TheSamba.com Forums
 
  View original topic: Electric vehicles are bad Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 126, 127, 128 ... 183, 184, 185  Next
nbvolks Sun Mar 26, 2023 5:22 am

Floating VW wrote: It was mentioned earlier (might even have been by me) that Dodge had decided to go all electric and stop putting gasoline engines in their muscle cars. . .

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/17/dodge-unveils-electric-muscle-car-concept-charger-daytona-srt.html

. . . only to backpedal a week later and admit they might, well, just switch the V-8 to a twin-turbo V-6.

https://www.drive.com.au/news/dodge-challenger-charger-six-cylinder-rumour/

Guess what?

Toyota just did the same thing:

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/29/toyota-ceo-stands-...icism.html

This is why I don't believe the hype about EV's replacing ICE by 2035, or whenever. It has to make sense or it's not gonna work, and right now, EV's just don't make enough sense.

P.S. Fun fact: Over the past 7 years, Walmart has managed to install charging stations at about 100 of their stores, nationwide. The cost to charge your EV while you shop there varies, but in "most states" they "will charge you 43 cents per kWh if you're a guest."

https://www.slashgear.com/1135151/heres-how-much-it-costs-to-charge-your-ev-at-walmart/

So, if you drive a Volvo C40 Recharge, it will cost you approximately $30 to get about 200 miles of range. To put that into perspective, that's the equivalent of an ICE vehicle that gets a 23 mpg at $3.50 per gallon of gas. The Tesla Model 3 is a little better at about $22 to go 200 miles.

To be fair, some of those Walmart's charge considerably less to charge your EV, though.

Toyota and Dodge...two choice examples. One, who's entire ethos as of the past 20 years has been loud muscle cars, backed by Stelantis, which is behind the game on EV R&D. And Toyota, who put ALL their eggs in the FCV development basket, and only as of last year admitted they needed to catchup with BEVs, and literally threw together the godawful bz4x (aka: Subaru Solterra).

And Wal*Mart didn't install chargers, Electrify America did, placing them in Wal*Mart parking lots. EA is not owned or part of Wal*Mart, it's part of VW.

Anywho, interesting choice to mention the Volvo C40, since we have a Polestar 2, which is essentially the same car (same battery pack, same charging speeds). So I can tell you exactly how it actually works. Having charged at EA charges at a Wal*Mart. Here I am at one:



As the article you posted says, some states have you charged by the minute, some by the kW used. How much have I spent? $0, but that's because Volvo/Polestar have a deal with EA for free charging. But, even if I was charged it would be no more than ~$15 for a 20%-80% charge (why people stop at 80% rather than go to 100% is another topic).

If I were to leave that at 80% and drive to 0% (wouldn't do that, but for arguments sake), that would mean approximately 210 miles. 210/15=14 miles/per $. Average car in the US gets 25mpg, current gas cost is $3.50. So, that same 210 miles would mean 210/25 = 8.4, that times the cost of $3.50, means you spent $29.40 to go that same distance.

Bear in mind, that EV cost is IF you didn't have the free charging agreement, and IF you weren't an EA member. So basically the highest price a user could pay. It also doesn't take into account that DC fast charging like that is not the normal way to charge. Level 2 charging, at home or elsewhere, is even cheaper.

oprn Sun Mar 26, 2023 6:15 am

Seeing as you love the throw around numbers, letís see you calculate the total cost of driving that car for the next 10 years including the purchase price and a battery change which it will need.

I just bought a good low mileage used Golf and expect it to easily last that long. I will do the same then we can compare some real life figures. Based on todayís fuel and power prices.

nbvolks Sun Mar 26, 2023 6:22 am

oprn wrote: Seeing as you love the throw around numbers, letís see you calculate the total cost of driving that car for the next 10 years including the purchase price and a battery change which it will need.

I just bought a good low mileage used Golf and expect it to easily last that long. I will do the same then we can compare some real life figures. Based on todayís fuel and power prices.

It doesn't "need" a battery change at 10 years any more than an ICE "needs" an entire drivetrain swap at 10 years. I feel like we're going in circles on this. Again, there are BEVs on the road right now that are older than 10 years, and still running around.

Right now, in this world, our BEV, which had a similar purchase price to our ICE, is cheaper to own and operate, full stop.

Bonesberg55 Sun Mar 26, 2023 1:33 pm

Alright, a cat fight! Got enough Friskies?

