I agree if we continue to turn fossil fuels into CO2 until they run out then we won't be driving much because the planet will be unlivable.Originally Posted by Art Mann
Contributor
I agree if we continue to turn fossil fuels into CO2 until they run out then we won't be driving much because the planet will be unlivable.
Contributor
Very true Mike, where I live we have time of use electricity pricing, because as you said there are periods of excess capacity.
If you owned an automobile at the beginning of their development, you also had fueling station shortages.
Those problems will be solved for electric vehicles soon, as their popularity increases.........Rod.
Contributor
I suspect "range anxiety" is just that, and that there are solutions that will deal with it easily. As of today, 95% of trips are shorter than 30 miles, and 99% are below 70 miles. The weighted average trip distance is 9.4 miles. Vehicles owned by urban households averaged 8.5 miles and rural vehicles averaged 12.1 miles. So 99% of all travel is readily covered. We made one driving trip over 400 miles in the last year in our own car (several more in rented cars after we flew to our destination). It would have been pretty painless to have to rent a hybrid or use a Zipcar to make that trip and be all electric for the rest of the year for our daily use. Some individuals, obviously, have different needs, but why design our entire transportation infrastructure to handle the few exceptions?
There is an interesting experiment going on where Teslas have been deployed as fleet vehicles that get operated many more miles/day than family cars. The early data seems to suggest that because of much lower maintenance costs of the all electric vehicle that total cost of ownership per mile is much lower than for a gas vehicle even when comparing a $120K Tesla to a $40K gas engine car. They suggested that these vehicles were going to have useful lifetimes of 600-750,000 miles or more over 2-4 years of use with minimal maintenance costs. With a Zipcar-like model that keeps the vehicles in heavy use the costs could be enough lower to cause many people to use a shared car rather than own one. For the young, urban folks I know this is already becoming the model of choice. I'd guess that fewer than one in five people under 35 in the Boston/Cambridge area choose to own a car; most are perfectly happy with Uber, Lyft, and Zipcar (and a bicycle).
Moderator
Terry, one of the huge performance advantages to electric motors is the incredible torque they have...acceleration can be amazing. Even the two "Prii" we owned were no slouches in that respect as was the heavier Highlander Hybrid Limited I owned before buying my Grand Cherokee. The acceleration was actually a good safety factor for us as getting out of our driveway with the ever increasing traffic can sometimes be a challenge. If you try to wait for a big opening in both directions, you can be sitting there long enough to consume a four course meal.Some of the highest performance vehicles on the planet right now are electrics...
--
The most expensive tool is the one you buy "cheaply" and often...
Member
I was thinking that this may be useful to add to this thread.
During the summer, I did a 5000 mile road trip from New York to Wyoming and back in my Model X and range anxiety was a constant presence. There's a stretch in South Dakota between Rapid City and Murdo that is 134 miles and the speed limit is 80 where I almost ran out of charge. I don't think I would be able to do a winter trip on that stretch when the high plains get really cold. At first, I thought that the charging stops about every 100-150 miles or so would be super annoying, but in retrospect it was great because the time was well spent in walking, reading and/or eating. The car can mostly drive itself on highways, and it is unbelievably relaxing to just keep your eyes on the road to make sure the car doesn't do something crazy (it can!). There was only a handful of times I had to take control - mostly in construction zones. We are still a long way from full self-driving where you can read a book or sleep while the car drives, but this nearly-there self drive is still a big leap forward from cruise control.
And here's an interesting bit of news from Bloomberg today on the road blocks for adoption of electric cars: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...pread-adoption
Contributor
Electric cars, much like solar power, have finally reached a point where they make not just environmental sense, but financial sense as well. That was the key to them breaking through to the general public. I would already have solar except I have to fix my roof first, and then that's next. Where I live we have one of the highest energy costs in the world, so it makes solar actually cheaper in the long run than grid power, even when you factor in changing batteries every 5 years. I'm saving up to go off grid.
My friends have electric cars, and I am watching them closely. They do well here because you go up hill 1/2 the trip, then you're down hill the other 1/2 and it charges batteries on the downhill. In Barbados they now have charging stations at many businesses, and at one mall. In Bermuda and Bahamas they are popping up as well. My issues are: (1.) Batteries are a HUGE cost, and batteries don't last long here- which is why I'm watching my friends to see what their experience is, (2.) They are great if you have a driveway, but for people living in apartments, or in zero-lot-line homes, charging may be an issue, and (3.) as someone mentioned, they don't tow well. That said, they do have a lot of low-end torque, but not for up hills. I brought the first electric service vehicle to the island years back- a tow vehicle for pulling dollies around. (purpose made) It works great on flat, but not on hills. The battery didn't do so well here, but that was also partly due to employees abusing it and not following proper charging procedure.
I'm a gearhead, and I love tinkering with gas engines, but I would be happy to see them go. My boat is getting fitted with a propane outboard. I'm excited about that. I considered electric, but I don't have a lot of room for solar panels. It is at least a step forward.
I've heard people saying that mining lithium has a high carbon footprint, and in the end it makes the gain from battery powered cars not actually a gain. I don't believe that. I've seen oil refineries. They are horrible places with tons of environmental issues. Also, sure, maybe lithium is hard to mine, but it's saving burning gasoline every day in your car. Surely that's a better trade-off.
Contributor
Dan
When you factor in the increase in population over the last 50 years and the current pollution levels, based on lbs. per person, I think you'll find it is down on a per person basis. Without the reforms and regulations of the last 50 years it would be much, much, worse. It still is though, a significant issue that needs to be addressed.
