Electric vehicle question
- Thread starter Jartard
- Start date
Right, because if we can’t do everything perfect, we should never do anything. That’s the loser’s motto.
no, you keep working on alternatives and improving green energy before you go to war on fossil fuels. to attack domestic fossil fuels first (maybe I should use the term NATURAL RESOURCES because it sounds better) that's the loser's motto and we are losing thanks to Biden and his idiot supporters.
Define support.
I support a variety of transportation platforms. So I guess in theory I support "electric vehicles". Which probably isn't what you mean
No, we shouldn't impose imperfect and impractical technologies across the United States where there are different needs where other technologies might be more efficient and practical.
This is the key word.
I am fine with some subsidies for buyers. It's subsidies to help emerging tech. That's cool. But imposing, well screw that. Although it is my belief there not be an imposing as soon as some want or say, and that includes California.
As I have noted, we are moving to rural-ish Kansas. I don't see a future in my remaining driving years where all electric will be a go there.
Actually yeah we do need to roll out imperfect technology because perfect technology doesn’t exist. Practicality is a real concern but the answer is to address what makes it impractical, not throw the entire thing out because we might have to solve a problem.
I'm involved in the car business too. Manufacturers are "imposing" this technology on dealers because the government is "imposing" mandates on them. For instance one domestic manufacturer is mandating $600k - $1.2 million in capital upgrades with $90k in annual fees.
Someone has to pay for this and that usually comes back to the consumer, and that will likely include ones in Kansas.
Almost 40% of all new vehicles are registered in 4 states. Like it or not CA and NY are dictating a lot of what we are talking about.
Two sides to every coin.
Who has ever said throw the entire thing out other than those calling for the retirement of ICE vehicles?
Yet on the flip side who has said 100% implementation?
California Enacts World-Leading Plan to Achieve 100 Percent Zero-Emission Vehicles by 2035, Cut Pollution | Governor of California
SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued the following statement after the California Air Resources Board (CARB) approved a rule requiring 100 percent of new car sales in California to be zero…
New York Tailgates California’s EV Legislation, Mandates 100% Zero-Emission Sales by 2035
New York follows California's lead, mandating 100% zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035. Learn more about Gov. Kathy Hochul's push for electric vehicles and the state's commitment to a cleaner future.
www.naturalgasintel.com
General Motors plans to exclusively offer electric vehicles by 2035
GM announced its "aspirations" Thursday as part of a larger plan for the Detroit automaker to be carbon neutral by 2040 in its global products and operations.
It's not like this is the first thing manufacturers have ever imposed on dealers lol. GM imposed on Cadillac dealers to get fancy, because too many were left over from the days when Caddy shared a show room with another brand. Pissed a lot of them off. You sell electric, you have to work on electric...although in reality, it's easier than working on gas cars.
Look, we know electric cars are the future. It's a point where as a business model the manufacturers have to get out in front. Can you name any horse buggy makers?
It's interesting watching how the manufacturers are doing this. Some are focusing on pricey models (Ford will absolutely find a way to fvck this up), Chevy has largely targeted the commuter because GM will let Caddy carry the halo.
I still don't know how the hell we are supposed to tow with these things, any farther than down to the local boat ramp. And so....
I mean gas will be available, and diesel too, there's just too much agricultural stuff and it's a long ways to everywhere. I don't have to buy a new car. Hell, I'll buy an older F150 with the inline six and drive it a million miles. Or a Taco with the four banger. That's pretty much already the plan, I will be selling the Mazda and buying a truck when we move anyways...and I really don't care for new trucks, they are too fancy, I like fvckin' real trucks.
Have you seen what older diesels are going for? People know what's up, and are planning to keep stuff a loooong time.
It's more than one manufacturer - it's an entire industry. Look, we recently spent $50k putting in a couple of chargers to be compliant which haven't been used much at all. Now we are being told we need to spend 10 times that amount and double that on an annual basis in order to remain compliant. And our local grid can't even support those new chargers.
Not necessarily, and certainly not in their current form.
Toyota has the global market share of Ford and Chevrolet combined. Toyota brought Prius to the mainstream. And yet guess what? They aren't necessarily betting the farm on EV's...
After Toyota's Mirai, the Japanese auto giant zeroes in on hydrogen buses and heavy-duty trucks
Toyota Motor Europe, CaetanoBus and Air Liquide have signed a memorandum of understanding.
I see a time in the future where there will be no private ownership of vehicles. You will pull out your phone and order up an electric, driverless pod to take you were you want to go.