Mickey bitsko Sun Mar 26, 2023 2:06 pm

I think it's been asked before, what is the long term environmental benefit of an ev ? Why does the government keep pushing this on everyone, ulterior motive I suspect.
All you ev owners, I'm happy for you, what was your motivation to go ev?
Ev's to save the world is a pipe dream.

nbvolks Sun Mar 26, 2023 4:24 pm

Mickey bitsko wrote: I think it's been asked before, what is the long term environmental benefit of an ev ?

Greenhouse gas reduction. Because, shocker, the memes you might see or even share making a joke about an EV powered by a coal fired power plant may not actually have a connection to reality.

They're a mitigation strategy. That's a word I've found is a tough sell among the crowd of black/white, all/nothing, mentalities.

Mickey bitsko wrote: Why does the government keep pushing this on everyone, ulterior motive I suspect.

Loaded question. Set your guns to tangent!

Mickey bitsko wrote: All you ev owners, I'm happy for you, what was your motivation to go ev?

1. Needed another car.
2. I may enjoy my analog things, but I'm a tech guy at heart.
3. POWAAAHHHH!!!
4. Cost savings.
5. Looking forward and recognizing that at this point, comparatively, the BEV was the right conscientious choice to make.

Mickey bitsko wrote: Ev's to save the world is a pipe dream.

Again, something doesn't have to be everything, to be an improvement or mitigation strategy. A lifebuoy out in the open ocean isn't going to provide you everything you need, but I'm going to guess you might still hold on to it.

Mickey bitsko Sun Mar 26, 2023 5:00 pm

Very good explanation, if you're not a politician, you could be.
The problem I have is, Ev's are cleaner for the environment, no, they are not, so stop the bs.
We're told ,our climate is dying , we're being told, it's almost too late, we must stop driving ice vehicles, stop using gas powered yard equipment, stop using gas stoves, next will be gas dryers then gas water heaters.
So , where does it end ? It's all bs to push the next fad in transportation.
I don't fault anyone, get what the hell you want it's your money.
But, Don't be in denial, it's pretty bad for the environment digging/mining for chemical elements, especially, at the volume required to build millions if not billions of batteries

nbvolks Sun Mar 26, 2023 5:18 pm

Mickey bitsko wrote: Very good explanation, if you're not a politician, you could be.
The problem I have is, Ev's are cleaner for the environment, no, they are not, so stop the bs.
We're told ,our climate is dying , we're being told, it's almost too late, we must stop driving ice vehicles, stop using gas powered yard equipment, stop using gas stoves, next will be gas dryers then gas water heaters.
So , where does it end ? It's all bs to push the next fad in transportation.
I don't fault anyone, get what the hell you want it's your money.
But, Don't be in denial, it's pretty bad for the environment digging/mining for chemical elements, especially, at the volume required to build millions if not billions of batteries

Yeah...they are better. I don't know why that's such a hard pill to swallow. Again, are they a panacea? Nope. Again the word of the day is mitigation. They are incrementally better, and are made increasingly better the more efficient your power generation source is. That's a reality that can never be true for an ICE vehicle.

Don't be in denial that somehow the extraction, refinement, delivery, and final use process for ICE is not itself an existing problem, or that production intensity surrounding modern ICE vehicles isn't also a consideration.

But again....m I t I g a t I o n

Xevin Sun Mar 26, 2023 7:55 pm

ICE products in the last 100 years have brought on unique environmental challenges. According to some, this is cured by BEV cars. Our kids are saved. The USA no longer needs to rely on foreign companies for energy. Huzzah, no more wars about energy sources and environmental responsibility. No more theories need to be researched. Itís all been sorted out in The Samba. Go Team!!



The USA wins. No more being dependent on foreign resources!!! We have all the resources and land to mine and make this happen. Start digging the shit out of Idaho for Cobalt. The Australian company who owns that chunk of Salmon, Idaho want their investment to profit. USA USA USA!!!

Not a Piers Morgan fan but not a fan of hypocrisy either. Iím still waiting for the data on how EV cars save the planet and not just the air. Itís important to mitigate air pollution. It is important to mitigate water and terra firma pollution
as well.


Mickey bitsko Sun Mar 26, 2023 9:15 pm

Apropos ^^ 😃

nbvolks Mon Mar 27, 2023 6:09 am

Xevin wrote: ICE products in the last 100 years have brought on unique environmental challenges. According to some, this is cured by BEV cars. Our kids are saved. The USA no longer needs to rely on foreign companies for energy. Huzzah, no more wars about energy sources and environmental responsibility. No more theories need to be researched. Itís all been sorted out in The Samba. Go Team!!



