Electric car thread

[LegoSkier]

Amazon making deliveries in our hood with a Rivian made EV van now.

[Buzzworthy]

Same, they are funky cool.

[The SnowShow]

My colleague’s opinion on EVs…how do I even respond to this?

“Idealism is simply that. Ideal concepts. Guess what? None of the bull idealism is realistic.

The carbon footprint they leave is astronomical in comparison. Fastest way to destroy the earth is to mine in creation of the batteries required to operate them.”

[J. Barron DeJong]

My colleague’s opinion on EVs…how do I even respond to this?

“Idealism is simply that. Ideal concepts. Guess what? None of the bull idealism is realistic.

The carbon footprint they leave is astronomical in comparison. Fastest way to destroy the earth is to mine in creation of the batteries required to operate them.”

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/el...le-myths#Myth2

[mcski]

Mining rare earth minerals is no minor thing and will continue to increase and significant environmental impacts. I think that’s being underplayed as an issue. The rest kind of depends on how many of these future cars are powered by coal power plants. I’d take vehícle emissions over coal plant emissions any day.

The future is hydrogen fuel cells. Once they get that tech going, it will blow up big time

[gravitylover]

https://www.hydrogenfuelnews.com/hyd...a-sea/8556602/

[joeshek]

Mining rare earth minerals is no minor thing and will continue to increase and significant environmental impacts. I think that’s being underplayed as an issue. The rest kind of depends on how many of these future cars are powered by coal power plants. I’d take vehícle emissions over coal plant emissions any day.

The future is hydrogen fuel cells. Once they get that tech going, it will blow up big time

Pretty sure study after study has shown it doesn’t matter - EVs powered by 100% coal are still more efficient from a carbon standpoint than gas. They’re just that much more thermally efficient than small gasoline/diesel engines.

They’ve also demonstrated it’s cheaper and more effective to clean up emissions from a single point (eg coal plant) than it is thousands of vehicles. Particularly diesel vehicles for which particulate is still a big problem.

All that said, still preferable to run the grid on low/no carbon power.

[Core Shot]

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/el...le-myths#Myth2

Hmmm. Did you look at that chart?
EV has no GHG in use?

Unicorn farts. And fairy dust.

PS. What’s a lifecycle? Not defined. More BS.
My 2007 ice has 265k miles.

[J. Barron DeJong]

Hmmm. Did you look at that chart?
EV has no GHG in use?

Unicorn farts. And fairy dust.

PS. What’s a lifecycle? Not defined. More BS.
My 2007 ice has 265k miles.

Electric vehicles create demand for more electric generation capacity, and that new electricity is very green these days:



https://www.publicpower.org/system/f...022_Update.pdf

P.S. Just because you don’t see a detailed breakdown of it in the chart doesn’t mean that lifecycle isn’t defined for the calculations….

[Core Shot]

I’m pretty sure I have more solar than you. Just got a $6k check for credits last month. On one of the two arrays I installed with your tax dollars.

Fuel type by stage of development? Wtf is that chart? Capacity addition by year? Wtf?

Unicorn farts. It’s the future.

Lifecycle of EV is around 120k miles. Then spend $25k on a new battery pack? Same shit with a turbo boosted 4 banger. Turbo gets cooked and heads blow. I’m interested in EV. But we ain’t there yet.

[J. Barron DeJong]

I’m pretty sure I have more solar than you. Just got a $6k check for credits last month. On one of the two arrays I installed with your tax dollars.

Fuel type by stage of development? Wtf is that chart? Capacity addition by year? Wtf?

Unicorn farts. It’s the future.

Lifecycle of EV is around 120k miles. Then spend $25k on a new battery pack? Same shit with a turbo boosted 4 banger. Turbo gets cooked and heads blow. I’m interested in EV. But we ain’t there yet.

OK? Not sure what’s confusing about capacity added per year, but whatever…

Just cause we’re not there yet, doesn’t mean we won’t get there. We’re currently on a better trajectory than the most optimistic scenarios from some of the forecasts put out not too long ago.

Edit:

Perhaps this is the piece you’re missing?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_concepts

[Core Shot]

Yeah. Marginal change is good. On the right track.
I sucked the gubmint teat to build solar. Better me than chevron Exxon or shell. It’s all subsidized.

But my point is we’re a long way from full EV. In thirty years with enough storage and maybe fusion we can party like it’s 1999

[ötzi]

Was it the tires or the fake spaceship noise?

Some weird noise, I guess you could say it sounded like a fake spaceship.

[ötzi]

The future is hydrogen fuel cells. Once they get that tech going, it will blow up big time

? The tech is online now, and California has a network of fueling stations.

[gravitylover]

Yeah but it's still a net loss. There are a few things in the works to process hydrogen without using more power than it produces, like the article I referenced above, but none of them are scaled up yet.

[ötzi]

I haven't looked at the numbers but it would seem that using solar to produce the electricity to produce hydrogen would be pretty efficient.

[joeshek]

Yeah but it's still a net loss. There are a few things in the works to process hydrogen without using more power than it produces, like the article I referenced above, but none of them are scaled up yet.

