No Gas for New York

[pauly1119]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Why do people act like the only place you can live in CA is downtown SF or LA?

Seriously?

Same with Seattle and WA, people act like the only place you can live in the entire state is downtown Seattle, for some crazy reason.

I wouldn't live in Florida in a million yeas due to the lack of mountains and the sports/outdoor activities that go along with them. If you like the ocean and swamps though, Florida might be for you. For sure, there's a ton of homeless people in the Florida downtowns though, so to bring that one up is just bizarre.

CA use to be an amazing place to live however that has changed a great deal. Still have amazing weather but I won't be visiting back until it gets under control. Florida is full of sports, tons of things to do, very hot especially right now and yes we have our share of the homeless but its not even close to whats going on in CA, We also have one of the best Governors in the Country, hopefully that will change for your state soon. I retire in less then 5 years so who knows where ill end up? Maybe midwest? Someplace with a lot less people.

[JamesNoBrakes]

Originally Posted by pauly1119

CA use to be an amazing place to live however that has changed a great deal. Still have amazing weather but I won't be visiting back until it gets under control. Florida is full of sports

Hmm, well you do you. I'm not sure you know what state I'm in, based on your response.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Nilly Welson

Yeh..and 10 2 sec 0-60 runs and back for another 1 hour charge on thew Chinese made battery packs.

Originally Posted by ember1205

And five one-hour charges before the batteries swell and have to be replaced.

Except, no, that's not how it works.

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

<sigh> . . . it never ends

What you gain with EV performance - most of which is so traction-controlled and stability-controlled that the driver is all but irrelevant - comes at too great a cost in other aspects of car ownership and driving. At least for some of us.


Norm

SMH...what, you with anti-EV rhetoric again?? What did you think, I'm gonna change my mind bro? Gas powered engines are, at best, sloppy, extremely limited, and extremely inefficient. Sure they've come a long way since carb'd engines. But EV vehicles are gonna make gas powered engines look as bad as fuel injected engines made the carb'd engines look. And guess what. All the car nuts of the 70s and 80s freaked out and protested and swore up and down that fuel injected engines were the end of performance. And then what happened? They eventually found that carbs sucked and fuel injected engines offered twice as much HP while still be streetable and more fuel efficient and more reliable and without needing a device that relatively is equivalent to just pouring a bucket of gasoline into an engine. But if those nuts had it their way back then we'd all be stuck with 1100 CFM double pumpers thru a tunnel ram intake manifold and a round underhood open element filter sucking in hot air and we'd be making 400 HP but getting 5 MPGs. So yea, I'm all for evolving to the next step in performance.

Originally Posted by z28pat

I just don’t see how big oil is going to sit back and let their markets be taken away. That’s why they have lobbyists and politicians on the payroll, I mean campaign donations.

They won't have a choice because it's already happening.

Originally Posted by Checkmate1

New York has Blackouts occasionally with the current grid the way it is...now add umpteen electric cars...can the infrastructure even handle this?

Unreal.

Well obviously by the time it rolls around they will have built a better infrastructure that can handle it more effectively.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

It doesnt end. I dont care if an Electric sportscar or exotic gets to 60mph in 1 second. The "whoosh" in place of the engine sound & other missing visceral stimulations is a deal killer for me. EVs are great for daily running about or going to work. We'll probably have one eventually ourselves. But, weekends, after work & pleasure driving? Petrol baby, preferably in a Camaro. * Sets mic down *

You'll care when some yuppie in a Polo shirt and khakis driving it pulls up next to your ZL1 and utterly embarrasses you. And sure, I get it, now everyone's gonna talk about how they don't care about other cars being faster and yada yada. If that's true then good for you. But my thought is if you can't beat em then join em. I've come across enough of the faster EVs to know that I'm most likely gonna lose whether it's a roll or a dig. And at this point I'd rather be on the winning team and have the faster car.

Originally Posted by Chrome383Z

Agree if the car is designed for it. My only problem with electric is modifying would probably be extremely expensive. Basically you’ll have to buy the high performance models.

They days of buying a SS level car and modifying to ZL1 levels for example will probably be gone. That part sucks.

Well there will be a lot of them on the SS and ZL1 levels of performance. But the ones that will destroy a ZL1 or HC or C7 ZR1 will all be very expensive. Just like it should be tho. I mean think about it. How expensive would a car be that can beat a ZR1?