The USA wins. No more being dependent on foreign resources!!! We have all the resources and land to mine and make this happen. Start digging the shit out of Idaho for Cobalt. The Australian company who owns that chunk of Salmon, Idaho want their investment to profit. USA USA USA!!!

Not a Piers Morgan fan but not a fan of hypocrisy either. Iím still waiting for the data on how EV cars save the planet and not just the air. Itís important to mitigate air pollution. It is important to mitigate water and terra firma pollution
as well.



Woh...both a non-sequiter and a red herring fallacy. Almost logical fallacy bingo!

We have indirect measures of the impact of any activity of production via resource/production intensity and life-cycle studies. This isn't new or unique to EVs, or even unique to environmental topics. It's a standard business and economic review.

Here's a sample overview of what that entails:
[url]https://www.oecd.org õ envPDF[/url]

As I've said before, language like "saving the planet" isn't the language used outside of people who don't know any better, or who are intentionally using it to create a straw man argument. It's inaccurate, it's, as I've been saying, about mitigation. The production intensity around BEVs, is higher up front, yes, but the overall life-cycle nets out better for the environment as a whole. The oversimplified explanation, and I'll use the extreme example here to make the point, is that if you bought a BEV and charged it with nothing but solar power produced at your home, then the effective resource intensity is zero, beyond the initial production. An ICE vehicle will continue to have all the resource intensity that stems from what's required to operate it, part of which would be the oil and gas extraction, refinement, transport, and burning. That resource and production intensity outweighs the initial resource and production intensity surrounding the BEV.

So one more time. It's not about a claim of zero resource and production intensity for the BEV. It's about relative resource and production intensity versus the ICE over the life cycles of both vehicles.

Mickey bitsko Mon Mar 27, 2023 6:42 am

To mitigate , in mitigation, have been mitigating, has been mitigated.. not sure there in the correct order, but I understand now, we're in the process of mitigation, we are going to mitigate and when we finally finish mitigating we will be mitigated.. got it 👍
Thanks nbvolks..

nbvolks Mon Mar 27, 2023 7:10 am

Mickey bitsko wrote: To mitigate , in mitigation, have been mitigating, has been mitigated.. not sure there in the correct order, but I understand now, we're in the process of mitigation, we are going to mitigate and when we finally finish mitigating we will be mitigated.. got it 👍
Thanks nbvolks..

Sometimes repetition is the only way to get through.

Bonesberg55 Mon Mar 27, 2023 7:48 am

Do we need to reopen "The McCarthy Hearings"?

chrisflstf Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:05 am

Mitigation is just another word for climate change. Global warming, climate change, bla, bla, bla, all the same crap being pushed on us by those that think they know best

oprn Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:26 am

nbvolks wrote: Mickey bitsko wrote: To mitigate , in mitigation, have been mitigating, has been mitigated.. not sure there in the correct order, but I understand now, we're in the process of mitigation, we are going to mitigate and when we finally finish mitigating we will be mitigated.. got it 👍
Thanks nbvolks..

Sometimes repetition is the only way to get through.
It's also the best way to normalize a lie. Repetition is the #1 propaganda tool! Repeat something often enough and people start to think a lie is true. It even works on yourself given enough effort.

nbvolks Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:55 am

oprn wrote: nbvolks wrote: Mickey bitsko wrote: To mitigate , in mitigation, have been mitigating, has been mitigated.. not sure there in the correct order, but I understand now, we're in the process of mitigation, we are going to mitigate and when we finally finish mitigating we will be mitigated.. got it 👍
Thanks nbvolks..

Sometimes repetition is the only way to get through.
It's also the best way to normalize a lie. Repetition is the #1 propaganda tool! Repeat something often enough and people start to think a lie is true. It even works on yourself given enough effort.

And in comes the ad hominem logical fallacy.

It's like being a freshman in college all over again!

vwracerdave Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:02 am

EV's are not the future. No point in pushing the fantasy.

Mickey bitsko Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:00 am

vwracerdave wrote: EV's are not the future. No point in pushing the fantasy.

They're not, it's mitigation.. don't you see

Bonesberg55 Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:34 am

Mickey bitsko wrote: vwracerdave wrote: EV's are not the future. No point in pushing the fantasy.

They're not, it's mitigation.. don't you see

No, its litigation! Don't you see?



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group