Electric Cars: Chev Bolt seems to be the first practical one.

[Travelover]

That's a no answer. Your not going anywhere longer than a cord in an battery car. Tell me why I should buy one. What do I get for my money.

I don't think you should buy one. I think you should find some other thread to rant in.

 

[IslandTractor]

I just assumed he is a teenager. :confused3:

He certainly has my pity.

Nah, he's just a dyed in the wool reactionary but his bark is worse than his bite.

 

[IslandTractor]

I think you will discover with AG blue the diesel produces less NOx that gas cars, and always beat gas on CO2. But those facts are not motivation for me at all.

No one is arguing that diesels don't have some advantages such as range over pure electric cars but I'd love to see that data that says the BMW diesel puts out less NOx and particulates than an electric or a modern gasoline fired automobile engine. Diesels typically put out less CO (not a big deal unless you like to sit in your garage with the engine running) and hydrocarbons (again, not a big contributor to air pollution toxicity) but are MUCH worse than gas engines on the dangerous NOx and soot (particulates). I can believe that particulates can be minimized but as we learned recently from the VW fiasco, NOx levels are not so easily managed. I know that your 3.0 biturbo is the most efficient of the BMW diesels (most of which are way way worse) but it still is going to put out more NOx and particulates per mile than a electric/hybrid that gets better fuel mileage and has longer range than the BMW (check out Prius Prime and Ford CMax Energi). And, while not as cushy, both of those cars cost $20K less than the BMW. How many miles do you have to drive per year to make that up????

 

[houstonscott]

No one is arguing that diesels don't have some advantages such as range over pure electric cars but I'd love to see that data that says the BMW diesel puts out less NOx and particulates than an electric or a modern gasoline fired automobile engine. Diesels typically put out less CO (not a big deal unless you like to sit in your garage with the engine running) and hydrocarbons (again, not a big contributor to air pollution toxicity) but are MUCH worse than gas engines on the dangerous NOx and soot (particulates). I can believe that particulates can be minimized but as we learned recently from the VW fiasco, NOx levels are not so easily managed. I know that your 3.0 biturbo is the most efficient of the BMW diesels (most of which are way way worse) but it still is going to put out more NOx and particulates per mile than a electric/hybrid that gets better fuel mileage and has longer range than the BMW (check out Prius Prime and Ford CMax Energi). And, while not as cushy, both of those cars cost $20K less than the BMW. How many miles do you have to drive per year to make that up????

Money is not a factor, performance, build quality, reliability, handling are real factors. I see a Prius as not much more than an uncomfortable stuffy box, I'd never get into, not even a serious consideration for a car. Non starter. Can't get out of its own way.

 

[IslandTractor]

Money is not a factor, performance, build quality, reliability, handling are real factors. I see a Prius as not much more than an uncomfortable stuffy box, I'd never get into, not even a serious consideration for a car. Non starter. Can't get out of its own way.

With those criteria, the only factor that favors BMW over Tesla is range.

 

[buickanddeere]

Greenies??? You're a brownie then cause you like pollution?? Let's back off on the name calling. It doesn't solve any problems, it just divides us further. Peace?

I don't think any reasonable person expects energy for free or that pollution will end. But back in the real world ... the reason California has been the leader on air pollution control is simply because the air here became unbreatheable. I have a photo on here somewhere showing the State Capitol as seen from the western slope of the Sierras, it is hidden in murky yellow crud that looks like the photos we see today of China. Our politicians didn't go nuts, rather they (finally) responded to their voters who demanded that they Do Something. Sorry that your officials enacted the same things elsewhere! In the broadest sense the adoption of electric vehicles in China and India and to a far lesser extent here, will help keep the air breatheable all over the planet. The US won't be the leader in adopting this, we don't have the critical need that particularly China does right now to turn down the steady increase in air pollution since so much has been done already. But I would like to help in that regard if costs were similar. They aren't, as you noted, so I still drive 2005 and 1999 vehicles, about 120k miles on each, that work like new but are technologically obsolete. I'm curious about motor vehicle progress, not someone who will throw money at Making A Statement with what I drive.