This won’t be practical in rural areas so if you live there, you might be hooking up Old Betsy to a wagon to make your monthly trip to town.
This won’t be practical in rural areas so if you live there, you might be hooking up Old Betsy to a wagon to make your monthly trip to town.
As with anything humorous there is definitely some truth in that.
Henry Ford over 100 years ago helped build the American middle-class and gave millions of Americans an affordable way to travel. Today's business leaders (edited to add and political leaders) seem hellbent on destroying that middle-class and restrict the freedom to travel that the personal auto gave us.
Last edited:
I don't think hydrogen will be it.
Who is we? Need more details., because I find this stuff interesting.
I also think manufacturers will eventually push to get rid of dealers and go to direct sales. Which is going to be a political shit storm on the state level. This is 20-30 years down the line.
I wouldn't bet against hydrogen and I definitely wouldn't bet against Toyota.
I'm not strong in science but I think I make up for it in common sense and data analytics. I've heard some pros and cons of the new and emerging energy technologies. This much we know - there hasn't been a game changer yet to effectively and efficiently replace ICE vehicles but someone may be working on that as I type this.
Your thoughts on hydrogen?
The dealership I'm involved with. We installed 2 Level 2 chargers, one in service and one outside for the public, parts, tools, training, etc. to be EV certified that came to about $50k. Now Ford has come out with the Model E program that will require either 1 or 2 DC chargers per location plus software and connectivity subscriptions. Those are the $500k, $1 million and $7,500 per month costs that I referenced earlier.
Ford Model E is Blue Oval's new division dedicated to EVs, software
Ford Model E will directly target fast-moving EV companies like Tesla and Nio.
In many ways the historical dealership franchise model paved the way for the current franchise model that has given us McDonald's, Wendy's, Domino's, etc. It has had its place in business and may still have it in the future. The reason it has worked is, believe it or not, is it is more efficient in many ways and the manufacturers don't have the capital or the resources to replace dealers or they would have already done so. They have tried in the past.
Tesla has, and continues to shake-up the status quo. That has these manufacturers on edge and we know from history these manufacturers don't always anticipate the market, technologies, etc. or make the best decisions. Tesla is a flawed business model to a degree and recent production and quality issues as well as a 50% loss in market value are showing some of those weaknesses. But give Musk credit - he has accomplished more than I ever thought he could and I think he is forcing the other manufacturers to make some uncomfortable and expensive decisions. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
With regard to the dealership model that is already being played put in several states. WV sells about .5% of all new US vehicles but it is on the forefront of this fight. Here is a recent article about this in Automotive News.
Future of auto dealer franchise law is up for debate
Some states, including West Virginia and North Carolina, have adopted new language in dealer franchise laws to address such changes in the industry as over-the-air updates and vehicle reservations.
www.autonews.com
It's a hell of a lot more efficient to just use electricity to charge vehicles than to use electricity to make hydrogen. I also believe building charging infrastructure will be cheaper than hydrogen infrastructure. And for the average commuter, charging at home is appealing, it's one less thing to take up some time going to gas up, so there are demand forces in play.
Well of course. But I think the internet has changed some of the balance of needed capital and efficiencies.
Turns out, it is hard to mass produce vehicles. Who knew?
Ahhh . . . And every restaurant is a Taco Bell. Of course.
It may or may not be. I don't think anyone has a true grasp on how much the grid and related generating capacity will need to be upgraded in order to support more BEVs on the road.
Much of the existing liquid fuel infrastructure is already in place and could be converted to support FCVs.
How A Hydrogen Filling Station Works
With more hydrogen cars on the road, it’s worth taking a look at how hydrogen gets into a fuel-cell vehicle and out on the road.
This is true. The internet has changed virtually every aspect of modern life including distribution systems.
Honestly, I'm strongly considering the F-150 Lightning as my next vehicle. To be sure, that's 2-3 years down the road, but for me it would fit my needs perfectly. I only travel to work or around town, rarely tow, but do use the bed of my truck to haul things frequently. I absolutely would not want to convert both my of vehicles to electric as I don't believe the infrastructure is in place. However, being able to let my vehicle top off as needed at my home is appealing. It's especially appealing as the truck I have now (Titan XD) gets only about 12 MPG.
The technology to hold and dispense hydrogen doesn’t really have any overlap with gasoline. Different tanks, different dispenser.It may or may not be. I don't think anyone has a true grasp on how much the grid and related generating capacity will need to be upgraded in order to support more BEVs on the road.
