I would say lithium open pit mining does more damage than a field of pump jacks (lets not even discuss the use of petroleum solvents and other derivatives). Disposal to third world countries. Plus that interesting argument of new vehicles vs positive impact of just fixing what we have now. If manufacturers and society cared about the environment.... repowering older vehicles over cash for clunkers... but capitalists have to get their cut of the pie.


Politics and ****ed up ideology. America was never great. Just less ****ed than the tsars and dynasties.

More "nonsense":

https://www.foxnews.com/world/myanmar-tragedy-exposes-dirty-underbelly-green-energy

How did you pump the gas without electricity? If there is electricity to pump gas, there is electricity to charge batteries.

I read the item below yesterday. I think the guy is trying a little too hard on some of the points, but the reality is that EVs are the future and most if not all of the anti-EV talking points aren't holding up to scrutiny anymore.

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4844

This coming from a guy (me) who drives a 1997 Land Cruiser on 35" tires to work everyday. SmileWavy

EVs absolutely are the future, basically assured at this point. The timeline is open for debate however.


In the year 2022, if you are an unemotional robot, the most compelling automotive choice for 95% of people is PHEV.

Team A: EV or Die
Team B: Carbs for life bro
Toyota: A prius prime is reasonably priced and is basically best of both worlds
Team A and B: Shut up Toyota it doesn't have fart mode and is slow.

On a recent road trip to far eastern Pennsylvania we stopped a few of the very large truck stops & gas stations. Hundreds of 18 wheelers and countless cars all get fueled up and bladders emptied. Then get back on the interstate and the traffic was three lanes of vehicles for as far as the eye could see, all burning petroleum. Maybe a dozen electric cars in the lot of them. No electric semis at all.

Maybe someday, but I just can't fathom the energy needed to move all that traffic day after day, all year long. We don't have nearly the electricity available to make a dent in it now.

How does a 100 electric cars and hundreds of semis get charged in short order without a local power plant?

if you are spending more than 50k buying a car, and you arnt buying a model 3 performance pack, you arnt thinking straight.

EVs are just better cars, faster.

fixed it for you.

we truck gas hundreds of miles, everywhere, dumbest system ever.

Trailers are where the mass is.
That is where the assist can be placed. Start. Stop. Start. Stop.
Retrofitting is easy.
It just needs a variable go/stop pedal signal.
It can even use lead-acid....
The key is large capacitor storage to buffer transition with individual battery heat monitoring to prevent failure.
A little push goes a long way in reducing wear on other components.
-----------

In 2006(?) I once tried to patent a 3-rotor electric motor. Damn the "disruptive technology" full speed ahead. No company would return a call. Even the Japanese.

Designed to optimize the electro-magnetic interaction surfaces so that every amp could be turned into kinetic energy and/or every 'wasteful' braking condition could do the same. It will eat anything thrown at it and poop gold. Hybrid with appropriate flywheel mass and PTO to battery/other. No more stuck drill bits with the motor smoking in counter-torque. Even tiny it can turn into a hammer drive when spun up if needed. Every electron accounted for. My idea of near-zero-friction "air bearings" is also known as "rifled bearings" and invented long ago. Just missing is the high psi air/oil injection mode.

Plate configuration is much more efficient than a cylinder motor(think cheater bar and the stuff that built stone monuments in the days before modern metallurgy).

And yet we are in 2022 still being sold stones and told it's the best humanity can achieve. Made to break. Like Inuits are being sold ice.

Steam from cooling towers.

those arnt coal power plants.

and coal makes up 21% of electrical power generation in the USA.

the meme is bush league at best.

When the electricity goes out, there are a LOT of stations have a small generator to run the pumps. Some of the people who run those gas stations have a brain in their head.

Yeah, steam from cooling towers, all those plants put out. That, and unicorn farts

I agree, utter nonsense.

It should read, exponentially more damage

:rolleyes:

You know perfectly well that it takes only a small gas generator to deliver magnitudes more energy out of a gas pump. Which in turn fuels magnitudes more miles driven than could be had with said generator juicing maybe one EV, partially.

A lot of y'all sound like old men sitting on your porches yelling at passers-by about EVs. They're happening whether you like it or not, and they're cleaner than IC engine transportation whether you like it or not. You talk about upstream pollution for EVs as if there wasn't also upstream pollution for gasoline propulsion.

Class 8 trucks, especially long-haul trucks, are a hard case. Realistically I see hydrogen fuel cell range extenders as a strong likelihood, but as far as batteries go, lithium-based power density is marginal because it's really difficult to package it acceptably within things like wheelbase limitations for Class 8 tractors. NMC (nickel manganese cobalt) batteries probably have more promise for that use case. Classes 6 and 7 are easier. I drove an International electric truck today (Class 6, dry van body) and it was very impressive.

