We have had electric cars since before the ICU. The only reason all cars aren't electric is the same then as it is now: energy density of the battery is too low, re-charge cycle takes too long, batteries have a limited lifetime expectation and they are expensive.
Energy densities and longevity are fine. Teslas being rented to commute to Vegas are over 400,000 miles with the batteries still working fine. Battery warranties are for 150,000 miles. Even if you had to replace your battery every 150,000 miles (and you wont') it's still cheaper than gas. Also, batteries don't just stop working, their capacity just reduces by a tiny amount every year. A battery considered "bad" still has 70% of its original capacity. If you owned a Chevy Bolt your car would still be driving 170 miles on a charge when your battery was "bad."
As someone who vapes and uses 18650 batteries which the first telsa cars used. Only they had 800 of them. Yes lithium batteries can fail out of no where, and when one battery fails the whole bank of batteries attached need to be changed as well, because one under performing battery will make the others work harder.
Telsa batteries will fail, and when they do Im sure buying 800 tesla brand 18650 batteries and having them installed will be cost a ton. Not to mention the amount of lithium batteries will then be in landfills.
Yes lithium batteries can fail out of no where
Craptastic Chinese products can and will fail a lot of the time. You're not going to be seeing any genuine Panasonic or LG cells failing like Chinese cells. Stop buying shit batteries.
Everything you wrote is false. In every imaginable way including cost. When you say cost, you mean to say direct cost at retail. If you take into account the total cost of producing the quantities of lithium ion batteries across the globe (and it is a global process), icus are WAAAAAAAAAAAAY cheaper in every possible cost dimension.
As well, not only are electrics more expensive, your perception of low cost electric re-charge is ONLY CHEAPER because you are being subsidized by the country to operate those electric power plants, 80% or more of which are powered by natural gas and coal. If the government were to stop subsidizing electricity, you would shit your pants at how expensive it would get.
Your electric car is not an electric car. It is an icu, you have merely offloaded the power generation to a giant natural gas or hydro turbine far far away. You are literally driving a remote controlled icu.
Never mind that at some supercharging stations the price to re-charge jumped to cost more than a tank of gas, I can't link to it now, don't have time to dig up the link.
But, that isn't the real notional cost of chargin up a Tesla. The only reason it looks cheap is because there are NOT ENOUGH ELECTRIC CARS ON THE GRID TO STRESS THE GRID YET. The grid will never be powerful enough to juice up electric cars if they even get any significant percentage of the market share. The reason is roughly speaking that to carry the kinds of current to industrial charging stations you will need some spectacular amounts of copper to carry the current (or is it voltage?). There is a famous set of calculations online of how ridiculous it would be to replace a gas station with an industrial charging station that can dispense the amount of juice necessary to replace AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF DAILY ENERGY provided by gasing up cars.
Again, don't have time to look up the calculations.
What Tesla fans are not fully cognizant of is that their expensive electric cars are only possible because there is just enough slack in the electric grid to allow for the parasitic load that is not supposed to exist. As we replace the high amounts of power density of carbon fuels with low density electric power your parasitic ass is going to be paying higher and higher prices, eventually evening out with gasoline or even greater.
Musk is not going to make his real money on cars. He is going to make his real money on rebuilding the grid and buying power plants as his parasitic cars push the grid into overload and suckers like you keep on buying them without knowing the full story involved.
I would call you a sucker for not knowing what you are talking about. However, the reality here is that the rest of us are suckers because we allow parasites to extract value from us without properly adjusting for it. Fair enough I guess.
Don't get me started on Chevy bolts not being sold any more, not being on the road, their owners suing Chevy for making garbage batteries that don't last. The only manufacturers that have managed to figure out how to manage heat in batteries are Tesla and Porche so far and frankly there are NO TESLA OWNERS THAT DON'T HAVE A SECOND CAR.
That is because Teslas are entirely impractical because of the re-charge times. Tesla is not in the car business. Tesla is in the same business as Apple: the lifestyle business. They are lifestyle toys give upper middle class social status signalling tool because those people have no soul, no culture and no self worth so they have to buy nonsense to fill that hole.
Electric cars are the future. They have been the future since they were the first cars and predate the gasoline engine. But, they are no panacea and the entire equation boils down to energy density at scale at cost.
Everything you wrote is false.
You want it to be false. Unfortunately, that's different than actually being false.
When you say cost, you mean to say direct cost at retail. If you take into account the total cost of producing the quantities of lithium ion batteries across the globe (and it is a global process), icus are WAAAAAAAAAAAAY cheaper in every possible cost dimension.
You're saying that mining companies, battery manufacturers, and auto makers are all selling their products for less than it costs them to manufacture them. Where's the data? I want to see how much it costs Tesla to manufacture a lithium battery and their cars versus how much they retail them for. I'll take any battery supplier and automaker if you don't have specific data for Tesla.
If the government were to stop subsidizing electricity, you would shit your pants at how expensive it would get.
Can you show us unenlightened people how is electricity being subsidized? A link to the item(s) in a federal or state budget will suffice.
You're forgetting the tax breaks given to oil and gas production. If we're going to compare costs, you can't count subsidies on only one side.
Your electric car is not an electric car. It is an icu, you have merely offloaded the power generation to a giant natural gas or hydro turbine far far away. You are literally driving a remote controlled icu.
