Posted on 10/11/2019 9:33:04 AM PDT by karpov
Sounds more like it but I sure as hell wouldn’t put $10,000 (that’s just the part folks) into a freakin leaf.
I had an EV 2 years, and long wanted to charge it via propane-powered generator. Only reason I didn’t is the hours of noise in doing so. Was happy I at least had that option for short-term power outages (figured it would take 1 gas-grill propane tank to charge, kept a few tanks on hand).
And most won't keep running without coal-fired power plants to recharge them.
That was an early model; specialized batteries are presumably hard to come by for a small-production vehicle. For that price you could buy a used Leaf now and drive it for years.
That is whyvI dont waste my time with Rush.
A few years back, I read about BMW making an electric Mini Cooper concept car. The story mentioned the cost of the lithium batteries were $30,000+. Plus the price of the vehicle (without the 4 cylinder engine of course). And then you have the weight of the batteries. And charging times.
When was this published? The 1990s? So many statements are nonsensical on the face of it.
Absurdity: Electric vehicles ... won’t survive without subsidies. <<
Reality: The federal Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax credit is for $2,500 to $7,500 per new EV purchased for use in the U.S.... This tax credit will be available until 200,000 qualified EVs have been sold in the United States by each manufacturer... (Source: energy.gov). The source further states that “Currently, no manufacturers have been phased out yet,” but Tesla now has been phased out. If you think the loss of a $6,000 tax credit is going to drive Tesla out of business, you’ve never met a Tesla driver.
Absurdity: Advocates claim that EVs are far simpler machines than combustion engines. But the essential “engine” for both is similarly complicated. ... It’s every bit as complex as—and far more expensive than—the combustion-mechanical drivetrain that it replaces.
Reality: No-one says the EVs are CHEAPER. They’re SIMPLER in that they are solid-state. If anything, Tesla has been daramatically under-selling durability, just as Toyota did for the hybrid.
Absurdity: China alone produces 60 percent of the world’s lithium batteries...
Reality: Tesla’s US cars are powered by batteries made at Tesla’s Gigafactory One, using components from Japan.
Absurdity: ... and there are no plans to develop a U.S. supply chain.
Reality: Tesla in fact is trying to vertically integrate its entire supply chain, to reduce dependence on Panasonic, as Panasonic is a foreign supplier.
Absurdity: “In reality, 96 percent of America’s consumer vehicles are gasoline-fueled ICEs, and 3 percent have the diesel option,”
Reality: Tesla alone accounted for 3% of all vehicle sales last quarter. That’s triple this estimation, six times if you take the misleading inference the article is referring to domestic auto manufacturers. In other words, Tesla already exceeds the 4%.
Absurdity: “And arithmetic reveals that even a 100-fold growth in EVs wouldn’t displace 10 percent of world oil.”
Reality: A preposterous failure of elementary-school math??? A 25-fold growth in EVs would displace 100% of world oil. (Nearly zero percent of U.S. electricity is generated from oil, folks.)
The grand-daddy of all stupid assertions: In one of history’s ironies, the Tesla Model S was introduced in 2012, exactly 100 years after Studebaker ended production of its lineup of electric cars... Changing a car’s fuel source is about as revolutionary as changing the feed for a horse.
Reality: We’re not talking about the 1990’s Chevy Volts. Car buyers want torque, horsepower, comfort, a quiet ride, longevity, etc. Electric cars provide all of these at a lower cost of ownership. A cost of ownership BELOW gas-powered alternatives.
DEFINITLY not lighter. My Tesla Model 3 weighs about 4,400 lbs.
Your wrong; most folks up here (Northern California), those of us who actually work for a living will tell you that electricity BURNS TREES, and houses and livestock, and PEOPLE.
Just as a matter of interest, San Franfreako, and “Sacramentally Ill” are NOT considered Northern California.
1 million miles?
“They are far more efficient and simple.”
I was reading about not enough rare earth something or other. We need different teck and need to push it.
While watching out for the law of unintended consequences so we do not do greater damage to our earth.
“I own battery powered ...”
I have some of those but not the large-energy ones like a chainsaw or mower because the batteries are real expensive and they don’t have the power of the gas-powered versions.
I’m very impressed with my battery powered drill. I use it regularly but its running time is minimal.
A few years ago we were told that Hydrogen Fuel Cells were the next energy source - The Fork Lift guys tried them and dropped the fuel cell programs after the Government $$$money was shut off. A lot of high and hidden maintenance costs involved with running Hydrogen Fuel Cells.
“1 million miles?”
Yes.
Last I checked a while ago, they’d tested major drivetrain components to 1,000,000 miles, and batteries were proving only 3-5% degradation after 100,000 miles (subsequent improvements made thereto).
Add to that the significant decrease in brake wear, thanks to regenerative braking producing electricity instead of brake pad dust.
A million miles is just 10 hundred thousand miles. EVs having eliminated most of the hard-wear components, it’s an attainable goal.
It’s a fast improving industry; try to keep up.
You can now buy a ~300 mile Tesla in the $30,000 range, charges in about 20 minutes.
“Reality: No-one says the EVs are CHEAPER.”
True, talking up-front costs.
Getting >5x more range per dollar than ICE cars, and needing much less maintenance, in the long run they’re cheaper - even, arguably, free.
But it should not be the Federal Government creating those “messes”.
The government choosing which technology will be the next mess is detrimental to the economy.
Tacking money from one citizen so that another citizen can be the next solar power millionaire whether his company is successful or not is immoral to say the least and grand theft to say the worst.
Solyndra and similar companies received massive amounts of federal loan guarantees and went bankrupt leaving the US government to make good on those loans while their founders and stockholders made millions.
Tesla is similar in that the company would not exist without government backing.
The Federal Government has no right to decide the direction technological progress should be moving. Without government interference other technology more beneficial to our nation might be advancing.
May be heavier, but the drive feels lighter due to power/responsiveness/control.
The reliance on limited resources is noted, and increased demand for the cars creates increased demand for alternate solutions. Just recently I heard of a breakthrough obviating the need for rare-earth resources for EVs.
Yes, Solyndra was (like many) just a front to abscond with free taxpayer money. You’ll notice it/they no longer exist.
Tesla WOULD exist without gov’t funding, though might have taken longer to get to this point. Musk’s goal is to create a viable EV company, and while others have gone thru the motions to get the money & run, Tesla is still working hard to advance & has been producing good vehicles for years (charlatans don’t achieve actual productivity & advancement). He’d have been stupid to _not_ accept the money Congress voted to give away to promote EV development & acceptance, just like you’d be stupid not to accept the mortgage interest deduction on a home.
I’ll agree the gov’t should not be trying to direct such development. Insofar as it does, EVs are a good direction for many reasons.
Your valid complaint should be taken up with your congresscritter, not Elon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.