IDK what those are with any certainty).

+ ...the energy inputs are difficult to keep track of, and the data is hard to come by.

Sounds like you know full well that there are so many variables involved here that everyone talks out their ass about to some degree, if they talk about it at all. That's promising . That's the beginning of wisdom. So, the question is, is your methodology any good?

+ The vehicle's weight does not matter because we are comparing real-world results.

So, you think a 1975 Coupe de Ville...

...can move down the road just as economically as any other motor vehicle in the real world if repowered with modern systems, because weight doesn't matter?!

Uh huh. You aren't even an armchair engineer.

 

[GomerPile]

You have not refuted anything I brought up....snarky responses to a serious post tells me you don't have the mental horsepower to discuss this.

I'm not trolling you here....I listed a bunch of simple bullet points and you come back with a pic of a pink heavy car. BTW that tells me you completely did not understand the first 4 bullet points. Comparing how far 2 objects can travel with a fixed amount of energy intrinsically accounts for the mass of each object.

Really? Let's see.



Sounds like you know full well that there are so many variables involved here that everyone talks out their ass about to some degree, if they talk about it at all. That's promising . That's the beginning of wisdom. So, the question is, is your methodology any good?



So, you think a 1975 Coupe de Ville...

...can move down the road just as economically as any other motor vehicle in the real world, because weight doesn't matter?!

Uh huh. You aren't even an armchair engineer.

 

[acptulsa]

You have not refuted anything I brought up....snarky responses to a serious post tells me you don't have the mental horsepower to discuss this.

I'm not trolling you here....I listed a bunch of simple bullet points and you come back with a pic of a pink heavy car. BTW that tells me you completely did not understand the first 4 bullet points. Comparing how far 2 objects can travel with a fixed amount of energy intrinsically accounts for the mass of each object.

Weight matters. Battery weight is an inherent disadvantage to EV efficiency, just like the electric grid losses are, just like the need to tap the energy on board and conduct the chemical reaction on the fly is an inherent disadvantage to ICE efficiency.

Any person who ignores such an obvious, major factor is no engineer. He is merely a regurgitator of propaganda, insisting on the right to declare major factors irrelevant as it suits his bullet points, and not worth my time. All your protestations of sincerity interspersed with personal insults don't make this conversation any more rewarding, either.

If the incredibly heavy component is necessary to one system but not the other, and you're comparing the efficiency of one to the other, of course weight is a factor. Mass never factors itself out and you can't factor it out either. It weighs heavily. You don't even need an armchair engineer to explain that to you. Go ask a kindergartner to do it.

You remind me more of Goober, by the way. Gomer didn't tend to stick so hard to his guns unless he was actually right about something.

 

[GomerPile]

You are too stupid to have this discussion. I'm sorry.

Weight matters. Battery weight is an inherent disadvantage to EV efficiency, just like the electric grid losses are, just like the need to tap the energy on board and conduct the chemical reaction on the fly is an inherent disadvantage to ICE efficiency.

Any person who ignores such an obvious, major factor is no engineer. He is merely a regurgitator of propaganda, insisting on the right to declare major factors irrelevant as it suits his bullet points, and not worth my time. All your protestations of sincerity interspersed with personal insults don't make this conversation any more rewarding, either.

If the incredibly heavy component is necessary to one system but not the other, and you're comparing the efficiency of one to the other, of course weight is a factor. Mass never factors itself out and you can't factor it out either. It weighs heavily. You don't even need an armchair engineer to explain that to you. Go ask a kindergartner to do it.

You remind me more of Goober, by the way. Gomer didn't tend to stick so hard to his guns unless he was actually right about something.

 

[acptulsa]

You are too stupid to have this discussion. I'm sorry.

All because I think weight is a weighty subject. Funny what gets you cancelled in this modern culture.

 

[CaptUSA]

I am not talking out my ass, there are gaps in your mental model of EV's.

Ugh... Go back and read the data provided in the thread.

Seriously, we'd be better off as a species if those who didn't know what they're talking about would just acknowledge it rather than pretending like they do.

Yay - you bought a Tesla and took advantage of other people's money! Congrats! It does NOT make you an expert. I've run the numbers. I've had my team explore the studies. I've commissioned EPRI studies and have won awards. I've been a member of nearly every major coalition on the topic.

Part 1 - you are comparing gasoline to STORED energy. If you compare gasoline to the fuel to generate that energy, you would see that your efficiency numbers evaporate. Even most of the religious believers now accept that. In the "real world", it takes more energy to move heavier things. Put 3 300lb linebackers in your Chevette and you'll notice it'll take more energy to move your car. Weight matters! (not to mention the road wear and tear, safety, and insurance implications that are being paid for by others)

Part 2 - You are talking about the externalities of acquiring the fuel - this is pretty much a wash, but it's WAY worse for intermittent sources. Nukes are best, then hydro, then nat gas... Your "studies" cut out relevant pieces of data. If they didn't, they would get more accurate results. My teams and I have validated them.
Your "break-even" points rely on the same subsidies that you're ignoring. All-in costs are all that matter.