Natural gas (and hydro) is the big source for electrical generation here, not coal or imported petroleum. But OPEC price-setting in the middle east and Venezuela is a primary basis for energy pricing, so we are partly dependent on their goals for what we pay. Look at the recent example of OPEC flooding the market with cheap petroleum with the goal of driving the N Dakota drillers out of business. If we could sever the dependence on energy pricing that is based on what the Saudis want, we could ignore them - and the chaos they are funding all over the middle east. Let them figure it out, bring the troops home. I realize these are long term ideals, not a basis for present choices. But where our choices can move progress forward without costing any more, why not choose that direction.

If you have not noticed lets bring you 50 years into the future form the past where you are still stuck. Coal power plants have scrubbers, lime injection and particulate precipitators.
Nuclear does not emit CO2. Natural gas does btw.
The LA basin was called " the valley of smokes" by the natives long before white man ever set foot in the area.
Tell you want. Move out there somewhere and do not use any oil directly or indirectly in your or your family's life.

 

[buickanddeere]

Battery degradation - I think it was Tesla I was reading about but I'll bet GM is doing the same thing: The battery capacity shown on the dash display and in the published ratings is less than the actual technical capacity, and the charging circuits don't use that extra capacity in the early years, so the first owner will see little to no degradation in what appears to be available. The car will meet its published specs for a long time due to the intelligent charger which only gradually 'sees' that it needs to charge to the real 100%. It's the owner's experience that remains uniform over several years, not the battery.


(Related: I've read that Tesla's stationary batteries are their means to recycle automotive batteries).

And something I read related to Bolt: the advertised quick charge, something like 90 miles in 30 minutes, is qualified by some unreasonable conditions. 1) weather that allows full charge but prevents overheating, around a constant 70 degrees. 2) Only if starting from a near-depleted battery. This isn't good for the battery and doesn't match a real world owner's use of the vehicle. Nobody with a 235 mile range will intentionally just make it home with only 2~5 miles of capacity remaining. 3) Charging only persists at maximum for the first 50% of capacity (including that claimed 90 miles) then the rate drops until 70%, then drops again to slower charging for the final 30%. Owners have documented this while I don't think it is in the published specs. In summary overnight charging works fine for a commuter, expecting to go on a road trip and use public fast chargers along the way is a little optimistic.

There's a lot to learn. EV's don't have a lot in common with traditional auto technology.

Apparently you are unaware that automotive manufactures do not allow full discharge no full charging of batteries. This leaves a cushion on both ends to hide lost capacity.

 

[buickanddeere]

In fact, 34% of the US electric energy generation is from NG. Coal is number two with 30%. Nuclear produces about 20%.
Electric cars are not only about saving the planet. They are about 4-5 times more energy efficient than ICE. ICE uses about 5% energy from the fuel due to transportation and processing losses. Electric cars use about 20-25 % of energy accounting for the same transportation and processing losses. If the energy is generated by renewables they could use up 90%. The issue is that fossil hydrocarbon can be used to make better stuff than generating energy by burning it in cars.

Thermal power plants that charge electric vehicles have an efficiency of between 33 and 50%. btw your figures for ice vehicles are lower than real world figures.

 

[buickanddeere]

Houstonscott this will make your head explode:

India cancelling huge coal power station because it wants to focus on renewable energy

Country wants to become a solar power leader by 2030

"Gujarati state officials had planned a 4,000-Megawatt ultra-mega power project (UMPP).

"It would have been the state of Gujarat's second UMPP.
But the government decided focusing on renewables was a better longer term strategy.

Show us solar and wind installations that are not engineering studies or are not funded with grants or subsidized wholesale rates.

 

[buickanddeere]

Is this argument coming from someone who got federal tax credit for putting solar panels on his home???? You have a sedan that produces more NOx air pollution than any other passenger vehicle on the road today. Is that something to brag about?

And, gear heads should love the technology (21st century) behind electric, hybrid and various combinations of the two. What's not to love about regenerative braking? Free energy. Battery technology will continue to improve a lot faster than diesel emissions controls too so lots for a gear head to be excited about in that area too.

Battery tech can not improve unless the Almighty decides to add new elements to the periodic table. You are stuck with Lithium batteries for highest energy density, if you don't mind sitting on a bomb waiting to burst into flames like the units on the Boeing 787.