 |
|
|
|
JRscooby
Indepmo
Senior Member
Joined: 06/10/2019
View Profile
 Offline
|
dodge guy wrote:JRscooby wrote:
I was not around then, but when Hank started to sell his Model T, there was a lot of the country where range was a issue.
The "We can't do it" people should pull there head out from between their cheeks, compare what the climate is doing to what scientist, (I know that the thought of scientist be correct hurts the right) told us would happen for the last 40 years.
If we don't change the way we move around, we will need to change the fact we move around. There might be something better than E-cars. If you know what it is, bring it out.
Back then all it was was building more gas stations.
Now they need to build an entire new power grid!
Gas stations. And pump stations at rail head to transfer fuel from rail car to truck to haul it to the new gas stations. And all weather roads so the trucks could get to the new gas stations. And much of the road improvement allowed improvement in cars. Using Texas as example, the development of a improved grid will help most of society.
Quote:Yes science is good, but reality is even better,
In most of the developed world, science is the study of reality. Science paid for by tobacco companies says smoking is good.
Science paid for by drug companies says no harm from opioids.
Science paid for by coal and oil says no harm from burning fossil fuel.
The rest of the world questions these statements, or at least looked at other sources for answers.
Quote:just look at what happened to Texas. And now the NE with power outages. Some gas stations have backup power to offset that.
OMG! TEXAS LOST POWER! OMG! NORTH EAST LOST POWER! People in those areas, like everywhere else, need power to live a normal modern life.
Do you think it would be better to go back to 1920s lifestyle and energy demands, or reinforce the grid?
IIRC, we learned not to long ago, without the internet stations can't sell or buy gas.
Quote: And BTW, how do you think the majority of electricity is generated? Not from unicorns running on a treadmill.
Pick any other industry, look at the development in last 40 years.
In 1979 solar panels where installed on the White House. We will never know how much FF money was involved in removing them 2 years later. Also, because they where removed, we will never know how much that example could of helped acceptance of solar panels. (IMHO, if Carter had been re-elected, the market demand would of had panels on the roof of every building built in last 25 years.)
Quote:Fact is you can store gasoline or diesel for months with no problem, kind of hard to store electricity unless you are fully off grid with enough solar and batteries to get you through a normal day.
I don't think we will totally get away from oil based fuel for a long time. I'm sure they are not ready for most RV towing. But RV towing is a real small percentage of the miles the country drives. A friend has a fleet of SUVs sends out crews every day most of the year hauling 2-4 big mowers and other lawn equipment on trailers, then back to shop every night. He is looking at putting solar on roof, a battery bank in shop to store the power to charge the equipment over night. Not much of a reach to also charge the vehicles.
|
Durb
NW
Senior Member
Joined: 01/15/2016
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
|
I enjoyed the video, 25 minutes of range anxiety. I was feeling range anxiety just watching it. They were lucky there wasn't a long line of trucks with trailers also waiting to charge in the Walmart parking lot.
Could be the Rivian uses 4 motors for propulsion and 2 for regenerative braking; sufficient to ****** the truck. Might explain the low regeneration numbers. Other than towing range, it appears the Rivian is a very capable vehicle. TFL glossed over the computer's range confusion at the end, no trip meter, and the cruise control fail; teething pains for a new vehicle.
I wish they would have included charge time to bring it up to 100% at the conclusion of the test.
I see I got asterisks for using a perfectly valid word for slowing down.
|
RoyJ
Vancouver, BC
Senior Member
Joined: 10/19/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
EVs are not JUST about saving the planet, it's saving the planet while not willing to give up our high performance luxury (i.e. having our cake and eat it).
If we truly JUST want to save the planet - drive 3rd world country 50cc scooters, 3 cyl subcompacts. In Asia they have 350cc motorcycle powered tricycle trucks with 3 ton payload.
