Tesla semi

[houstonscott]

VCR’s were new tech. Of course prices were high when the fad was new . Any tech has a advancement curve that is initially rapid with the improvement proportional to the extra cost and engineering. As the tech matures there are some gains however the cost is very high for a small unit of gain. Engineering becomes complex and the tech complicated . For instance there are no new significant gains left to improve the lbs of fuel per HP per hour for a Diesel engine . Some diesels from the late 1950’s exceed the efficiency of some diesels in the same HP range today. Electric motors , no different . Gasoline and diesel still have the same btu’s per pound. Elements such as Lithium still have the same number of electrons per pound .

Now you've confused them. Both technologies are mature. LI batteries have been flying in military spacecraft since the early 1980's, those might have exceeded in performance to what you can get in a car. That's a long time ago. Not much has really changed. There are limits in physics and they are well understood.

 

[Sodo]

There are limits in physics and they are well understood.

When you hear the phrase "Everything that can be invented has been invented" it's attributed to Charles Duell, commissioner of the United States Patent and Trademark Office from 1898 to 1901.

But he didn't say that. In 1899, while Duell was in office, a joke story in Punch magazine (a comedy magazine) offered a look at the "coming century." A 'genius' asks "isn't there a clerk who can examine patents?" A boy replies "Quite unnecessary, Sir. Everything that can be invented has been invented." This comic exchange was somehow attributed to Charles Duell and it's referenced in hundreds of books since.

Strange how apt this situation is in 2017, 118 years later. A joke about short-sightedness becomes "truth".

Here's an actual quote from Mr. Duell, where it's pretty apparent he did not suffer from short-sightedness, and was well suited for the task of patent office commissioner.

In my opinion, all previous advances in the various lines of invention will appear totally insignificant when compared with those which the present century will witness. I almost wish that I might live my life over again to see the wonders which are at the threshold. -Charles Duell


Not accusing HS of shortsightedness; actually the opposite. To encourage short-sightedness (of TBN members) may be long-sightedness. Looking forward electric will compete with Petrol, and the inflated price ----- dropping. When its brutally obvious that the consumer clearly saves money, and less goes to the investment sectors.

Petroleum won't go away for a long time, but as electric vehicles rise in popularity, the price of petroleum will drop. For two reasons.
1) The petroleum producers will attempt to slow the shift to electric vehicle advantage by making petroleum more affordable (again). Remember $.25 per gallon? There's a LOT of leeway there..... not to 25c of course but there's lots of profit that can be slashed.
2) The resultant oil surplus will reduce the price. Many truckers, will be able to run their diesel trucks out on lower cost fuel. It will take YEARS. But the sooner electric comes on-board, the sooner the price will drop.

Basically the consumer has nothing but benefits ahead whenever their money is in their pockets, and withheld from top-performing investment sectors. This is the "REAL free market" and its why competition benefits the consumer. And why a monopoly (the petroleum producers) are marketing AGAINST electric so "bigly". Pay attention - the energy investment sector is not rallying against electric "by the goodness of their hearts".

 

[MossRoad]

Many truckers, will be able to run their diesel trucks out on lower cost fuel. It will take YEARS. ...

There won't be any truckers as the advances in automation are already leading to driverless trucks. Diesel or electric, they'll be unemployed sooner than later.

 

[CincyFlyer]

Oil and gas gets 15.5 billion/year subsidy in direct payment or tax breaks from federal goevernment and 3 billion from the states. Needles to say that it is not only O&G that gets those. If you add cost of defending of shipping routes the cost jumps to about estimated 52 billion/year.

Where does that federal government get "its" money? Same with the state. Most of it comes from its people, or the corporations run by its people.

 

[CincyFlyer]

There won't be any truckers as the advances in automation are already leading to driverless trucks. Diesel or electric, they'll be unemployed sooner than later.

Probably we'll still have local delivery by human, at least in my lifetime (unless drones get a lot larger). Still, one would think that anyone whose job can be automated would be seeing what else they can do, perhaps something less amenable to automation.

 

[Sodo]

There won't be any truckers as the advances in automation are already leading to driverless trucks. Diesel or electric, they'll be unemployed sooner than later.

Not anytime soon. YEARS. With lower fuel prices owner/operators will make some BIG dough in the meantime, and would be wise to save profits.
Changes to the HUGE freight infrastructure won't change fast. When it becomes viable, the large fleets buying new trucks will see the numbers (in using electricity) and will embrace driverless for sure too. You'll know it when they do it. When it produces profits for the "transportation investment sector". Theres a theme going here.

Good fear though.

 

[Gale Hawkins]

When you hear the phrase "Everything that can be invented has been invented" it's attributed to Charles Duell, commissioner of the United States Patent and Trademark Office from 1898 to 1901.

But he didn't say that. In 1899, while Duell was in office, a joke story in Punch magazine (a comedy magazine) offered a look at the "coming century." A 'genius' asks "isn't there a clerk who can examine patents?" A boy replies "Quite unnecessary, Sir. Everything that can be invented has been invented." This comic exchange was somehow attributed to Charles Duell and it's referenced in hundreds of books since.

Strange how apt this situation is in 2017, 118 years later. A joke about short-sightedness becomes "truth".

Here's an actual quote from Mr. Duell, where it's pretty apparent he did not suffer from short-sightedness, and was well suited for the task of patent office commissioner.