And initially there likely won't be any ways to modify them. But soon enough there will be. Look at the world of electric RCs. Those guys mod all the time. Those things can hit 50+ MPH. The Traxxis can hit 100 MPH, lol, and that is stock. There are ways to modify them. And there will be ways to modify EVs for sure. Just initially on a much more pricey scale. But for those who got the coin it won't be a problem.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Well there will be a lot of them on the SS and ZL1 levels of performance. But the ones that will destroy a ZL1 or HC or C7 ZR1 will all be very expensive. Just like it should be tho. I mean think about it. How expensive would a car be that can beat a ZR1?

And initially there likely won't be any ways to modify them. But soon enough there will be. Look at the world of electric RCs. Those guys mod all the time. Those things can hit 50+ MPH. The Traxxis can hit 100 MPH, lol, and that is stock. There are ways to modify them. And there will be ways to modify EVs for sure. Just initially on a much more pricey scale. But for those who got the coin it won't be a problem.

Join them we should, but not on these draconian terms of centralized control. I'm not familiar with the RC scene, but those modders must be running unregulated controller software, and that's how you preserve freedom in this "software is eating the world" technology scenario. The moment your every move is transmitted to the manufacturer and captured forever is when your ownership and freedom ends. (BTW your example is also a bit apples to oranges, because it simply plays to the "rebuilding from scratch using a smaller/less capable format, rinse and repeat" tech pattern, and one can't do with cars what was done with cell phones, because you can't ride in an RC.)

This is my main problem with electric vehicles, nothing wrong with their capable powertrains, but they're pretty much appliances on wheels... when were able to mod your microwave oven to fix anything? Or your smart TV, to turn off that pesky camera you didn't want in the first place, preserving other functionality? Even if you're willing to throw thousands of dollars at it (alluding to your coin argument)? Can you change one single feature on a Tesla? And even if you can hack something up, the mothership can and will bring the hammer down... I watch Rich Rebuilds on youtube and he's an unsung hero in many ways, but all that shouldn't be necessary.

It sure is an uphill battle, yet one worth fighting, first of all because of the potential you highlighted, but mostly because the alternative the industry is marching towards is downright dystopian. 100% open source software and right to repair with full documentation would be the ideal (and somewhat unattainable, yet worthy) moonshot goal here.

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Except, no, that's not how it works.

Except, that's exactly how it works.

One major flaw with EV's is the amount of time it takes to "fill the tank" compared to ICE automobiles. One way around it is to speed up the charging speed, but that increases heat internally in the battery. And that's highly detrimental to the life of the battery. So, a handful of high-speed, high-temp charges are going to do a reasonable amount of "damage" to a battery in terms of premature wear. Was my comment an exaggeration? Yes. But the point I was trying to make wasn't.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by ember1205

Except, that's exactly how it works.

Was my comment an exaggeration? Yes.

Then that isn't "exactly" how it works if you admittedly exaggerated then. You tried to make it seem worse than it is.

You guys are all acting like it's Doomsday or something. I mean, did you think we would be completely reliant on a limited resource forever? There are more and more people these days which means more and more cars which means more and more consumption. How long before we completely tax out a source that we are completely reliant on? And then what? The change was bound to happen and I prefer sooner rather than too late. If it bothers you that much then keep driving gas powered vehicles. Make your own gas like others keep suggesting. Eventually after you blow up a few engines chasing some dream and after seeing much newer and way faster cars out there you will fold and join the majority.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Then that isn't "exactly" how it works if you admittedly exaggerated then. You tried to make it seem worse than it is.



You guys are all acting like it's Doomsday or something. I mean, did you think we would be completely reliant on a limited resource forever? There are more and more people these days which means more and more cars which means more and more consumption. How long before we completely tax out a source that we are completely reliant on? And then what? The change was bound to happen and I prefer sooner rather than too late. If it bothers you that much then keep driving gas powered vehicles. Make your own gas like others keep suggesting. Eventually after you blow up a few engines chasing some dream and after seeing much newer and way faster cars out there you will fold and join the majority.

IMO limited resources is not a good argument at all, since most of electricity still relies on non-renewable nowadays, namely fossil fuels and nuclear reaction.

Granted, you could argue that it's more efficient to generate electricity and use it in EV, but your argument is mainly focused on how gasoline is a limited resource. Well, so is other forms of fossil fuels(other than maybe natural gas, though I am not sure how fast we are generating that versus how fast we are using it), and uranium.

