Tesla semi

[vvanders]

Rather than call people names why not respond to the articles presented and the facts? You don't really want a discussion. Defend your position with facts or understand your world view is distorted.

No, we're calling it like it is. You're a troll in EV threads and not welcome here.

We've covered this ground before and it only ends up with you getting threads locked.

 

[TemporaryKubotaOwnerMark]

But Elon Musk knows how to sucker people. He's a bigger con than Bernie Madoff, and a lot smarter. He does it legally, and he gets people to worship him in the process. That's a pretty good insurance plan against prison time.

And here it is....

You miss the point. Elon is a technology disrupter on a mission to eliminate automotive vehicles as a primary contributor to air pollution. He's not trying to compete with GM or other major OEMs by producing 5-10 million vehicles annually. His goal is to produce enough affordable ZEVs, 500,000 or so per year, to keep the pressure on the big OEMs to play catchup with Tesla's products by developing ZEVs of their own. That's why nearly 10 years ago he made all of Tesla's ZEV patents public. And so far he's been able to attract a huge number of both small and large idealistic investors who share his beliefs about the future of automotive technology and who put their money on Tesla.

Even the oh-so-adoring first name familiarity:

There isn't even any "catching up"; Elon has made all of the technology available for free.

Elon! Elon! Elon! Elon!

:yuck:

 

[houstonscott]

No, we're calling it like it is. You're a troll in EV threads and not welcome here. We've covered this ground before and it only ends up with you getting threads locked.

You sure it's not you getting thread locked,not sticking to facts of subject, and attacking people like right now. Stick to topic, because you are confronted with defending a position your solution is to remove the push back. Sorry man up.

 

[Walt 2002]

Doubt you are going to see the subsidy for these That previous administration doled out. They need to stand on their own.

Walt Conner

 

[vvanders]

You sure it's not you getting thread locked,not sticking to facts of subject, and attacking people like right now. Stick to topic, because you are confronted with defending a position your solution is to remove the push back. Sorry man up.

You're right, how could I possibly stand up to such an internet titan as yourself? I must repent my ways and drive my EV off a cliff.

Or I can add you to my ignore filter.

 

[houstonscott]

Doubt you are going to see the subsidy for these That previous administration doled out. They need to stand on their own. Walt Conner

Walt, do you drive a 2002?

 

[daugen]

Walt, do you drive a 2002?

I started this thread out of genuine interest so I get to ask you politely HS and others to please stop the rock throwing and verbal jousting.
This is not Unfriendly Politics.
Our world is changing and we all have different opinions on how that is going to happen.
Every car manufacturer is touting a huge electric car future. There is no getting around this...even for a guy whose
nickname in high school was dualquad.

So yes, let's discuss the science of this. And who is going to pay for it. That's fair.
I think chemistry and science will solve the battery issues. Look how far they have come in the last twenty years. Remember nicads?.....

Progress is usually made by overachievers.

I watch a few train videos and yeah the drive motors are electric,
but the sound coming out of the subwoofer of the EMD engines thumping along is just magic.
Let's face it, electric engines are boring.

Like so many things, follow the money, if it saves money or at least qualifies for a government grant, it's going to get built.

 

[daugen]

I have always thought that somehow an electric truck would be like a coal fired steam locomotive.
Just pull its energy supply right behind it. But we all know road trains don't back well...
Perhaps an industry standard battery pack that can be changed out instead of charged? Probably too heavy unless they had some automated
machine like a high tech garbage truck with arms. Not an issue with cars, but no truck driver is going to fiddle his thumbs on the clock if his log book says drive and his
battery pack is down...

There isn't any reason a trailer could not have solar panels on it and a storage battery to run all the lights, little less load on the truck.
A reefer is going to be a challenge, that a/c unit must pull some amps. But still doable if it can cycle on and off and the trailer perhaps is extra insulated.
I always look for solutions...

 

[houstonscott]

I started this thread out of genuine interest so I get to ask you politely HS and others to please stop the rock throwing and verbal jousting. This is not Unfriendly Politics. Our world is changing and we all have different opinions on how that is going to happen. Every car manufacturer is touting a huge electric car future. There is no getting around this...even for a guy whose nickname in high school was dualquad. So yes, let's discuss the science of this. And who is going to pay for it. That's fair. I think chemistry and science will solve the battery issues. Look how far they have come in the last twenty years. Remember nicads?..... Progress is usually made by overachievers. I watch a few train videos and yeah the drive motors are electric, but the sound coming out of the subwoofer of the EMD engines thumping along is just magic. Let's face it, electric engines are boring. Like so many things, follow the money, if it saves money or at least qualifies for a government grant, it's going to get built.

No one is throwing rocks, or jousting. You want to discuss this or not, science is not in your favor on issue. Your post is nothing more than a political rant for EV and an attempt to stop push back. Shame on you. There is another side to this discussion you'll have to answer too. LI batteries are unchanged since 1985. Space craft industry had them, we've had them for 20 years now. Did you read article study about how much power we'd need to charge a nation of EV cars, it's laughable. It's a hobby niche car, that shouldn't be subsidized any longer.

 

[wagne223]

I very much understand the reason for developing alternative energy and I support such efforts. If a person wants to purchase and operate an alternative fuel vehicle I think it is great. I would much rather my tax dollars did not support the companies though. Dont get me wrong, I dont think the government should be supporting any business.

With that said, the thing I despise is any type of false narrative. Calling a vehicle ZEV (Zero Emissions Vehicle), to me, is a false narrative. Sure, there may be zero emissions from the vehicle, however, the energy put into the vehicle and the devices to store that energy have emissions and an environmental impact.

If the vehicle is charged from the grid, that energy has emissions.

If the vehicle is charged by wind, solar, or hydro plant, then the environmental impact comes from the raw materials to make those products.

Raw materials must be collected, then processed into products we can use. Those activities produce emissions and in the case of batteries, changes to the landscape, the earth itself, and other forms of pollution.

Then there is the disposal once the vehicle has worn out parts, is crashed, or just used up its life. Batteries are a hazardous waste (all batteries not just EV batteries) that must be disposed of or rebuilt.

I would be much happier if we could get some real data in reference to total environmental impact comparing EV, Hybrid, and ICE vehicles.

Again, I understand the need and I am not opposed to the development of EV and Hybrid vehicles. I just feel like most who own those types of vehicles look down on those of us who dont because they THINK they have no impact on the environment. People think that way because of the false narrative.

Personally I think my environmental impact is less then any EV or Hybrid. For daily use I drive a 2001 Hyundai Accent that gets 35 mpg, and only use my 2006 truck if I need to haul something or I'm going to hunt camp.

By not buying a new vehicle every few years, and driving a fuel efficient vehicle for 90% of my needs, I feel my total impact is very low.

I feel an independent (if that would even be possible with all the corruption) origination should come up with a scale to estimate each vehicles total environment impact from raw materials to end of use including what can be recycled and what is hazardous waste. Then consumers could make an informed decision and actually understand what impact their decisions make.

But I'm not a fool! Like most things, the general public will never know these facts. Only what we are told to believe.