Electric cars.

[cartesian Product]

Originally Posted by bondtoys

Let‘s continue burning oil and gas!

That's right; for cooking, heating, and generating electricity for electric cars.

[SDGT3]

Originally Posted by bondtoys

Amazing!
Protect the earth by keeping on burning fossil because EVs are evil and our politicians are.

Why haven‘t I thought of that?

As for e-fuels, just research the amount of energy that is necessary to produce them and ask yourself, how many EV you could charge with that amount of electric power instead.

Even the Porsche boss gave our e-fuel missionary politicians a dressdown recently.
E-fuel may have applications in planes (where batteries are too heavy), other than that, it‘s just an illusion -if you are seriously concerned about where all the power comes from

Taken as a whole from mining to market, an ICE is more eco friendly than an EV. I do believe EVs are a stop gap as well as we'll see other sources of propulsion in the future.

Your right about the biofuel made from air. The announcement by Porsche was more of a "we can actually make fuel from air", but if when you read it closely they made it on a mountain top in Chile where the winds are constant and strong. This biofuel is not scaleable. They also never mentioned the BTU's from their fuel in the 2 articles I read.

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

You can’t be serious, polar opposite? Try and understand this.

Two vehicles going down the highway. Both are going 30 MPH. With me so far?

At this speed the EV has a range of 100 miles. The ICE is getting 30MPG and with 3 1/3 (or whatever) gallons in the tank will also travel 100 miles.

The EV speeds up to 60 MPH and it’s range falls to 50 miles

The ICE speeds up to 60MPH and you are telling me it will get BETTER then 30MPG and be able to go FARTHER then 100 miles now? What will the MPG increase to? 50MPG? Try and speak in reality

ICE vehicles get better mileage at highway speeds than city driving for a number of reasons and clearly marked on the window stickers of every car sold. At constant highway speeds, the engine is working at lower RPMs and higher gears (if not a CVT transmission) thus less energy is used. On the other hand there is the "law of diminesing returns" where going faster than optimal burns more fuel.

Originally Posted by daveathall

I am of the opinion that ICE are as near as they can be to be the pinnacle of their evolution. EV on the other hand is at the beginning of the cycle.

That's my opinion, nothing that has been said on this discussion has convinced me otherwise.

In 5,10 or 20 years the conversation will be completely different.

Agreed.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by SDGT3

Taken as a whole from mining to market, an ICE is more eco friendly than an EV. I do believe EVs are a stop gap as well as we'll see other sources of propulsion in the future.


ICE vehicles get better mileage at highway speeds than city driving for a number of reasons and clearly marked on the window stickers of every car sold. At constant highway speeds, the engine is working at lower RPMs and higher gears (if not a CVT transmission) thus less energy is used. On the other hand there is the "law of diminesing returns" where going faster than optimal burns more fuel.


Agreed.

Phillip, THANK YOU for injecting some common sense, reality, and civility in to this thread.

Your first point. Completely agree. The “Green” Fuel for charging EVs is kind of a Unicorn, and the Bio fuels SOUNDS great… but, for the points you mentioned is not viable yet. I ALSO WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree EVs are a stopgap. My GUESS, is that vehicles will eventually be powered by Hydrogen, but that is just a guess.


OF COURSE ICE vehicles get better milage on the freeway at steady speeds, as compared to stop and go traffic driving. My whole point was the YouTuber said EVs range reduced as their speed increases. Well, as you pointed out with the law of diminishing returns so does an ICE. Both types vehicles have a sweet spot for fuel use versus distance traveled taking in to account speed, but once you increase speed, your fuel use increases and your range decreases, it doesn’t matter whether that fuel is gasoline or electricity. NO ONE (at least in their right mind) can refute that. I wholeheartedly agree with you

I also agree with you and David. We have had 100+ years to improve ICE, and what? 10? 20? With EVs? The improvements I believe coming will be substantial.

Thank you again Phillip, for introducing common sense and reasonable points on this thread. Whether you are for or against the implementation of EVs, you express reasonable and germane points.



I have one question for those of you against the upcoming ban against ICE vehicles. I have heard nothing about Hybrids, as far as I know they will still be available for purchase after the ban is enforced. IMHO, these seem to eliminate the inconveniences of an EV you all reference. Would you feel as strongly against this ban if you are able to purchase Hybrids?

[JoeJoeBobo]

A current hybrid is still an ICE vehicle.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Phillip, THANK YOU for injecting some common sense, reality, and civility in to this thread.

Your first point. Completely agree. The “Green” Fuel for charging EVs is kind of a Unicorn, and the Bio fuels SOUNDS great… but, for the points you mentioned is not viable yet. I ALSO WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree EVs are a stopgap. My GUESS, is that vehicles will eventually be powered by Hydrogen, but that is just a guess.