Renewables are too dependant on geographical locations. You can practically build a fossil fuel or nuclear power plant anywhere you want as long as it's remote enough, but renewables? You are limited to where it is windy/has enough water flow/sunny(solar takes up a crap ton of land, BTW).

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

IMO limited resources is not a good argument at all, since most of electricity still relies on non-renewable nowadays, namely fossil fuels and nuclear reaction.

Granted, you could argue that it's more efficient to generate electricity and use it in EV, but your argument is mainly focused on how gasoline is a limited resource. Well, so is other forms of fossil fuels(other than maybe natural gas, though I am not sure how fast we are generating that versus how fast we are using it), and uranium.

Renewables are too dependant on geographical locations. You can practically build a fossil fuel or nuclear power plant anywhere you want as long as it's remote enough, but renewables? You are limited to where it is windy/has enough water flow/sunny(solar takes up a crap ton of land, BTW).

Not only does it still rely on it "mostly", there really isn't a way to get away from coal and natural gas burning to generate electricity. EV's are little more than a way for make fossil fuel use a "blind item" by using them to generate electricity and then telling the car owners that their new car "doesn't use fossil fuels." It's typical political double-speak by being technically true AND an evasive lie at the same time.

Want to have fun with a politician? Take up the argument that EVERY form of energy is ultimately solar energy. They will want to argue, so ask them to name a form of energy that isn't ultimately derived from the sun. They can't.

The issue with renewable energy is less about being "only where it's windy" (for example) and more about the sheer volume of real estate required for the amount of energy produced. The only place I could install solar panels on my home is on the roof (no ground-mounted options allowed, and it would consume my entire yard even if it were). Ok... No issue... 2600 square foot ranch, so LOTS of real estate on the roof. But, you can really only use half of it (has to face the correct direction) at best.

Central Air, filter for a pool, blower fans to circulate the heat in the winter, and a 3/4 full server cabinet that I use as a home lab for work. I couldn't produce enough power to run my house on the sunniest of days. So, what's the point?

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

IMO limited resources is not a good argument at all, since most of electricity still relies on non-renewable nowadays, namely fossil fuels and nuclear reaction.

Granted, you could argue that it's more efficient to generate electricity and use it in EV, but your argument is mainly focused on how gasoline is a limited resource. Well, so is other forms of fossil fuels(other than maybe natural gas, though I am not sure how fast we are generating that versus how fast we are using it), and uranium.

Renewables are too dependant on geographical locations. You can practically build a fossil fuel or nuclear power plant anywhere you want as long as it's remote enough, but renewables? You are limited to where it is windy/has enough water flow/sunny(solar takes up a crap ton of land, BTW).

Well I'm no expert. But to me, a limited resource is exactly that, limited. Meaning at some point or another it will run out. So is it better to just wait until we run out? Or is it better to start now before we run out. And I'm not getting into some long drawn out debate about it. Regardless of anyone's protests this is coming. Gasoline-powered vehicles will be phased out and EV will take their place. And soon after that gas-powered engines will slowly start to diminish until they are a distant memory. I'll be switching over soon because there is no since in waiting until the last minute. Like I said, can't beat em, might as well join em.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Well I'm no expert. But to me, a limited resource is exactly that, limited. Meaning at some point or another it will run out. So is it better to just wait until we run out? Or is it better to start now before we run out. And I'm not getting into some long drawn out debate about it. Regardless of anyone's protests this is coming. Gasoline-powered vehicles will be phased out and EV will take their place. And soon after that gas-powered engines will slowly start to diminish until they are a distant memory. I'll be switching over soon because there is no since in waiting until the last minute. Like I said, can't beat em, might as well join em.

What’s interesting is that I could argue both sides of the issue. Oil is a diminishing asset. So is cobalt and lithium used in EV batteries. There is no doubt that EV’s are coming. For once, automakers are ahead of legislation. Companies like GM,Volvo, Mercedes Benz, Ford, and many more have already stated plans and, more importantly, started spending billions of dollars to install EV capacity. Several have already stated that they are no longer working on new internal combustion engines. So that’s one side of the story.

