When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Like Batteries, Solar panels are also heavily degraded by high and low temperature. So when the need for air con / Heat is needed the panels are down to less than 25% of max capacity. Not counting degradation from clouds, or at night.
When we have found ways to produce electricity with reliable, sustainable and cheaply, then we can make a run at EV's.. All renewable methods don't fulfil those needs today.
If you think batteries are the answer, how many batteries would it take to run your local Hospital for a few days when renewables are not working?
My recommendation is to plow $$$ to find ways of cleaning up the ICE to produce less CO2.
Until an electric car is as easy and quick to charge as a gas car it will not be the answer. I love my Taycan but right now it is a great 3 or 4th car for a family because of the time it takes to charge and the range so for me it is a great car to use to drive around town but no way I would take it from Phoenix to LA or a long road trip with the range anxiety it creates.
It’s too bad, this is a topic that needs a technical discussion and a technical solution but it is also plagued with a political component.
If it could be left alone to naturally evolve by engineering markets and science it would have a much better outcome. Unfortunately, we’re not lucky here.
In answer to the question asked in the thread title, NO, Electric is not THE answer. There will never be any such thing as THE answer. There will always be many answers, each with it's own pro's and con's.
I have owned a Tesla Model 3 for three years and put 48,000 miles on it. My wife loves this car and swears she will never go back to an ICE car again. However, long trips/vacations can and have posed inconvenient challenges, and there are other pro's and con's as well. Bottom line, no car is perfect or ever will be, be it ICE, electric, hydrogen, etc. So to sum up, my EV has been a great "answer" to some of my family's transportation needs/wants but it has not been "THE answer".
EV's are a wonderful option to have available. As time goes by and they improve, they will probably become even better options. But they will never be "THE answer" because nothing will ever be able to be all things to all people.
Electric cars are the future in the USA, like it or not
So because electric cars are being forced on us, we should accept it, similar to WEF's statement, "You will own nothing and be happy"?
No what actually will happen, is the public will get so fed up with electric cars, they will vote out those who are pushing them on everyone.
The amount of ore mined for the precious metals for just one car battery (half a million pounds), and the impossible to fix long charging times make them a non-starter. 100 years from now, we will not be driving battery electric cars.
One of the important things people don't discuss is the many ICE farm machines, construction machines, etc.......that can't get to a charging station nor can the owners afford to replace batteries as much as these machines are used.
We may be able to get vehicles to an alternative form of energy but I'm in agreement that batteries aren't the right answer and not for cost of replacement issue either. It's the ecological impact to manufacture them and then where do they go when they are spent?
Technology is a wonderful thing when politics don't get in the way.
Not exactly (disclaimer: I work I the electric power industry and the stats that the anti-EV crowd likes to spew are far from the truth). For most commuters (40-50 mile round trip commute) recharging their car is the equivalent of running an electric oven for an hour. Compared to home air-conditioning, EV charging is a rounding error.
I seldom use hotel chargers on road trips. I’m picky about where I park my car and at 6kW, they’re hardly worth the hassle. I prefer to get a 10-15 minute charge from a DC fast charger while I grab a cup of coffee and use the restroom. At my age, my bladder requires more stops than the car does LOL
Don’ know where you got your information about recharging an EV is the equivalent to running an electric oven for an hour. Charging a car is equivalent to running 10 refrigerators. There are 290.8 million registered cars as of this year. Just imagine if just half hook up to the power grid….you can see the lights turning off now.
Don’ know where you got your information about recharging an EV is the equivalent to running an electric oven for an hour. Charging a car is equivalent to running 10 refrigerators. There are 290.8 million registered cars as of this year. Just imagine if just half hook up to the power grid….you can see the lights turning off now.
Uh, what sort of circuit is your refrigerator plugged in to? What sort of circuit is your electric oven connected to? Remember, Watts = Volts X Amps.
I wonder if people asked the same thing about gas powered automobiles back when the Model T was first introduced and everyone was still riding horses.
LOL probably so… and their grandchildren are apparently on this forum. Their parents probably were arguing the virtues of candles when electric lights were invented.
So much misinformation about EVs circulating. If someone doesn’t want one, don’t buy one. There are plenty of ICE choices out there. Incentives aren’t needed for people to buy EVs any more. Teslas haven’t had incentives for years and they can’t keep up with demand.