OF COURSE ICE vehicles get better milage on the freeway at steady speeds, as compared to stop and go traffic driving. My whole point was the YouTuber said EVs range reduced as their speed increases. Well, as you pointed out with the law of diminishing returns so does an ICE. Both types vehicles have a sweet spot for fuel use versus distance traveled taking in to account speed, but once you increase speed, your fuel use increases and your range decreases, it doesn’t matter whether that fuel is gasoline or electricity. NO ONE (at least in their right mind) can refute that. I wholeheartedly agree with you

I also agree with you and David. We have had 100+ years to improve ICE, and what? 10? 20? With EVs? The improvements I believe coming will be substantial.

Thank you again Phillip, for introducing common sense and reasonable points on this thread. Whether you are for or against the implementation of EVs, you express reasonable and germane points.



I have one question for those of you against the upcoming ban against ICE vehicles. I have heard nothing about Hybrids, as far as I know they will still be available for purchase after the ban is enforced. IMHO, these seem to eliminate the inconveniences of an EV you all reference. Would you feel as strongly against this ban if you are able to purchase Hybrids?

We’ve had 130 years to improve EV’s. They were the predominate horseless carriage in the late 19th century. Electric motors are old technology. The new technology is computational chemistry and engineering. Advancements in modeling have made it faster, cheaper, and easier to develop experimental technology. Advances in phone and laptop battery tech are more responsible for your EV advancements than a desire for electric cars.

Advancements in machining and manufacturing will make ICE design improvements economical. ICE will continue to improve efficiency and reduce emissions. We aren’t at the pinnacle. There is more to come.

IMO, hydrogen is a boondoggle. It’s derived from petroleum. Electrolysis is hideously inefficient. More likely (50 years from now), is room temperature super conductors and super conducting magnets. These technologies allow you to run your car on the solar power your car generates.

[michaelodonnell123]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Really? The faster you go the better gas mileage you get huh? Congratulations! Your ICE breaks the laws of physics. So for example, you get 30 mpg at 30 MPH but at 60 mph you get 50 MPG? Get real

Oh, and my EV starts just fine cold or hot too and has gone above its rated range, it all depends on how you drive.

It's well documented that highway driving( faster) gets better mileage than city driving (slower). If you don't think this is true then take it up with Honda and all the brilliant engineers that disagree with you. Tell them they are breaking the laws of physics and get this all straightened out.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by michaelodonnell123

It's well documented that highway driving( faster) gets better mileage than city driving (slower). If you don't think this is true then take it up with Honda and all the brilliant engineers that disagree with you. Tell them they are breaking the laws of physics and get this all straightened out.

Do you even bother to read anything that is posted, or just like to argue. Obviously it is the latter. Here, let me quote something.

“OF course ICE vehicles get better mileage on the highway at steady speeds”

Look about two posts up, that is a quote from me. Here, TRY to understand this, just try. The issue was someone stated EVs get lower range the faster they go, which is true. SO DO ICE VEHICLES. Get it? At 60MPH, you get so much MPG. At 80MPH, you get LESS MPG AND LESS RANGE PER TANK. GET IT? No, probably not, I am sure I am wasting my time (again).

But that was very talented posting that pretty picture with the highlights

[michaelodonnell123]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Do you even bother to read anything that is posted, or just like to argue. Obviously it is the latter. Here, let me quote something.

“OF course ICE vehicles get better mileage on the highway at steady speeds”

Look about two posts up, that is a quote from me. Here, TRY to understand this, just try. The issue was someone stated EVs get lower range the faster they go, which is true. SO DO ICE VEHICLES. Get it? At 60MPH, you get so much MPG. At 80MPH, you get LESS MPG AND LESS RANGE PER TANK. GET IT? No, probably not, I am sure I am wasting my time (again).

But that was very talented posting that pretty picture with the highlights

I win.

[TheVTCGuy]

Originally Posted by michaelodonnell123

I win.

OOOOHHHHH Kay……..

[TheVTCGuy]

Interesting video on nuclear fusion from 60 minutes. IMHO, I think fusion is humanity’s only hope for long-term survival, a clean (nearly) limitless energy source, but that’s just an opinion. This lab achieved a positive flow of power (the reaction returned more energy then was put in) for the first time in history. Biden has set a goal of a commercial nuclear fusion power plant in a decade, a goal that most agree is wildly optimistic at best. I agree there are a plethora of challenges to overcome, but maybe, this test was a turning point? I guess time will tell.

I tried to understand all the technical details, but my head exploded.

https://youtu.be/2kh6Ik4-yag

[JoeJoeBobo]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Interesting video on nuclear fusion from 60 minutes. IMHO, I think fusion is humanity’s only hope for long-term survival, a clean (nearly) limitless energy source, but that’s just an opinion. This lab achieved a positive flow of power (the reaction returned more energy then was put in) for the first time in history. Biden has set a goal of a commercial nuclear fusion power plant in a decade, a goal that most agree is wildly optimistic at best. I agree there are a plethora of challenges to overcome, but maybe, this test was a turning point? I guess time will tell.

I tried to understand all the technical details, but my head exploded.

https://youtu.be/2kh6Ik4-yag

You story lost me at “60 Minutes” well before you even got to Biden!