But if governments forced that on us it'll be political career suicide. Thus the push for 500 - 1000 hp EVs to "save the planet". Volvo estimated 100k miles breakeven vs similar powered (high hp) IC SUV, this is cradle to grave, including mining for batteries. If we compared to a Toyota Yaris the break-even point may never come.
|
FishOnOne
The Great State of Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 02/12/2011
View Profile
Offline
|
BCSnob wrote:A 50% reduction is better than doing nothing.
Wouldn't hybrids get your there?
'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs
"250k Miles"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
Hybrids get you reductions vs ICEs but not as much as with EVs. The extent of the reductions with hybrids depends upon how much the ICE is used in the hybrid.
Wheel to wheel emissions tool compares ice, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and EV emissions.
Allowing both, hybrids and evs, to be developed and manufactured (as opposed to pushing back at their development at every opportunity) is the path forward to reducing emissions. Both will have their uses (where it makes sense) and ices will continue where it makes sense. As improvements are made in the performance and charging infrastructure, where evs makes sense will expand. We’ll never learn what is possible if no one tries.
|
|
|
FishOnOne
The Great State of Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 02/12/2011
View Profile
Offline
|
BCSnob wrote:FishOnOne wrote:BCSnob wrote:That hybrid has the same lithium batteries as an EV. EVs have lower emissions than hybrids (see wheel to wheel emissions tool).
I am amazed by the extent of the “can’t do” attitudes in Americans posting here. Good thing engineers, chemist, and manufacturers still have a “can do” attitude.
I'm an electrical engineer with Mfg/Eng experience with years of Lean manufacturing experience. Worked with a chemist for many years to develop marine seismic sensors. Also worked with a team for designing an ocean bottom data acquisition node that used panasonic lithium ion batteries.
Because of my background I'm very critical of this particular vehicle and simply calling a spade a spade.
As a research chemist in industry I know that initial offerings of a new product are improved over time and demand from the buying public. Take for example the initial models from kia and hyundai. Also note that new sources of lithium (besides open pit mining) are being developed due to the increasing demand and prices. If no one ever goes through the process of manufacturing a new product because it’s a “spade” it never gets improved.
When I started working in the late 80's up to current, battery technology has always been the gating item for land seismic data aquisition systems and we have always been forced to go with cable type systems that includes wires for DC power. Yes battery technology has improved, but it still has a long ways IMO.
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
Will battery technology improve without new applications (and market value) requiring improvements?
|
FishOnOne
The Great State of Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 02/12/2011
View Profile
Offline
|
BCSnob wrote:Will battery technology improve without new applications (and market value) requiring improvements?
In the last 30 years there's been plenty of market opportunity for battery mfg's and the battery mfg's have been under pressure to improve their technology and reduce costs.
|
BCSnob
Middletown, MD
Senior Member
Joined: 02/23/2002
View Profile
|
My TV has a 26gal tank; we get ~7mpg towing a 7k trailer on hilly terrain below 3000’. I wonder just how bad the Rivian would look compared to my rig running that route? The Rivian could run it faster than I since it has no worries about overheating.
We chose to stay at hotels instead of pulling the trailer up and over going out to Carbondale CO a couple years ago.
|
Reisender
NA
Senior Member
Joined: 12/09/2018
View Profile
Offline
|
BCSnob wrote:My TV has a 26gal tank; we get ~7mpg towing a 7k trailer on hilly terrain below 3000’. I wonder just how bad the Rivian would look compared to my rig running that route? The Rivian could run it faster than I since it has no worries about overheating.
We chose to stay at hotels instead of pulling the trailer up and over going out to Carbondale CO a couple years ago.
Yep. With our 3/4 ton GMC we would have been in the right hand lane, foot TO THE FLOOR and watching the temperature gauge and every body passing us while we got 5 mpg. Then on the other side of the hill we would have been modulating the brakes and modulating gearing as we went down the other side.
That Ram half ton following empty with no trailer couldn’t even keep up to the Rivian hauling 8800 pounds up the hill. And remember, that was the medium range Rivian. They are not producing long range Rivians until next year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