Which is far more efficient than millions of tiny little engines.
The grid will never be powerful enough to juice up electric cars if they even get any significant percentage of the market share.
Yes. Trying to make everything electric in 10 years is stupid. The infrastructure isn't ready yet. The market will work fine to supply electricity as demand increases as long as no idiots get in the way.
There is a famous set of calculations online of how ridiculous it would be to replace a gas station with an industrial charging station that can dispense the amount of juice necessary to replace AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF DAILY ENERGY provided by gasing up cars.
It's ridiculous because that's a ridiculous way of "fueling" electric cars. They only time you need to be charging quickly away from home is when you need to drive further than the car's range in a single day. How often do you drive 250+ miles a day?
I would call you a sucker for not knowing what you are talking about. However, the reality here is that the rest of us are suckers because we allow parasites to extract value from us without properly adjusting for it.
It sounds like you're trying to make a case against letting the market function. Are you a communist per chance?
>It sounds like you're trying to make a case against letting the market function. Are you a communist per chance?
Only at your reading level. Read everything again slowly.
Okay, I have a bit more time to try and answer. Too busy earlier.
1) The only possible conversation on the topic is this format:
You make a claim.
I make a claim.
I didn't ask you to provide sources, I'm not going to be providing sources to you. I'm not your monkey, you can sing and dance all you want.
Do your own research, this is only a conversation.
2) My thoughts on your points as follows:
>You want it to be false. Unfortunately, that's different than actually being false.
Ditto in the inverse.
>You're saying that mining companies, battery manufacturers, and auto makers are all selling their products for less than it costs them to manufacture them. Where's the data? I want to see how much it costs Tesla to manufacture a lithium battery and their cars versus how much they retail them for. I'll take any battery supplier and automaker if you don't have specific data for Tesla.
Do your own research. This is a conversation, not a collaboration to on a white paper.
>Can you show us unenlightened people how is electricity being subsidized? A link to the item(s) in a federal or state budget will suffice.
Get fucked. Do your own research, I'm not your monkey.
>You're forgetting the tax breaks given to oil and gas production. If we're going to compare costs, you can't count subsidies on only one side.
This is a good point. I've been meaning to put a site together to help pull together the total set of numbers and model some comparative scenarios.
>Which is far more efficient than millions of tiny little engines.
Only true if you are close to the power plant. As soon as you go away from the power plant the powerline losses start to take over and this number becomes debatable especially when you consider the cost per hour of labour you need to include in a recharge cycle. Every car takes 3 minutes to fuel up, 80% on the best of current battery chemistry is about 30 minutes.
>Yes. Trying to make everything electric in 10 years is stupid. The infrastructure isn't ready yet. The market will work fine to supply electricity as demand increases as long as no idiots get in the way.
This is simultaneously true and not true. Eminent domains exists as a direct example of the free market not being able to solve certain distribution problems in society. I would prefer that no eminent domain exists and that free market solve the problem, however, there are obvious tradeoffs and there are no ways to compare what the same scenario would look like if there were no concepts such as eminent domain.
There are many such examples despite my idelogical predisposition toward pure capitalism being the only functional way to maximize price discovery calculation capacity and lower price discovery time frames.
>It's ridiculous because that's a ridiculous way of "fueling" electric cars. They only time you need to be charging quickly away from home is when you need to drive further than the car's range in a single day. How often do you drive 250+ miles a day?
This is nonsense. The grid, from powerplant to the home, was built using a hodge podge of ad hoc duct taped regions and subsections with little to no capacity planning and where capacity planning was done regulatory oversight has so overburdened the energy marketplace such that the grid is barely managing to handle current consumption requirements.
California has regular planed outages in a first world nation.
The reality is this: If every car owner got a tesla and charged it over night you would fry the grid to a crisp.
The grid is NOT built to scale up to replace icus in all car engines because the average home consumes a miniscule amount of energy per day relative to a car. Pushing a modern heavy car burdened with all of the safety equipment mandated by governments down the road consumes orders of magnitude more energy than homes do.
Basically, if every person to get a new Tesla, you have only two options:
Rebuild ALL of the grid going up to the home to be able to handle the new nightly loads which will be orders of magnitude greater than previous home energy consumption. Rebuilding the entire power grid up to the home means running a whole bunch of new copper to the home.
Build new power charging stations and run MASSIVE amounts of coil to those stations necessary to recharge all the electric vehicles.
Of the two options, new centralized regen stations are MASSIVELY less costly and more efficient to build than to rip out all the old copper from homes and condos and replace it with new copper.
It's not even necessary to do the math on this, its obvious. But the math has been done, find it your self faggot.
>It sounds like you're trying to make a case against letting the market function. Are you a communist per chance?
No, its a simple observation that the grid still has some slack in it and it can handle the parasitic load of a few arrogant Tesla owners. It's also an observation that you fuckers are just patsys in a modern rail road style pincer move to corner the market on the power grid business by pushing you guys to overload the grid and force governments into central planning mode where they will use eminent domain and other tools of the state to give new monopoly / oligopoly powers to new power producers that want in on where the real money is: billing per watt hours on a grid that was forced into an upgrade cycle by losers that aren't thinking about being the reliability of having our energy dependence being distributed.
Your enthusiasm for technology blinds you to the full spectrum of consequences of going all electric.
(post is archived)