Talk about moving the goalposts...so you want hydrogen technology to break the rules of thermodynamics, and create more energy than it takes to make? Electricity+Water->Hydrogen -> Electricity to run a motor and move. Every time you change states, you lose efficiency...that's just how things work.

LOL.

Comical how the fossil industry fanboys seem to forget the fact that they dig free stuff out of the ground and burn it at 20-30% efficiency, and then lose another 10% in a transmission, and so forth.

[WMD]

Hydrogen has lost the battle to power light vehicles. It takes too much energy to produce the hydrogen, then it is inefficient to convert the hydrogen to electricity to then power the vehicle. Way more efficient to just use electricity directly. Hydrogen is a good option for uses where the required battery would be too heavy, such as in long distance flight. But not cars.

EV's are way better than ICE vehicles when it comes to emissions. Even if powered by coal. There are lots of studies showing this.

Mining is an issue with modern living, but in a world where we electrify everything and power it with 100% clean energy, overall mining will decrease 80%.

To address climate change, never buy another fossil fuel powered anything. At least not a new fossil fuels powered thing.

I've got a Kia EV6 that I love and just ordered an F150 Lightning. Large EV's require batteries that are way too big so they use too many minerals ((1 F150 battery uses the same minerals as 3 Chevy Bolt batteries), but I live in WY and need to show people an EV truck can work.

All plausible paths to net zero emissions have us electrifying everything that can be electrified, and getting that electricity 100% from renewables.

Edit to add: see the post from Joeshek above. I didn't see it before posting this and it is right on.

[gravitylover]

Talk about moving the goalposts...so you want hydrogen technology to break the rules of thermodynamics, and create more energy than it takes to make? Electricity+Water->Hydrogen -> Electricity to run a motor and move. Every time you change states, you lose efficiency...that's just how things work.

LOL.

Comical how the fossil industry fanboys seem to forget the fact that they dig free stuff out of the ground and burn it at 20-30% efficiency, and then lose another 10% in a transmission, and so forth.

I'm not moving goalposts at all, just saying that there are potential options. I'm not really a fan of hydrogen but if someone figures out a reasonably efficient way of breaking it out it's certainly abundant enough to be a viable power source for a long time.

[J. Barron DeJong]

Hydrogen has lost the battle to power light vehicles. It takes too much energy to produce the hydrogen, then it is inefficient to convert the hydrogen to electricity to then power the vehicle. Way more efficient to just use electricity directly. Hydrogen is a good option for uses where the required battery would be too heavy, such as in long distance flight. But not cars.

EV's are way better than ICE vehicles when it comes to emissions. Even if powered by coal. There are lots of studies showing this.

Mining is an issue with modern living, but in a world where we electrify everything and power it with 100% clean energy, overall mining will decrease 80%.

To address climate change, never buy another fossil fuel powered anything. At least not a new fossil fuels powered thing.

I've got a Kia EV6 that I love and just ordered an F150 Lightning. Large EV's require batteries that are way too big so they use too many minerals ((1 F150 battery uses the same minerals as 3 Chevy Bolt batteries), but I live in WY and need to show people an EV truck can work.

All plausible paths to net zero emissions have us electrifying everything that can be electrified, and getting that electricity 100% from renewables.

Edit to add: see the post above. I didn't see it before posting this and it is right on.

Yep, hyrdrogen for long distance flight is the future.

[Ted Striker]

"God as my witness, I thought turkeys could fly"

[WMD]

Yep, hyrdrogen for long distance flight is the future.

^^That might not have been the best use of hydrogen. They should try fuel cells next time.

[NBABUCKS1]

where you at in wyo wmd?

The Evanston electriy america station made it possible for me to get your sister car the ioniq.

Hopefully fed funds will get more dc fast charging in wyo.

Daniel Junction would be perfect catches a lot of jackson traffic.

As much as I'd love an EV truck it's just not happening for me (every use case different obviously). I still have my gasser f150 that does everythign the ev can't but only driven 10% of the time.

[ötzi]

I have a great use case for an electric truck including free (solar) power but I finally found somebody to do the body work on my '04 Silverado so I'm driving that until one of us dies.

[WMD]

where you at in wyo wmd?

The Evanston electriy america station made it possible for me to get your sister car the ioniq.

Hopefully fed funds will get more dc fast charging in wyo.

Daniel Junction would be perfect catches a lot of jackson traffic.

As much as I'd love an EV truck it's just not happening for me (every use case different obviously). I still have my gasser f150 that does everythign the ev can't but only driven 10% of the time.

I'm in Lander. The family and I drove to LA in the EV6 last March, and it was easy once we got out of WY. That Evanston EA dc charger changes everything. They just put in fast chargers in Casper and Rawlins, too, opening up trips to the east and to Colorado. We definitely still need more, especially in the Cody area.

We have a diesel Ram 1500 now, and we realize the Ford Lightning won't be able to do everything we need (like Salmon River raft trips in ID with super long shuttles), but we are willing to figure something out when those issues arise. I totally get this doesn't work for everyone.