Sure sure... and you sound like a guy on the street corner shouting the EV is near!

Seriously though, while both EV and ICE cars have upstream pollution, EV's have much more. But that is not the beef of this topic...

EV's rely on high energy efficiency to offset their horrible batteries. ICE cars have excellent energy density but (relative) crap conversion/thermal efficiency - but that has been changing, and changing much faster than batteries have gotten better.

And then there is infrastructure. The "rapid" charging stations are ridiculously expensive, especially considering how slowly they 'pump' the electrical energy. Sure, gas stations are not cheap, but they have massive throughput from a single pump. - how many pumps are at your local Costco? Are they busy? How many rapid chargers would be needed to compete with that energy throughput? Can the grid handle that?

No one has used PCBs in transformers for years. They are filled with a light oil for free circulation.

BTW, PCBs were a Federal mandate...for safety! And the PCBs are not dangerous. Just the Dioxin contamination. Like Agent Orange...

there are 3 gas stations on the same corner of the street 4 blocks from my house.

what the actual **** kind of argument is "EV infrastructure is too expensive"

insane.




we are going to switch to EVs, and not because they are greener, and not because they are cheaper. we are going to switch to EVs because they are better cars. period. the model 3 performance pack is currently a better car than cars cost 2 and 3 times as much. and can do everything than can do with the AC on carrying 3 passengers. end of story. EVs already won. its over. if you cant see that, you are lost.

We will never scale to producing 10 million new EV cars a year. Simply not going to happen.

I am not anti-EV in anyway shape or form. I will be looking at a hybrid small truck once I no longer need a 1/2 ton truck...so spare me the insults.

https://the-pipeline.org/piercing-the-electric-car-fantasy/

Right now, electric vehicles make up about 1 percent of America’s car fleet. If they pose challenges for the electric grid already, what will the challenges look like if the EV fleet reaches 50 percent of the auto fleet as Biden proposes? No wonder Elon Musk says we’ll need to expand electric power generation by 30 percent or more to meet the demand of a larger EV fleet on the road. And yet it is supremely uncouth to point out that electrons for EV batteries are generated mostly from fossil fuels right now, and thus EVs may not deliver a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions when a proper life-cycle analysis is done.

Economist Mark Perry notes that nearly two-thirds of current U.S. electricity is generated by coal and natural gas, and the figure rises to 86 percent if you include nuclear power, which environmentalists irrationally hate and are trying to eliminate. When you raise this problem, you are met with a hail of green indignation about how we’re starting on an “incredible transition” to a carbon-free energy future (a phrase Biden and energy secretary Jennifer Granholm have both used repeatedly with the unsettling grin of the chiliastic fanatic). “EVs are just an early step toward the carbon-free nirvana, which is just a few hundred thousand more windmills and square miles of solar power away!”

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1660222558.jpg

A recent little-noticed report from Volvo punctures this green myth, even though the very green Volvovians try very hard to obscure this conclusion. The report notes what a number of neutral analysts have pointed out for some time now: EVs are more material-intensive than old-fashioned gasoline-powered cars, requiring more steel, aluminum, copper, and other rare earth minerals and specialty products like magnets that must be mined (which environmentalists oppose) and require an energy-intensive process to manufacture into shiny EVs. And that’s before you get to the huge quantity of lithium needed for the batteries.

Thus it is eye-popping when Volvo admits that the carbon footprint for the manufacturing of its C40 Recharge electric car is 70 percent higher than its comparable internal combustion version of the car (the XC40). But not to worry, says Volvo: you’ll make up the higher manufacturing emissions when you drive the emission-free EV far enough.

How far? Kudos to Volvo for calculating that: at the world’s average electricity sourcing today, a C40 driver would need to drive his car 68,000 miles to reach a break-even carbon footprint with a gasoline-powered model. The average American drives about 14,000 miles a year, and thus would need to drive his Volvo EV almost five years before reaching a lower carbon footprint. What if we had a grid that was 100 percent wind- or solar-powered? Volvo calculates that an EV driver would still need to drive 30,000 miles before reaching a carbon-footprint breakeven point with a gasoline car.

Most charging will take place during off peak hours where we have excess capacity.

Today's EV's aren't for everyone. If you commute 50 miles a day they can be a great fit. If you haul a trailer every day, not so much.

I have a neighbor that owns a Mustang Mach E. He says it is the best thing since sliced bread.