In my opinion, all previous advances in the various lines of invention will appear totally insignificant when compared with those which the present century will witness. I almost wish that I might live my life over again to see the wonders which are at the threshold. -Charles Duell


Not accusing HS of shortsightedness; actually the opposite. To encourage short-sightedness (of TBN members) may be long-sightedness. Looking forward electric will compete with Petrol, and the inflated price ----- dropping. When its brutally obvious that the consumer clearly saves money, and less goes to the investment sectors.

Petroleum won't go away for a long time, but as electric vehicles rise in popularity, the price of petroleum will drop. For two reasons.
1) The petroleum producers will attempt to slow the shift to electric vehicle advantage by making petroleum more affordable (again). Remember $.25 per gallon? There's a LOT of leeway there..... not to 25c of course but there's lots of profit that can be slashed.
2) The resultant oil surplus will reduce the price. Many truckers, will be able to run their diesel trucks out on lower cost fuel. It will take YEARS. But the sooner electric comes on-board, the sooner the price will drop.

Basically the consumer has nothing but benefits ahead whenever their money is in their pockets, and withheld from top-performing investment sectors. This is the "REAL free market" and its why competition benefits the consumer. And why a monopoly (the petroleum producers) are marketing AGAINST electric so "bigly". Pay attention - the energy investment sector is not rallying against electric "by the goodness of their hearts".

Great info and thoughts. Science lags happen because of the lagging minds of men in my view. The "laws" of science are only valid until they are broken by the next generation of minds. The power of the computer processor comes to mind. The consumer will be the winner I agree. Buggy chassis makers have to morph or go out of business. Body by Fisher logo comes to my mind.

While Tesla may not be around long term in their current format they have been a change agent and seems to eyes looking to the heavens to deploy even newer technology.

 

[buickanddeere]

Now you've confused them. Both technologies are mature. LI batteries have been flying in military spacecraft since the early 1980's, those might have exceeded in performance to what you can get in a car. That's a long time ago. Not much has really changed. There are limits in physics and they are well understood.

Many of the liberal arts and uneducated fans of EV and renewable energy proponents endlessly yap off about “New more efficient and cheaper batteries and solar panels just around the corner in research right now.” Ain’t no such thing. Stuck with where we are with battery energy density and PV output .

 

[buickanddeere]

When you hear the phrase "Everything that can be invented has been invented" it's attributed to Charles Duell, commissioner of the United States Patent and Trademark Office from 1898 to 1901.

But he didn't say that. In 1899, while Duell was in office, a joke story in Punch magazine (a comedy magazine) offered a look at the "coming century." A 'genius' asks "isn't there a clerk who can examine patents?" A boy replies "Quite unnecessary, Sir. Everything that can be invented has been invented." This comic exchange was somehow attributed to Charles Duell and it's referenced in hundreds of books since.

Strange how apt this situation is in 2017, 118 years later. A joke about short-sightedness becomes "truth".

Here's an actual quote from Mr. Duell, where it's pretty apparent he did not suffer from short-sightedness, and was well suited for the task of patent office commissioner.

In my opinion, all previous advances in the various lines of invention will appear totally insignificant when compared with those which the present century will witness. I almost wish that I might live my life over again to see the wonders which are at the threshold. -Charles Duell


Not accusing HS of shortsightedness; actually the opposite. To encourage short-sightedness (of TBN members) may be long-sightedness. Looking forward electric will compete with Petrol, and the inflated price ----- dropping. When its brutally obvious that the consumer clearly saves money, and less goes to the investment sectors.

Petroleum won't go away for a long time, but as electric vehicles rise in popularity, the price of petroleum will drop. For two reasons.
1) The petroleum producers will attempt to slow the shift to electric vehicle advantage by making petroleum more affordable (again). Remember $.25 per gallon? There's a LOT of leeway there..... not to 25c of course but there's lots of profit that can be slashed.
2) The resultant oil surplus will reduce the price. Many truckers, will be able to run their diesel trucks out on lower cost fuel. It will take YEARS. But the sooner electric comes on-board, the sooner the price will drop.

Basically the consumer has nothing but benefits ahead whenever their money is in their pockets, and withheld from top-performing investment sectors. This is the "REAL free market" and its why competition benefits the consumer. And why a monopoly (the petroleum producers) are marketing AGAINST electric so "bigly". Pay attention - the energy investment sector is not rallying against electric "by the goodness of their hearts".

Unless the Almighty adds some new elements to the periodic table, there is no way to even approach the energy density of diesel/gasoline with batteries . You can’t cheat the laws of physics no matter how noble your goal is or how much you want it .

 

[buickanddeere]

Where does that federal government get "its" money? Same with the state. Most of it comes from its people, or the corporations run by its people.

The greenies are quick to imagine all manner of “subsidies “ even though cash does not change hands . The long list of “costs” and the financial value is ludicrous. The greenies get away with it as most people hate oil companies and hope it is true in order to vilify the industry .
How much does the fosssil industry pay in fees, royalties , taxes and licenses into state/province and federal coffers ? How much income tax is paid on wages ? The typical greenie is a socialist and would be disappointed to watch finding disappear from their pet causes. IMF’s imagined $34-billion: Silly stats are behind claims that Canada subsidizes oil industry | Financial Post