Compare the original Leaf to a Tesla of today. Look at the decreasing charging times, the increasing range, the growing number and power of rapid charging stations, the advancement in battery chemistry and engineering. The idea that the first ever electric semi is the end of the road can not be supported at this point. The market for trucks is obviously NOT all long haul. Semis are delivering to stores, construction sites, and all sorts of places. The idea that your concern for sleepers and super long routes is what all trucks must do is just plain not supportable.
yeah let's do that. And at a shorter range but also a shorter charge time. And we're talking about parking at your house and charging it while it's not being used and driving it 30 or 40 miles a day that's perfectly adequate. It's cheaper it's more efficient it's better made the only thing that sucks about it is the charging Network rapid charging of the exists because these cars are a novelty. For rapid chargers use the same amount of energy is 230 homes. California was talking about installing 1.5 million of these that would be a good start if you're talking about 20% of vehicles being electric the only problem is when they're all charging this will use the same energy as 86 million homes. California and all of the states in its power grid don't produce that much energy. Again it's not magical pixies that make electricity. Battery chemistry is not going to make a huge difference you still need a cathode you still need an electrode and you still need an electrolyte. The only hope for batteries is solid state and they will not put that in cars because you won't replace it. Also fast charging damages batteries. physics are the end of the road. In order for a semi to be as capable as a regular semi it would have to have 15 tons of batteries. That's with the absolute best battery technology. So even if it was it's capable as diesel power vehicle it wouldn't be able to call even half of the weight is a standard semi. yeah there's a lot of other components involved that I've stated that you missed. There's longevity these will not last as long as a diesel semi. Especially if they're doing fast charging the best case scenario you probably get about 80 90,000 mi out of them before the battery fails and it's pretty much the end of the truck. There's also the downtime if we're talking about massive batteries you need massive charging time this means you have to double or even possibly triple the amount of vehicles you have in your motor pool that's triple the insurance triple the registration fees triple the tires triple the maintenance triple everything. It's the most inefficient concept you ever devised by humans I never mention sleepers or super long routes. That's a straw man you fabricated because you don't want to address the other problems even with short or medium runs that electric trucks will have. And again I'll point this one out wherever you stop and plug these trucks in if you want them to be ready to go in 8 hours you probably have to have your own power plant. Because a massive battery needs massive amounts of time to charge. And that's what the fast charger and that's going to shorten the life of the truck causing dendritic growth in the battery. Shorts and possible fires will be the results of that. This isn't smart it isn't innovative. It's just denial of reality.
You're mixing and matching your data. And, yes we do need more electricity for this and other reasons. You are listing the factors that are rapidly improving. Batteries are rapidly improving charging speed, reducing damage to fast charging, moving away from substances that are expensive (in various ways), etc. I have no idea what you mean by "won't replace it". EV batteries are not being made to create an aftermarket in replacement batteries, if that is what you mean. Your 15 tons of batteries is ridiculous, as it is about 3X what is used today, and batteries are improving rapidly. You have no basis for your guesses about the future. Again, you're coming up with more unsubstantiated claims.
You are being dishonest. 600% more. You are preaching the gospel of the electric car and ignoring the reality. it's not hard, it's simple English. The life of the vehicle is dependent on the life of the battery. why? No what's used today is diesel. thus saith the lord. it's not guesses it's the laws of physics. Praise be to the electric car god. I'm just not a follower of this religion I'm skeptical of it.
I'm absolutely fine with you being skeptical. The point about battery weight is that you suggested 15 tons when the Tesla semi batter pack is 5.0 or 5.5 tons.
The US automotive industry has been continuously subsidized and bailed out by taxpayers. This will not stop because of the transition to EVs. It will become more common for taxpayer money to accumulate in the hands of auto execs etc. as US manufacturers continue to make poor decisions and be immune from the consequences. It doesn’t matter if current EV subsidies are permanent. It matters only that they will transfer billions if not trillions of dollars from the poorest to the most wealthy. You said this early in our discussion. I pointed out the Tesla semis Pepsi is getting now we’re paid for 100% by government (funded by the most egregious tax ever devised to empower the largest corporations) as well as an overwhelming majority of charging infrastructure needed to run them. If we are really concerned about the health and wealth of the less fortunate we must acknowledge what’s really going on here. https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12992-021-00781-6 We are literally giving EVs and charging infrastructure to a corporation known to be one of the most able to afford EVs on their own. A company known to prey on the poor and destroy their health while transferring their wealth to large corporations and their shareholders. And the populist notion it’s being done to save lives and the planet is patently absurd—but people buy into the notion because they are completely unaware of the facts. I know it won’t matter to many and facts will be ignored based on emotions, but at least now some of those facts have been presented here by me. There really isn’t any US auto industry. There is a hollow shell of an industry being held together by taxpayers and foreign cheap labor. Sorry, you are off into fallacy land again. I have never “worried” about the cost of electricity vs petroleum fuels. Ever. I am concerned the policies you support are transferring wealth from the poorest to the most wealthy. America hasn’t had a viable automotive industry for decades. Viable industries don’t require billions of dollars of subsidies and bailouts on a regular ongoing basis. Again, you are supporting that word you won’t say that isn’t capitalism but a collaboration of government and big businesses sold to the people with populist propaganda. None of the EV wealth transfer scheme I’ve exposed to you is based on capitalism. You need to stop using that word because you clearly don’t understand what it means.