That’s a very old pic. Interestingly you could plug in and charge there with zero risk too, even standing in water.
Hydrogen isn’t the answer. It takes electricity (lots of it) to produce hydrogen via electrolysis. After the losses to produce hydrogen from electricity then convert it back into electricity via a fuel cell, you’d be better off just staying with electricity.
It’s not what hydrogen is for. Hydrogen is more scalable than batteries. EV motors are incredible efficient, but the battery storage is terrible in energy density. An entire 800 lb Nissan Leaf’s battery stored the same energy as 6 lbs of gas. Hydrogen is a more scaleable fuel than throwing tons of batteries at a vehicle so someone can do an occasional road trip twice a year.
I wonder if people asked the same thing about gas powered automobiles back when the Model T was first introduced and everyone was still riding horses.
This is probably the most played out and worst analogy guaranteed to make an appearance on every EV thread.
Cars are much more convenient and cheaper than a horse. That’s why cars required no tax incentives, mandates, or pledges. EVs cost more than a gas car but do the same thing.
A better analogy would be “I wonder if people asked the same thing when the first diesels were introduced” but it doesn’t really have the same ring to it.
Last edited by Majestic94; Sep 27, 2022 at 07:14 PM.
So much misinformation about EVs circulating. If someone doesn’t want one, don’t buy one. There are plenty of ICE choices out there. Incentives aren’t needed for people to buy EVs any more. Teslas haven’t had incentives for years and they can’t keep up with demand.
They were for me. As soon as gas prices started dropping and the feds killed the tax credit for almost everything I bailed on my EV search.
Tesla can’t keep up with demand because everybody is fighting for the same shrinking pool of battery materials. The more EVs they make the higher the prices become. Economies of scale are working opposite of the plan.
For the hydrogen naysayers, there is a company (https://genh2hydrogen.com/?utm_sourc...ign=gmblisting) with a host of NASA cryo engineers behind it doing research, ... - just so happens its HQ and main fabrication center is just outside the KSC gates. I know a few involved and hardly a hair brain idea. Just as 3 mile island gave nuclear an off ramp, the hindenberg didn't do hydrogen any favors. Again, time will tell.
They were for me. As soon as gas prices started dropping and the feds killed the tax credit for almost everything I bailed on my EV search.
Tesla can’t keep up with demand because everybody is fighting for the same shrinking pool of battery materials. The more EVs they make the higher the prices become. Economies of scale are working opposite of the plan.
And yet, people keep buying more and more of them…
Not exactly (disclaimer: I work I the electric power industry and the stats that the anti-EV crowd likes to spew are far from the truth). For most commuters (40-50 mile round trip commute) recharging their car is the equivalent of running an electric oven for an hour. Compared to home air-conditioning, EV charging is a rounding error.
I seldom use hotel chargers on road trips. I’m picky about where I park my car and at 6kW, they’re hardly worth the hassle. I prefer to get a 10-15 minute charge from a DC fast charger while I grab a cup of coffee and use the restroom. At my age, my bladder requires more stops than the car does LOL
An oven uses about 2.3 kWh an hour while a Tesla uses about that much in half a mile of driving.
Its not just the anti EV crowd spewing incorrect facts.
For the hydrogen naysayers, there is a company (https://genh2hydrogen.com/?utm_sourc...ign=gmblisting) with a host of NASA cryo engineers behind it doing research, ... - just so happens its HQ and main fabrication center is just outside the KSC gates. I know a few involved and hardly a hair brain idea. Just as 3 mile island gave nuclear an off ramp, the hindenberg didn't do hydrogen any favors. Again, time will tell.
There’s a reason rockets use hydrogen and not giant battery packs.
This is probably the most played out and worst analogy guaranteed to make an appearance on every EV thread.
Cars are much more convenient and cheaper than a horse. That’s why cars required no tax incentives, mandates, or pledges. EVs cost more than a gas car but do the same thing.
A better analogy would be “I wonder if people asked the same thing when the first diesels were introduced” but it doesn’t really have the same ring to it.
I think the comparison of these two events fit, but at a different level than your comparison. Both events describe a major cultural shift and how opponents and proponents deal (dealt) with the cultural change. Yes agree, the details of the shift differ and don't compare well, but how people deal with big shifts are common in both events.