The other side of the story is that internal combustion engines available today are more advanced than at anytime in history and are approaching theoretical levels of efficiency. What automakers are saying is they will not spend the extra money required to make them marginally more efficient. That development money is going into improving battery efficiency and electric motor efficiency. But many of the more efficient internal combustion engines that are available today will continue to be available for as long as it is economically feasible for the automaker(s) to continue to offer them. For most of us on this board, there will still be new ICE powered vehicles sold on the day we assume room temperature. Maybe not in some states, depending on what eventually comes of all the state mandates.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by ember1205

Not only does it still rely on it "mostly", there really isn't a way to get away from coal and natural gas burning to generate electricity. EV's are little more than a way for make fossil fuel use a "blind item" by using them to generate electricity and then telling the car owners that their new car "doesn't use fossil fuels." It's typical political double-speak by being technically true AND an evasive lie at the same time.

Want to have fun with a politician? Take up the argument that EVERY form of energy is ultimately solar energy. They will want to argue, so ask them to name a form of energy that isn't ultimately derived from the sun. They can't.

The issue with renewable energy is less about being "only where it's windy" (for example) and more about the sheer volume of real estate required for the amount of energy produced. The only place I could install solar panels on my home is on the roof (no ground-mounted options allowed, and it would consume my entire yard even if it were). Ok... No issue... 2600 square foot ranch, so LOTS of real estate on the roof. But, you can really only use half of it (has to face the correct direction) at best.

Central Air, filter for a pool, blower fans to circulate the heat in the winter, and a 3/4 full server cabinet that I use as a home lab for work. I couldn't produce enough power to run my house on the sunniest of days. So, what's the point?

Yeah, I love those "Zero Emissions" stickers on the back of EVs. Guess "Zero Local Emissions" will make people think a little too much, and we all know thinking is bad, very bad!

Now to be fair, most of the electricity in my province does come from hydroelectricity, so there is some truth in the zero-emission bit, though if you really want to get down to it, those machines need to be maintained and lubricated, and guess what is needed to make lubricants? Anyway, the local hydro generation is seeing some challenges with expansion between costly construction, COVID outbreaks, and some opposition. It will probably take a while to finish.

And you don't have to tell me how much solar power generation blows, I have experience with that firsthand in one of my university courses. Our final project basically had a building on campus assigned to a group, and we are supposed to install as many solar panels as we can with each of them positioned to achieve maximum efficiency. The simulations were done with System Advisor Model (SAM) which is made by National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The end result? No group was able to report a profit, or even close to minimal financial loss. IIRC the loss for the building assigned to our group was in the range of hundreds of thousands, if not close to a million over the life of the panel. It's too cost-prohibitive to install for little return on a very large scale.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Well I'm no expert. But to me, a limited resource is exactly that, limited. Meaning at some point or another it will run out. So is it better to just wait until we run out? Or is it better to start now before we run out. And I'm not getting into some long drawn out debate about it. Regardless of anyone's protests this is coming. Gasoline-powered vehicles will be phased out and EV will take their place. And soon after that gas-powered engines will slowly start to diminish until they are a distant memory. I'll be switching over soon because there is no since in waiting until the last minute. Like I said, can't beat em, might as well join em.

And my points flew right over you. We are using the same limited resources to make electricity, buddy. At least that's how most of the electricity is made. You can argue we will use it up more slowly that way, but we will still run out one day. It's not really addressing the issue, just delaying the inevitable. Then there is Martinjlm's point on the resources that make the batteries. Lithium battery recycling still has a long way to go, and its commercial viability is the biggest problem. Why bother recycling when it's cheaper to make it from the ground up?

Gas engine dying is also hilarious. Now, this is a bit cheating but think outside of cars for a bit. Sea vessels and ground vehicles are okay with anything electric because weight doesn't matter as much, and if your sea vessel is large enough, you can even just make the electricity onboard with nuclear reactions. But even then, if sea vessels need to travel a long distance, it's simply not feasible to just charge up a massive battery onboard. And then there is aviation... Even making those hybrid is a royal pain now, let alone fully electric. Good luck lifting up those heavy batteries with their awful energy density! It's extra fun to just know that aviation uses a ton of fuel as well, naturally. I hope you never travel around!

There is no point waiting until the last minute, you said? I see many reasons, since EVs are far from mature. It's kind of like buying those first generation Samsung foldable smartphones. You are paying a premium price for a tech that's not quite there yet, and some problems still need solving. Right now, the best thing to do when EV catches fire is to just wait for it to burn out, while we have a lot of experience fighting ICE fire at this point(and it is just physically easier to put out than lithium fire). I would rather wait and then buy a product that's superior to what your impatience-filled Kool-Aid made you buy with less money.

The only winners on public roads are the ones who don't get speeding tickets, BTW. Can't go fast when cops pull you over, can you?

