The Electric Vehicle (EV) discussion thread (Merged) (2 Viewers)

I want an EV. I'm invested in EV companies. I drool over the being able to have incredible power, low noise, no emissions, incredible wade depths and pretty much unlimited auxillary power.

No matter how I try to justify buying an EV it simply isn't an option for what I do. There simply isn't an answer for me unless it involves using multiple vehicles and being far less efficient at what I do. I also realize that I'm not only in that small percetile, I'm in that 1 in 10k+ area. In 6 weeks I put almost 40k miles on my car driving through rural West Tx, Oklahoma panhandle, Eastern Co and the central/northern plains. Just imagine what that trip would have looked like with an EV vehicle.

I just have to keep looking at the future and waiting. Unfortunately for me, it's going to take a major battery breakthrough before EV is an option. When that happens it is going to make gas power about as competitive as steam engines are now.

If there is any presumption going on, it's likely on your end. While I understand the reactionary comment because of the people that are completely unwilling to make any changes, there are some people that would have to make incredible changes to make an EV work for them. It is up to technology to close that gap.

I work in the auto industry and the EV topic is huge of course. Personally, EVs do not work for me. Charging and Range are big issues. I am in a city and do not have a garage. I have a parking "pad" off a public street. No place to even put a charger.

Another issue is lack of body style options. The trucks and SUVs are coming but not quite here yet. Even so the prices are absurd. For all intents and purposes they are luxury vehicles, and unclear how or when price points will drop into an affordable range for the average household when most households can only afford to buy used vehicles. Even a new ICE vehicle is beyond the reach of most.

There are about 54 million retail sales of new and used vehicles every year, including private party. ~40 million of those are used, for reasons of affordability. Completely unknown how EVs will translate to the used market, depreciation or value retention wise.

I'm also paid to be a realist at work. EVs are NOT Zero Emission. They are Zero "direct" emissions. They do not plug into unicorn butts. The power generated is still in large part generated by fossil fuels, especially in China and Asia. Even as is the grid could not handle everyone in an EV and to expand electricity in the medium term to accommodate mass adoption of EVs implies continued emissions, but they will happen out of sight at a smokestack, so you can feel better about it.

Beyond that everything that goes into an EV or the Solar panels that hopes hang on is non renewable. Finite. Batteries and Solar panels wear out. Rare earth minerals etc. are finite and have limited recyclability and dirty to mine, process and dispose of. If we envision that economies, populations and vehicle ownership will continue to grow, it raises interesting questions about how many years an EV world will buy us. When do we hit supply constraints or just run out of the raw materials? At what point to do we shift to "rare earth mineral" wars instead of oil wars/politics?

To me seems like the reality is going to be EVs having a certain ceiling and being one of a mix of powertrains (incl hybrid variants), unless governments try to tax or regulate you out of ICE/Hybrid altogether, which may happen down the road given the massive investments of Tesla and other automakers in EV technology. If the adoption rate stalls and prices don't come down and return on investment isn't materializing, the bailout for the industry will likely include laws to force you to buy the EV product.
 
Last edited:
I'm also paid to be a realist at work. EVs are NOT Zero Emission. They are Zero "direct" emissions. They do not plug into unicorn butts. The power generated is still in large part generated by fossil fuels, especially in China and Asia. Even as is the grid could not handle everyone in an EV and to expand electricity in the medium term to accommodate mass adoption of EVs implies continued emissions, but they will happen out of sight at a smokestack, so you can feel better about it.

Beyond that everything that goes into an EV or the Solar panels that hopes hang on is non renewable. Finite. Batteries and Solar panels wear out. Rare earth minerals etc. are finite and have limited recyclability and dirty to mine, process and dispose of. If we envision that economies, populations and vehicle ownership will continue to grow, it raises interesting questions about how many years an EV world will buy us. When do we hit supply constraints or just run out of the raw materials? At what point to do we shift to "rare earth mineral" wars instead of oil wars/politics?

Sounds like a cop out answer from someone with vested interest in ICEs thriving. The energy source is not the inherent fault of an EV. We need to reduce all forms of fossil fuel burning, not just cars. EVs address just part of the problem, yes, but they shouldn't take blame or be discarded for not solving the whole problem.

Battery recycling technology will continue to improve as there is more funding and motivation to do so. Humans have been harnessing the power of the sun for tens of thousands of years. You are right though, everything is finite and even the sun will burn out some day.
 
tenor.gif
 
Sounds like a cop out answer from someone with vested interest in ICEs thriving. The energy source is not the inherent fault of an EV. We need to reduce all forms of fossil fuel burning, not just cars. EVs address just part of the problem, yes, but they shouldn't take blame or be discarded for not solving the whole problem.

Battery recycling technology will continue to improve as there is more funding and motivation to do so. Humans have been harnessing the power of the sun for tens of thousands of years. You are right though, everything is finite and even the sun will burn out some day.
I have no vested interest in how the vehicle is powered. There is no "blaming".

We have a long way to go to be able to supply enough power from renewable "clean" sources to realistically enable the average consumer to own and operate an EV.

EVs will grow in the mix as the technology advances, but hyrids and ice will remain important for many decades and perhaps longer, unless there is regulatory pressure driven by donors and vested interests.

Then there are other things to consider like Biogas and Biodiesel, where investment and research continues. It may be a mix of solutions...
 
I am hoping to be able to get an EV next year,, but what is with the arrogant presumption over this? Nobody in the last few pages has insulted EVs...just questioned their viability for their own personal situation.

You kinda gotta be an arrogant butt crevasse to tell an anonymous person on the internet that you know about their personal situation better than they do.

Then @blackadder made factual, valid points about the viability of the current electric grid or even the availability of certain materials to create an EV inventory for a large scale movement away from ICE vehicles and a couple people act like he is a heretic yet can't provide a single reputable fact or reference to show he is wrong.