I live in an area where virtually every river and stream qualified as a superfund site in the 70's,and were essentially "dead". The air quality was just awful then ,and the air particulates in PPM were horrendous. It's not that way any longer, and it's not just a visual "soot" indication, it's in measurable metrics.
60% + of all electricity in the US is generated by fossil fuels. Goal and Gas being the source. Coal is going by the wayside rapidly, and gas is overtaking it. There are way too many negatives associated with coal. Gas is definitely better, but it also has it's drawbacks. Nuclear Power is a dying industry and unless some type of intervention is effected, expect to see many more base load gas plants coming on line, as the nukes drop off line.
We are not there with respect to "renewable" energy sources, and may not be for decades. Solar panels are definitely not the answer. They simply cannot produce the same megawatts per unit square as a base load fossil, or nuke plant can. They also have a very significant drawback associated with end of life waste stream issues. We tend, as individuals, to look at the situation on a small scale, so while it is conceivable to power the electric needs for a single residence with renewables, it is just not possible as of now to power a city infrastructure with "renewable" energy.
The irony of the situation is that while we may feel as if our "individual carbon footprint" is decreasing by using electric cars, and solar panels for our homes, the reality is that it more than likely is not, at least not right now. Someday maybe.
BTW
I hate the term "renewable energy". It's a term made up to sell a concept. There is no "renewable" in energy.
"The first thing you need to know, will likely be the last thing you learn." (Unknown)
Contributor
I'm very used to range anxiety, actually. When I drive my F350 diesel with the camper on it and pulling my fairground organ trailer my range is 220 to 230 miles, which means I start looking for fuel every 150 miles. Add to that the fact that I can't get my rig into more than half of the stations that are supposed to have diesel and you have a recipe for anxiety. More than once I've had to find a place to park and unhitch the trailer in order to get to the pumps. I'm sure they put the small tank (~32 gallons) on that truck to keep the weight down, but what a pain! I've started carrying a 5 gallon can to ferry fuel to the truck.
Contributor
Interesting point but I don't know if I would call it a fallacy. The same limitation applies to ICE vehicles as well. It's just that we can find gas stations at frequent intervals. But there are times when you just have to stop and fill up because there won't be a gas station for some number of miles. The big difference is the time to recharge. If you have a range of 400 miles and a trip of 480 miles, you have to plan your stop strategically. That would be much easier to do if the charging stations were as common as gas stations.
Most electric cars I'm seeing now have a fairly fast (by electric standards) partial recharge time. Say, 80% in 30 minutes. If I wasn't going to do it every day, I think I would take that. To be honest, I probably don't get out of the car and walk around enough anyway.
Maybe the better point would be the infrastructure required of the station out in the middle of nowhere to charge 10-20 cars at once. That would be a lot of current and much more than it would take to operate a few pumps.
Contributor
To elaborate on Mikes comment: Some have suggested that electric cars hooked up for charging could provide needed electricity back to the grid in times of extreme load. Say you commute 20 miles to work every day and you have a car with 200 mile range. That's 160 miles of range you might not need today. You drive to work and hook up your car in the middle of August on the hottest day of the year. The (very smart) grid is stressed for power and draws down your battery to make up a temporary shortfall.
There are all sorts of devilish details to the idea. Chief among them is the requirement that we anticipate our transportation needs. But it's interesting. Just think of the unused energy in all those batteries.
Contributor
The folks with sight impairments are already thinking about the electric future. I'm guessing that it will get worse before it gets better. Imagine Times Square with one or two silent electrics. Some have even suggested that electric cars electronically simulate car noises so that the blind folks can hear them coming. I would imagine that when we get to a time where all vehicles are electric, the overall quiet will make it better.
Contributor
I'd point out that there are millions of hearing impaired people who can't hear the gasoline powered cars we have now. They seem to have figured out how to cope.
Member
I'm honestly not going to get an electric vehicle until it can do everything a gas powered vehicle can do as well or better than a gas powered vehicle can do it, at a comparable cost. If they are supposed to be a replacement technology, they need to outperform what they are replacing and currently, they do not. Until I can pull into a charging station and recharge at the same speed as I can currently fill up my tank with gas, forget it. I don't have time to sit there for 30-60 minutes while my batteries charge. I've got 10 minutes. And I think people are vastly underestimating how many charging stations that they'll need, given the prolonged charging time. The gas station I use is always busy, there are rarely empty pumps when you pull up. So, even if they get charging down to 30 minutes from empty to full, that's 3x as many chargers that they will need to service the same number of people.
Contributor
I think you are overlooking a few facts. As someone pointed out earlier, the majority of cars on the road today travel a relatively short distance per day much less than the range of most electric cars. Thus they could do the majority of their recharging overnight at home which means no waiting at a gas station and consuming electricity when demand is low, win win. For those who regularly travel long distances then a hybrid would be the solution. You are forgetting that electric cars are a solution to a serious problem.
Contributor
Somebody needs to calculate the cost benefit function for electricity cost per charge and fule range (put it in terms of cost per mile) and compare that with equivalent cost per mile for gasoline. There is a point at which the costs would be equivalent --- just for the sake of discussion, don't include time value such as time to refill a gas tank vs wait for a battery charge. Also, don't include cost of the vehicle. Just day to day operating costs. Don't include maintenance either ( ie, cost of replacement batteries). Anyone have hard data such as this?
Posting Permissions