Please site this info. I'd like to know, and just guessing its magnitude isn't good enough. Tax credits are on a per model basis. Tesla rebates ran out before others did. Those who track car purchases say that fuel efficient cars see an uptick in purchases during times when fuel costs are high. Well, now EVs have cheaper fuel. That's what I pointed to. I agree that there are problems with tax credits. However, I am somewhat susceptible to the reasons for tax credits on EVs. The health cost of burning oil in our cities is real. Reducing the importance of oil would be a major benefit to the world in terms of conflict as well as climate. If we want to cut tax credits, we should start with the tax benefits we give to fossil fuel. Those tax credits are for a decades old industry, and its about time that they pull their weight. In fact, the cost of healthcare, etc., should be charged them just like it is important to make other industries pay for the negative impacts they cost. Internalizing the externalized costs is an important economic principle. EV models are now being built to allow sales at prices that aren't out of range of new car buyers. It's been obvious this would happen, as it is pretty much a requirement of capitalism. I agree our legacy auto industry does have problems. For example, Ford's president says their $6B debt tied to warrantee work is a bigger issue than any other issue they have - EVs or whatever, and that quality is where they need to focus. Also, I suspect existing sales models which include a central corporation that delivers cars to more or less private sales satellites is a growing problem. We often see "sales" figures that have to do with cars shipped to dealers, regardless of whether they are ever sold. Plus, this shields the company from customers, leaves dealers the right to mark up prices, etc. I like the model where I can visit a site to see what I'm buying and then order on-line.
Which info? Past transfers of wealth or future ones? In the past the taxpayer has given billions to bail out auto makers. It’s been big business since the 1970 bailout of Chrysler. In a couple or few decades the same automakers are bankrupt again. Where did/does the money go? In the present there are numerous observable wealth transfers to look at. The purchase of Tesla semis for Pepsi by taxes on those least able to afford them I’ve already described. Pepsi got $15 million in “free” vehicles as well as $40,000 per unit in tax credits and virtually free charging units also paid for by taxpayers. Then you have to consider states mandating regulatory credit purchases. If GM can’t sell enough EVs in California for instance, they are forced to buy regulatory credits from Tesla who does sell the required percentage of EVs. This drove Tesla stock through the roof and who profits from that? Not the gas station attendant or janitor. It’s what makes people like Musk the richest people on earth. It’s no coincidence most states requiring regulatory credits top the list of states with highest wealth/income inequality by GINI coefficient. Then you must consider the income of the average EV purchaser is more than double the average US income. So the wealthiest are getting tax credits paid for by those unable to purchase EVs themselves. The average EV purchaser also already owns multiple vehicles and a home. I can’t quote a total wealth transfer figure in the future. I’m not able to predict exact future figures. But there are legions of documented current and past wealth transfers to run the numbers on like with Pepsi and Tesla and the CARB. Asking me for exact figures of how many dollars the wealthy will extract from the less fortunate is like me asking you the exact date EVs will no longer have any government subsidies. That was changed with the Inflation Reduction Act. After December 2022 there are no limits on rebates. Sure. But minimum wage workers aren’t buying EVs. The upper classes are. People with double the average US income. Yes they do—at least temporarily. You claimed I was worried about the fuel cost of operating EVs. I never stated any such thing or inferred it. It’s irrelevant to my point about wealth transfer. What do you think the kid chiseling cobalt ore in the Congo for pennies a day so you can have an EV cares about your polluted city? If you are going to invoke effects on the world hadn’t we better think of that poor schmuck? You don’t need someone else to pay you to not burn oil in your city. LOL. You want oil companies to pay healthcare costs but want the poor to buy Pepsi new Tesla semis! SMH. Around 25,000 Americans die from consumption of sugary drinks annually while 17,000-20,000 die of vehicular pollution. Of course fossil fuel subsidies were a mistake. I already stated that. Now I’m trying to get people to see we shouldn’t make that EXACT same mistake with EVs. But to no avail. You do realize the electricity for powering EVs is HEAVILY subsidized, right? Without government subsidies electric vehicles would not be economical to power. From renewable energy tax credits to the cheap diesel fuel that moves coal to the power plants that still produce over 20% of our electricity and direct subsidies to natural gas production, the consumer cost of electricity is a fraction of what it would be without taxpayer subsidies. If you think EVs are a move away from fossil fuel subsidization you’ve been misled. Again, capitalism has little to do with current movement to affordability of EVs. There isn’t any free market which is a requirement of capitalism. I agree the dealership model of automobile sales is outdated and needs to go. It just adds cost and red tape. Dealer services stinks and is exorbitantly expensive anyway. Ford doesn’t have to be too concerned about solving their financial problems. There’s always a bailout option!