I love the new Hummer and F150 Lightning, although I do question the wisdom of creating a vehicle that can do 0-60 in 3 seconds while weighing 9000+ pounds
 
I'm that butt crevasse. I live on EV forums where folks who don't have EVs spew disinformation and ignorance about their operation. Many folks operate on the presumption that since it doesn't function exactly like a gas car, it is wholly unacceptable.

Why do people feel the need to express that something that they don't use, and likely don't understand, won't work for them? You don't see me, as a guy, going into wedding dress forums stating that wedding dresses don't work for me.

For each 1 person that accurately diagnosis the EV landscape for themselves and states that something doesn't work for them, there are 100 others who are clueless to the process that are influenced by that report. The only way to combat that flood of information that may not apply to them is to push back with the facts.

Unfortunately it's human nature to describe when something doesn't work. It drowns out the silent majority where everything works just fine.

So, folks can say what they want, of course. But don't expect to just get a free ride because EVs don't happen to work for you at this time. Every expectation that gets set in that scenario pushes EV adoption back because it requires a set of technologies that may never come in at a reasonable price point. I will continue to point out where EVs, in their current form, can work for the vast majority of drivers, and not few outliers with virtually impossible needs.

SFIAH
 
We have a long way to go to be able to supply enough power from renewable "clean" sources to realistically enable the average consumer to own and operate an EV.

That is also true of our energy grid in general though. We have a long way to go before all homes/factories/malls/etc. use sustainable energy sources. I see the same argument when people detract from cryptocurrencies saying they have a large carbon footprint.

Why put down EVs saying that they aren't truly zero emission because of the power grid they run on? The vehicles themselves are zero emission (similar to how cryptocurrencies don't inherently produce greenhouse gases), so the argument is just distracting. You want to have a conversation about how to get the power grid off fossil fuels, great, we can talk about that.
 
That is also true of our energy grid in general though. We have a long way to go before all homes/factories/malls/etc. use sustainable energy sources. I see the same argument when people detract from cryptocurrencies saying they have a large carbon footprint.

Why put down EVs saying that they aren't truly zero emission because of the power grid they run on? The vehicles themselves are zero emission (similar to how cryptocurrencies don't inherently produce greenhouse gases), so the argument is just distracting. You want to have a conversation about how to get the power grid off fossil fuels, great, we can talk about that.
It's not a distraction at all

It's idiocy to disregard what consequences are involved in making or disposing of an item. By your logic, the plastic in the ocean doesn't matter because that comes after it's used so it doesn't matter

What is logical is to make an apples to apples comparison from start to finish (and I am willing to bet that EVs still win)

Anything else is just biased, willfully ignorance
 
I'm that butt crevasse. I live on EV forums where folks who don't have EVs spew disinformation and ignorance about their operation. Many folks operate on the presumption that since it doesn't function exactly like a gas car, it is wholly unacceptable.

Why do people feel the need to express that something that they don't use, and likely don't understand, won't work for them? You don't see me, as a guy, going into wedding dress forums stating that wedding dresses don't work for me.

For each 1 person that accurately diagnosis the EV landscape for themselves and states that something doesn't work for them, there are 100 others who are clueless to the process that are influenced by that report. The only way to combat that flood of information that may not apply to them is to push back with the facts.

Unfortunately it's human nature to describe when something doesn't work. It drowns out the silent majority where everything works just fine.

So, folks can say what they want, of course. But don't expect to just get a free ride because EVs don't happen to work for you at this time. Every expectation that gets set in that scenario pushes EV adoption back because it requires a set of technologies that may never come in at a reasonable price point. I will continue to point out where EVs, in their current form, can work for the vast majority of drivers, and not few outliers with virtually impossible needs.

SFIAH
So what you are saying is you have no facts or statistics....just a stupid, inane metaphor that plays on gender stereotypes regarding traditional wedding attire?

Got it
 
Sounds like a cop out answer from someone with vested interest in ICEs thriving. The energy source is not the inherent fault of an EV. We need to reduce all forms of fossil fuel burning, not just cars. EVs address just part of the problem, yes, but they shouldn't take blame or be discarded for not solving the whole problem.

Battery recycling technology will continue to improve as there is more funding and motivation to do so. Humans have been harnessing the power of the sun for tens of thousands of years. You are right though, everything is finite and even the sun will burn out some day.
Just came across this and thought it plays into your point. I've always heard the emissions total is suspect for EV's, but if these folks are right one could anticipate hundreds of thousands of lower emissions miles.

 
It's not a distraction at all

It's idiocy to disregard what consequences are involved in making or disposing of an item. By your logic, the plastic in the ocean doesn't matter because that comes after it's used so it doesn't matter

What is logical is to make an apples to apples comparison from start to finish (and I am willing to bet that EVs still win)

Anything else is just biased, willfully ignorance
Thanks for the reply, though I don't appreciate being called an idiot. I also don't follow your argument. What consequences am I disregarding? The consequences of generating electricity by burning fossil fuels?
 
Thanks for the reply, though I don't appreciate being called an idiot. I also don't follow your argument. What consequences am I disregarding? The consequences of generating electricity by burning fossil fuels?
No you are ignoring the consequences of any choice you agree with while only paying attention to the consequences of those you are against

Just like I didn't call you an idiot, I said a particular choice is idiocy. They aren't the same thing at all

Would you prefer obtuse?
 
No you are ignoring the consequences of any choice you agree with while only paying attention to the consequences of those you are against

Just like I didn't call you an idiot, I said a particular choice is idiocy. They aren't the same thing at all

Would you prefer obtuse?
There's that word...obtuse. :hihi:
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom