Electric cars....sooner than you think?

[904VT]

Originally Posted by texasmade

Not quite. Most power was lost due to natural gas plants not being winterized for hard freezes and shutting down. On top of that, you had pipeline companies choosing to shut down flow causing an even bigger gas shortages to plants so they could take advantage of spot prices lead to a total crapfest for several days.

And the DOE restriction on consumption type (or better termed sourcing of units beyond certain thresholds) not being lifted during the emergency. Multiple factors.

The wind generated while not responsible for full output in the state, certainly failed as well. It was not the sole factor however as you bring up a good point. No perfect solution.

[Cloudchaser]

Originally Posted by Old Geezer

I bear witness to the quickness. I watched a Tesla model 3 (assume it was a 3, it was the small one) absolutely obliterate a Mustang GT at a stop light race a few weeks ago. The Mustang was loud so presumably it had at least an aftermarket exhaust and maybe some engine mods. The Tesla pulled away from it almost immediately and never stopped extending the lead. About half a block later the Mustang GT threw in the towel

It's almost as if the Tesla were doubling the normal fuel consumption of the ICE.

Think of it as drag-racing to bring attention to climate change. "You've come a long way, baby!"

[Speedbird-1]

Maybe Helium-3 will be the long term solution.
Hence the renewed interest in mining on the moon, which has
100 million times, more Helium-3 than we have on Earth.

The following is from an explainingthefuture.com article.



A Flower in the Darkness?

The subject of mining helium-3 on the Moon as a fuel for future clean, safe nuclear power plants is a fascinating one that raises many questions. Some of these questions are highly technical, and relate to the feasibility of the involved nuclear physics. Other questions concern the not inconsiderable practicalities associated with getting to the Moon, mining and super-heating large quantities of lunar rock (Space.com have reported a suggestion of roughly one million tons of lunar soil being needed to be mined and processed for every 70 tonnes of helium-3 yield), and then getting the precious cargo back to the Earth. However, the far more interesting questions arguably relate to why this is a topic that is receiving so little media and public attention.

As noted above, several of the largest governments on the planet have on various occasions made announcements that they are either actively considering or would like to go to the Moon to mine helium-3. Whether or not the science will actually work, this is surely major news. Given that public debates concerning the construction of future nuclear fission power plants and even wind farms now rage with great vigour and a high media profile, why helium-3 power plants as part of a potential future energy strategy are rarely if ever even mentioned is exceptionally hard to fathom.

Nobody is trying to hide the potential of future lunar helium-3 power generation. However, like a rose in a dark room, there is a potential danger that something of beauty will fail to gain the light it requires if more attention does not start to be languished on what could end up as a very big part of the solution to Peak Oil and other fossil fuel resource depletion, not to mention climate change.

You may also now want to read and view my broader and more recent content on Resources from Space.

Christopher Barnatt.

[Blansky]

The problem with helium cars is the high pitch sound they make and that people all giggle hysterically when you drive by them.

Oh, and I guess that they keep floating away.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Speedbird-1

Maybe Helium-3 will be the long term solution.
Hence the renewed interest in mining on the moon, which has
100 million times, more Helium-3 than we have on Earth.

The following is from an explainingthefuture.com article.



A Flower in the Darkness?

The subject of mining helium-3 on the Moon as a fuel for future clean, safe nuclear power plants is a fascinating one that raises many questions. Some of these questions are highly technical, and relate to the feasibility of the involved nuclear physics. Other questions concern the not inconsiderable practicalities associated with getting to the Moon, mining and super-heating large quantities of lunar rock (Space.com have reported a suggestion of roughly one million tons of lunar soil being needed to be mined and processed for every 70 tonnes of helium-3 yield), and then getting the precious cargo back to the Earth. However, the far more interesting questions arguably relate to why this is a topic that is receiving so little media and public attention.

As noted above, several of the largest governments on the planet have on various occasions made announcements that they are either actively considering or would like to go to the Moon to mine helium-3. Whether or not the science will actually work, this is surely major news. Given that public debates concerning the construction of future nuclear fission power plants and even wind farms now rage with great vigour and a high media profile, why helium-3 power plants as part of a potential future energy strategy are rarely if ever even mentioned is exceptionally hard to fathom.

Nobody is trying to hide the potential of future lunar helium-3 power generation. However, like a rose in a dark room, there is a potential danger that something of beauty will fail to gain the light it requires if more attention does not start to be languished on what could end up as a very big part of the solution to Peak Oil and other fossil fuel resource depletion, not to mention climate change.

You may also now want to read and view my broader and more recent content on Resources from Space.

Christopher Barnatt.

Regarding mining on the moon, I wonder if any involved have researched the potential impact of mining the body that controls our tides. Probably no impact, but gosh if we're wrong the consequences would be severe. Helium is interesting though for power plants for sure.

[Speedbird-1]

The, Helium Deluxe. Wartburg-Deusenberg-Hindenburg MK2.

Could be a goer.

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by Speedbird-1

The, Helium Deluxe. Wartburg-Deusenberg-Hindenburg MK2.

Could be a goer.

Oh the humanity.....

[Tricolore66]

Interesting to hear that the ID.4 isn't selling, as I was really rooting for it! I love what VW is doing these days, and I'm planning on getting the new Golf R just as soon as I can.

I went to the ID.4 driving event in Houston, which was a waste time time since it was basically a loop around the Galleria mall and I couldn't get the thing past 15mph, if moving at all. I understand what VW was trying to do, which is not make it too radical and grab conventional crossover buyers, but I think that will prove to be a failed strategy. I went with a friend to pickup a new Tesla Y last week, and couldn't believe the buying experience. I was expecting something like an Apple store experience, but it was just a kid in track jacket pointing to a parking spot in a busy strip mall and telling him "there's your car, just open it with the app, and you'll want to make a service appt today to fix all the issues."

I've never seen a modern car with such poor paint quality, terrible panel gaps, sloppy trim, cheap materials. I'm in the sports car business and he asked me to go along to check it out, which seemed strange since he already paid for it, and they wouldn't even let us inside it until he accepted the car on the app and basically took delivery. He's super picky and I'm sure he'll go nuts chasing issues and probably make them buy it back. He's already complaining about rattles and software glitches.

That brings me back to the VW ID.4. These Tesla people don't really want things that operate like cars; they want rolling iPads. They apparently don't care about things like quality, or they wouldn't be paying $75k for something that would never be allowed to leave a Toyota factory. In short, the ID.4 misses the mark for the people who appear to want to buy these things today. I think they should have tried to "out-Tesla Tesla" instead of converting gas buyers to electric. I think stealing market share from those who are already electric disciples, at least in your first serious effort, might have made more sense, but I guess we'll see.

I think VW should have launched with their most expensive performance model first, like Porsche did with the Taycan. The VW is really well put together, with lots of nice touches, but it's pretty slow, and the rated range is way off from the Tesla, which is what everyone will unfortunately be comparing it to.

Originally Posted by swils8610

I run a VW dealer. The ID.4 is not selling well at this point. We’ve sold one. With the AWD model coming late summer sales should increase. We do sell 1 or 2 Audi ETRONS a month.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Tricolore66

Interesting to hear that the ID.4 isn't selling, as I was really rooting for it! I love what VW is doing these days, and I'm planning on getting the new Golf R just as soon as I can.

I went to the ID.4 driving event in Houston, which was a waste time time since it was basically a loop around the Galleria mall and I couldn't get the thing past 15mph, if moving at all. I understand what VW was trying to do, which is not make it too radical and grab conventional crossover buyers, but I think that will prove to be a failed strategy. I went with a friend to pickup a new Tesla Y last week, and couldn't believe the buying experience. I was expecting something like an Apple store experience, but it was just a kid in track jacket pointing to a parking spot in a busy strip mall and telling him "there's your car, just open it with the app, and you'll want to make a service appt today to fix all the issues."

I've never seen a modern car with such poor paint quality, terrible panel gaps, sloppy trim, cheap materials. I'm in the sports car business and he asked me to go along to check it out, which seemed strange since he already paid for it, and they wouldn't even let us inside it until he accepted the car on the app and basically took delivery. He's super picky and I'm sure he'll go nuts chasing issues and probably make them buy it back. He's already complaining about rattles and software glitches.

That brings me back to the VW ID.4. These Tesla people don't really want things that operate like cars; they want rolling iPads. They apparently don't care about things like quality, or they wouldn't be paying $75k for something that would never be allowed to leave a Toyota factory. In short, the ID.4 misses the mark for the people who appear to want to buy these things today. I think they should have tried to "out-Tesla Tesla" instead of converting gas buyers to electric. I think stealing market share from those who are already electric disciples, at least in your first serious effort, might have made more sense, but I guess we'll see.

I think VW should have launched with their most expensive performance model first, like Porsche did with the Taycan. The VW is really well put together, with lots of nice touches, but it's pretty slow, and the rated range is way off from the Tesla, which is what everyone will unfortunately be comparing it to.

Nice input. I'm curious what happens to all these fully electric vehicles when the electric components eventually go. At a certain point the vehicle will depreciate as needed repairs become sunk costs and greater than the value of the vehicle. Then these all become more electronic waste/e waste. Basically giant versions of what are in small electronics with lithium ion battery type waste.


We should cut down electronics in vehicles in general, as we witnessed this year what happens when you overly rely on electronics to manage vehicles. With the microchip shortages, assembly lines have shut down and cost of storage increases as vehicles wait to be finished. What's wrong with some simplicity in our vehicles.

Those that care about the environment, it's worth considering if electronic vehicles actually do more harm to the environment than good. We are early in the production cycle of these vehicles, so as I mentioned earlier there will eventually be e waste galore. Add the electricity needed to charge the vehicles, and they aren't as clean as perceived imo. All vehicles today already hold too much plastic pollution as well.

[brandrea]

Copper could become a problem ….

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/video/co...vestor~2219532

I hope the video link works. Forgive the ADS, I don’t know how to get rid of them. This is a most interesting interview. Aside from the metal “shortage” he gives an interesting take on combustion vehicle input on overall CO2 emissions.

EDIT: it’s at about the 8 min mark.

[Tricolore66]

The older I get the more appreciation I have for things that will last and stand the test of time, so not much today is geared in that direction. Most days I drive an air-cooled Porsche and check the tire pressure with a 40 year old gauge. I’ve got Rolex’s that are almost as old as I am, and probably one of the things that attracts me to the brand. Like most things, if you just follow the money you’ll understand why things like electric cars have come to exist.

Originally Posted by 904VT

Nice input. I'm curious what happens to all these fully electric vehicles when the electric components eventually go. At a certain point the vehicle will depreciate as needed repairs become sunk costs and greater than the value of the vehicle. Then these all become more electronic waste/e waste. Basically giant versions of what are in small electronics with lithium ion battery type waste.


We should cut down electronics in vehicles in general, as we witnessed this year what happens when you overly rely on electronics to manage vehicles. With the microchip shortages, assembly lines have shut down and cost of storage increases as vehicles wait to be finished. What's wrong with some simplicity in our vehicles.

Those that care about the environment, it's worth considering if electronic vehicles actually do more harm to the environment than good. We are early in the production cycle of these vehicles, so as I mentioned earlier there will eventually be e waste galore. Add the electricity needed to charge the vehicles, and they aren't as clean as perceived imo. All vehicles today already hold too much plastic pollution as well.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Tricolore66

The older I get the more appreciation I have for things that will last and stand the test of time, so not much today is geared in that direction. Most days I drive an air-cooled Porsche and check the tire pressure with a 40 year old gauge. I’ve got Rolex’s that are almost as old as I am, and probably one of the things that attracts me to the brand. Like most things, if you just follow the money you’ll understand why things like electric cars have come to exist.

I agree, I think products that last a lifetime are well worth the investment. You get to enjoy high quality and cut down on waste. Air-cooled are so nice

[DLRIDES]

NON SPONSORED industry insiders of the automotive world I listen to, say the same as ole Scotty here :


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kua9I49rcCQ

[Speedbird-1]

Electric vehicles........meeeeah.
I wonder how keen the emergency services and armed forces are on electric powered kit?
A squadron of 70 tonne, Abrams hybrid battle tanks queuing up at a 'Bhagdad high street' charging point would be an interesting sight!



Now, if somebody would market a QUIET,POWERFUL rechargeable lawnmower
that could run for a couple of hours, and could leave nice stripes on our lawns, .......I'd put myself on the waiting list.

[77T]

Originally Posted by Speedbird-1

Now, if somebody would market a QUIET,POWERFUL rechargeable lawnmower
that could run for a couple of hours, and could leave nice stripes on our lawns, .......I'd put myself on the waiting list.

More better…runs on beer…auto mulching, too…





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Speedbird-1]

Originally Posted by 77T

More better…runs on beer…auto mulching, too…

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Too noisy............all that, huffing and puffing!

[Blansky]

And too much sapping of precious bodily fluids....

[Widows Son]

Originally Posted by Haveapair

Yes combustion engine cars will eventually go the way of the mechanical watch... They will disappear forever

Not the greatest analogy. There are many mechanical watch collectors on this forum. I have a number of mechanical watches, Rolex, Omega, IWC, Hamilton, Bulova, Universal, Tissot, if regulated properly a good mechanical watch will be +/- 2-4 seconds a day. That's good enough for anyone not planning a lunar landing. Plus with proper servicing they will last several lifetimes. There's a resurgance in watch collecting, and classic cars.

[Widows Son]

Oops, I got sidetracked by the watch analogy. It's difficult to make sweeping generalizations about usage. The wide open spaces in the US can't be compared to smaller nations. Short trips in European countries favor electric and public transportation. Not to pick on the youngsters here but, I'm willing to bet that the majority of people under 25 have no idea how electricity is produced. Hmmmmmm.... maybe by burning coal????? a non renewable resource...... Sorta like oil??????

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by DLRIDES

NON SPONSORED industry insiders of the automotive world I listen to, say the same as ole Scotty here :


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kua9I49rcCQ

I LOVE Scotty’s videos! He is the best!

[Etschell]

ford is changing the game basically. tesla was the disruptor but ford will be the biggest benefactor. most dont even get it yet.

im not a huge EV guy to begin with but i can see the shift. yes you have people who are die hard combustion engine enthusiasts but the combustion engine will go the way of manual transmissions.

less maintenance and quicker power response in EVs. the consumer should love the EV if prices were similar - which they will be in time.

cars were steam powered for 30 years prior to combustion engines.

[DLRIDES]

Originally Posted by Widows Son

Oops, I got sidetracked by the watch analogy. It's difficult to make sweeping generalizations about usage. The wide open spaces in the US can't be compared to smaller nations. Short trips in European countries favor electric and public transportation. Not to pick on the youngsters here but, I'm willing to bet that the majority of people under 25 have no idea how electricity is produced. Hmmmmmm.... maybe by burning coal????? a non renewable resource...... Sorta like oil??????

I’ll be so bold as to say 80-90% of the US adult population has no idea how the majority of electricity is made ! You turn the switch and things just work !

IMO, this happens to coincide with the amount of US population that is too stupid to vote.

[Dr.Brian]

If the infrastructure isn’t there, and it will take decades I think, there will be a limit on how many they can really sell. I suppose the govt could involve itself to force infrastructure advances and investments, but they have bigger fish to Fry at the moment. As an example, California still has brown outs during highest use times. What happens when millions of vehicles need to be plugged in, thousands and thousands of high speed chargers, etc. We aren’t there.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by DLRIDES

I’ll be so bold as to say 80-90% of the US adult population has no idea how the majority of electricity is made ! You turn the switch and things just work !

You're probably right about that knowing how it is made. Ask them and they will probably generically say the power plant. I don't think it is exclusive to the US though by any means. I'd bet even less globally understand how the plastic components are made, lithium ion batteries are made, and how both are disposed. Hint, it's not clean at all.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Dr.Brian

If the infrastructure isn’t there, and it will take decades I think, there will be a limit on how many they can really sell. . . ..

Very much true. There is no power grid today, in any city, that will suddenly be able to charge everybody's electric car if owners are much more than a couple of percent of the population.

That, and there are a few physics issues to overcome; like what do the northern states do with their electric cars in the winter.

[zengineer]

Originally Posted by Tools

Very much true. There is no power grid today, in any city, that will suddenly be able to charge everybody's electric car if owners are much more than a couple of percent of the population.

That, and there are a few physics issues to overcome; like what do the northern states do with their electric cars in the winter.

People like to say there is a giant issue with "the grid", but is it actually true? Most commuters and fleet vehicles will charge at home overnight when demand on the existing grid is lower that during the day.

People also love to ask about cross country road trips or long haul truckers ...or "Texas"....fine, nobody said they need to immediately replace every ICE vehicle. It will take decades and at the rate it has been going battery technology will be dramatically better in 5-10 years.

Yes, cold reduces range and running a heater even more so but it doesn't stop them dead. How many people commute more than 100 miles round trip?

And pollution...that electricity comes from coal burning plants. Well, yes some of it does but part of the goal is to reduce emissions in big congested cities. EVs allow that to happen.

All that said...I am not interested in an EV ...yet.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by zengineer

. . .

People also love to ask about cross country road trips or long haul truckers ...or "Texas"....fine, nobody said they need to immediately replace every ICE vehicle. It will take decades and at the rate it has been going battery technology will be dramatically better in 5-10 years.

Yes, cold reduces range and running a heater even more so but it doesn't stop them dead. How many people commute more than 100 miles round trip?

. . ..

The entire western 2/3 of the US is more than a 100 miles from anywhere.

I think that commuter EV cars in some metro areas are fine; probably a good idea.

Billings Montana, Tonopah Nevada, St. George Utah, Williams Arizona, Death Valley California, and many others may not see many buyers.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Tools

Very much true. There is no power grid today, in any city, that will suddenly be able to charge everybody's electric car if owners are much more than a couple of percent of the population.

That, and there are a few physics issues to overcome; like what do the northern states do with their electric cars in the winter.

Larry you were right on the money with this insight. Looks like CA just prompted EV owners to only charge their vehicles during off hours. To your other point, perhaps best left for large metro areas for now at least.

[Blansky]

The myriad of ideas coming forth it interesting as we put our brains together to come up with energy alternatives.

Saw this today...

https://newatlas.com/energy/buoyancy...c5e9b-93122952


https://newatlas.com/energy/transpar...m-solar-cells/

[904VT]

Originally Posted by Blansky

The myriad of ideas coming forth it interesting as we put our brains together to come up with energy alternatives.

Saw this today...

https://newatlas.com/energy/buoyancy...c5e9b-93122952


https://newatlas.com/energy/transpar...m-solar-cells/

Always great links for reading material thank you