Much of the existing liquid fuel infrastructure is already in place and could be converted to support FCVs.
How A Hydrogen Filling Station Works
With more hydrogen cars on the road, it’s worth taking a look at how hydrogen gets into a fuel-cell vehicle and out on the road.www.caranddriver.com
This is true. The internet has changed virtually every aspect of modern life including distribution systems.
Hydrogen might make sense for fleet vehicles. I don’t see it catching on for consumer cars.
Just to go back what I said weeks and months ago, this green energy worship is going to lead to the next war and it already has started.
China and Russia, among other actors, are going to try to corner up fossil fuels because they will become very valuable. Why? Your big stuff like heavy trucks, equipment that build things, military, etc. are still going to need it. Solar and batteries are not going to make things or heat your house or build nations. Then, China and others will try to corner the lithium and other rare earth minerals market and supply chain. Hello, Africa. Get ready for big time war.
This is a road to a major conflict and Ukraine is just the beginning.
China and Russia, among other actors, are going to try to corner up fossil fuels because they will become very valuable. Why? Your big stuff like heavy trucks, equipment that build things, military, etc. are still going to need it. Solar and batteries are not going to make things or heat your house or build nations. Then, China and others will try to corner the lithium and other rare earth minerals market and supply chain. Hello, Africa. Get ready for big time war.
This is a road to a major conflict and Ukraine is just the beginning.
Look we know you are a BEV fan but I said liquid fuel infrastructure and not necessarily the storage and dispensing. In fact the article I linked to referenced above ground storage for hydrogen vs below ground for gasoline.
Point is there are already tankers, pipelines and many retail outlets that could be used for the distribution of other liquid fuels including hydrogen.
I'm not betting against any future technologies, including BEVs, and certainly not against Toyota.
Can existing pipes and tankers be used for liquid hydrogen? I’m not saying they can’t, I honestly don’t know. I would think they can’t; the handling requirements for liquid hydrogen are very different than those for gas or even natural gas.
I think we ought to explore all potential technologies, I just don’t get why some people who are very anti BEV are so in to H2 cars. Especially those that freak out about BEV safety risks but have no issue with a 9000 PSI or whatever tank of hydrogen onboard.
H2 has some advantages and like I said for fleet cars it might make sense, but I think the disadvantages are bigger.
I just don't get why some people who are very anti H2 are so into BEV cars...
Well, BEV are much more efficient. You have to use electricity to create the H2, then you convert that back into electricity to use it. You lose efficiency at both steps. If you’re worried about the energy grid I think you’d pick the one that uses about half as much energy per mile.
When I was just a toddler, my parents bought me a tiny little car that I could pedal around. The way vehicles are going, looks like I might get to own a car with the same type of propulsion before I check out.
And vehicles that operate under a heavy load (either hydrogen fuel cell or ICE).
I think there is a difference between consumer and commuter vehicles.
Commuter car is probably the right term yeah.
And like you said, heavy load vehicles like, say, Big Rigs may be a great use case for H2. We should be developing H2 technology, it has its place. Maybe one day it’ll even bypass BEV, though I don’t really see how you get around the efficiency issues.
Dang. You know that you are directly responsible for the next hurricane Ian then right?
I do think BEVs can be effective as commuters in more urban areas. However it is not a one size fits all though many are wishing that it is through their attempts to force the issue and frame the narrative.
There are currently inherent deficiencies in BEVs that may or may not be corrected in the future. Technologies may render this debate meaningless sometime in the future, but for now it certainly isn't settled.
You seem to stress economy as a primary reason for driving a BEV in addition to a perceived lower environmental impact. However not everyone is of that economical mindset, that is why there are more expensive and less efficient vehicles being sold each and every da.y.
Do you really believe what you post about this??? While ignoring the infrastructure upgrades that will need to be implemented in order to keep up with the increasing electrical demand...
Can California really make power grid 100% green?
New legislation accelerates California's self-mandate to become a zero-emission state by 2024. But can California actually do it?
calmatters.org
My point is when comparing BEV to H2, it’s going to take about twice as much energy to make the H2 as it does to charge a BEV.Do you really believe what you post about this??? While ignoring the infrastructure upgrades that will need to be implemented in order to keep up with the increasing electrical demand...
Can California really make power grid 100% green?
New legislation accelerates California's self-mandate to become a zero-emission state by 2024. But can California actually do it?
Similar threads