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

j

There is no point waiting until the last minute, you said? I see many reasons, since EVs are far from mature. It's kind of like buying those first generation Samsung foldable smartphones. You are paying a premium price for a tech that's not quite there yet, and some problems still need solving. Right now, the best thing to do when EV catches fire is to just wait for it to burn out, while we have a lot of experience fighting ICE fire at this point(and it is just physically easier to put out than lithium fire). I would rather wait and then buy a product that's superior to what your impatience-filled Kool-Aid made you buy with less money.

The only winners on public roads are the ones who don't get speeding tickets, BTW. Can't go fast when cops pull you over, can you?

Part of what we are seeing here is that EVs are mature. EVs have progressed from being tiny short mileage science experiments (Mitsubishi iMiEV) or super pricey luxury vehicles (Model S, Taycan) to being mainstream moderately priced vehicles (Mustang Mach E, VW ID.4) and fully functioning, even commercial vehicle capable (Ford Lightning, Silverado EV) that are available in every form factor from small sedan to CUV to SUV to monster pickup (Hummer EV).

The next step is to improve the cost of EVs and improve charge times. There are people burning midnight oil to achieve both of those things. It will happen sooner than later. Part of the reason automakers are actually ahead of the government in embracing the move towards EV is the long term cost potential. Right now GM has somewhere around 12-15 vehicle platforms in development and production, depending on how you define platform. When GM shifts to mostly EV, they will be able to deliver most of their portfolio using two platforms, BEV3 for sedans and crossovers, BET for trucks and SUVs. They will be able to mix and match eMotors and drive units to achieve performance and capability targets. Battery sizes will be flexible like lego sets to deliver multiple options for range and vehicle output. Once these are in place, development costs per unit produced will drop dramatically.

2021 was the year that EVs crossed the 10% of sales line in California. 2022 will be the year they cross the 5% line nationwide. And as a nation, the US is far behind other leading car markets.

Still, ICE will not totally disappear. There are some use cases where ICE continues to work best. It’s not so much an “either or” scenario, it’s an “and” scenario.

[ember1205]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Part of what we are seeing here is that EVs are mature. EVs have progressed from being tiny short mileage science experiments (Mitsubishi iMiEV) or super pricey luxury vehicles (Model S, Taycan) to being mainstream moderately priced vehicles (Mustang Mach E, VW ID.4) and fully functioning, even commercial vehicle capable (Ford Lightning, Silverado EV) that are available in every form factor from small sedan to CUV to SUV to monster pickup (Hummer EV).

The next step is to improve the cost of EVs and improve charge times. There are people burning midnight oil to achieve both of those things. It will happen sooner than later. Part of the reason automakers are actually ahead of the government in embracing the move towards EV is the long term cost potential. Right now GM has somewhere around 12-15 vehicle platforms in development and production, depending on how you define platform. When GM shifts to mostly EV, they will be able to deliver most of their portfolio using two platforms, BEV3 for sedans and crossovers, BET for trucks and SUVs. They will be able to mix and match eMotors and drive units to achieve performance and capability targets. Battery sizes will be flexible like lego sets to deliver multiple options for range and vehicle output. Once these are in place, development costs per unit produced will drop dramatically.

2021 was the year that EVs crossed the 10% of sales line in California. 2022 will be the year they cross the 5% line nationwide. And as a nation, the US is far behind other leading car markets.

Still, ICE will not totally disappear. There are some use cases where ICE continues to work best. It’s not so much an “either or” scenario, it’s an “and” scenario.

So, which is it? EV's ARE 'moderately priced' or there needs to be continuing improvement on the cost? I don't believe we are EVER going to see electric vehicles at price points to compare with their ICE counterparts (with everything else being the same - size, passenger capacity, cargo, range per "tank", etc.).

While the vehicle part of EV may have a level of maturity, the power part does not. We need to lighten batteries, reduce size, increase charge capacity, decrease charge time, reduce hazard risk during charging, improve ability to recycle, decrease cost, and significantly improve reliability. And that's just off the top of my head.

I still genuinely don't understand why there was never a market for a diesel electric automobile... All the benefits that everyone decries from the electric motor part of the world combined with a smaller overall battery pack that can be kept charged by a tiny diesel engine (which could be controlled with stop/start technology). Seems it would be super reliable, able to traverse long distances, able to actually refuel in short orders of time, and would significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions through the way the engine operation would be controlled.