Tesla semi

[Dadnatron]

I'm all for alternative fuels. I'm all for alternative forms of transportation. I look forward to the day when vehicles are capable of driving themselves. (Hopefully before I am old and my children want to take away my keys.)

I love driving and have driven since I was 5yo on my dad's lap and 7yo alone, when my Grandpa would put the truck in 1st gear and let me drive all over the field as he was working it. But in reality, any more, there are a lot of things I could and would rather be doing, than driving.

But concerning ZEVs or so called... I don't like subsidies in ANY FORM, from the Government. I do recognize that certain aspects of 'progress' however you wish to term it, would be more difficult without subsidies in some form, however, the damage they cause is not worth the supposed benefit.

When it makes financial sense to purchase an electric car/truck... I'll do so. When solar panels make more sense than hooking up to the grid, I'll do so. I believe both will happen before I'm gone. Trucks... I'm all for them, but I believe there will be a bigger hurdle given the battery size, cost, and weight. Hauling around 10K lbs of battery not only costs efficiency, but also payload. (Perhaps the offset of fewer mechanicals will make enough difference, although a 5K Tesla isn't showing it to be the case.) I can see short haul trucks being used, but I think it will be a while before long haul trucks are out in force. That is... barring a major breakthrough in battery tech.

In fact, I believe the BEST way for .gov to be involved... if it believes it wants to 'shepard' the people in a direction, is to offer a large award, to be given to a company who meets the goal set out beforehand. ie, 1st company to produce a battery with X capacity/lb, Y safety, and Z cost will receive X$B and a government contract for 3 years.

.gov 'needs' vehicles for function, even at the level I'd like to have .gov functioning. If the goal is lofty enough to make a real change... I would be much happier supporting THIS type of Tax manipulation, than subsidies.

 

[cqaigy2]

Ah there we go, just about right on schedule(although about half a page earlier than I predicted).

Like we covered in the massive EV thread that you managed to get locked before. If you don't like Tesla, don't buy one. If you think they're going to go under feel free to short the stock, although that would require you to put your money where your mouth is.

That's all I'll say on the subject.

Yup, coming out of the wood work. I wonder if that happens on Kubota threads too.

 

[wagne223]

Yup, coming out of the wood work. I wonder if that happens on Kubota threads too.

Happens on all threads on all forums when people have differing opinions and the thread does not go the way the OP planned.
Happens to me all the time.

 

[skylarkguy]

Sorry but this. The Electric Car Fantasy | The Rush Limbaugh Show is not an article. It's a transcript of a monolog. Please present something with citations from verifiable sources. Thank you.

 

[houstonscott]

Sorry but this. The Electric Car Fantasy | The Rush Limbaugh Show is not an article. It's a transcript of a monolog. Please present something with citations from verifiable sources. Thank you.

Read down to the professor who crushed the numbers for California alone going pure electric by 2040. Bing up his study, you'd be floored how much money and improvement and additional electric generation it would take to do that! Never going to happen, not there not anywhere. Bumping up against realty makes the discussion real not some science fiction tin hat discussion.

 

[Dadnatron]

Read down to the professor who crushed the numbers for California alone going pure electric by 2040. Bing up his study, you'd be floored how much money and improvement and additional electric generation it would take to do that! Never going to happen, not there not anywhere. Bumping up against realty makes the discussion real not some science fiction tin hat discussion.

Houstonscott... the difference in this... and its a HUGE difference, is that there is no 'home refueling' for gasoline powered vehicles in all but 'farm type' atmospheres. Whereas, MOST if not ALL powering of electric vehicles would be charged almost exclusively from home chargers.

The energy cost and requirement would be the same, but the source of that energy transfer, ie the gas station vs the home garage would be radically altered.

That argument is a straw man fallacy.

 

[CincyFlyer]

unfortunately for Tesla its Tesla that's having to play catchup, he's being beaten by the manufacturers up and down. If you are truly interested in using modern EV technologies the MB C350e has about tens times as much as any Tesla. And the CO2 thing has disappeared, and modern ICE is the cleanest for air pollution you can put fuel into... The need for electric has dried up, and a real examination of how much electric power generation would really be need if you could snap you finger and have a all EV America is impossible, EVER! I'd recommend you sell your stock.

The Electric Car Fantasy | The Rush Limbaugh Show

Not that I'd trust Rush's hyperbole (I used to listen to him a few decades ago, before he went over-the-top for ratings.) Nuclear power will solve the electrical generation issue, and the C350e certainly hasn't 10x the "technology" of the Tesla (the real-world battery range is rather laughable). The Tesla is good as an automobile, not solely as an electric automobile. Go drive one.

 

[Gale Hawkins]

At the age of 66 with a broad educational interest the self driving cars and trucks boggles my mind yet I am sure they are going mainstream.

From Amazon I just ordered the $59 AONE Lane Keeping and Frontal Crash warning system for our recently purchased 2010 Subaru Forester so I can play around with it. It connects to the OBD plug and uses your own Android 5.0+ smart phone. I would like a new Subaru with the Interactive EyeSight driving aids.

When all vehicles on the road are "aware" of one another then insurance rates are to drop.

 

[daugen]

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.

Shame on me Houston? I'm trying to return a little civility here. Your approach is so obnoxious and caustic no one wants to have a discussion with you. Please leave this thread and let the rest of us have a pleasant discussion. Your presence is not appreciated.
Can we be any clearer?

perhaps you just thrive on controversy and unhappiness. I don't, I'm trying to learn something here, and my post was hardly a rant.
But yours sure was, what a pot calling the kettle black.

 

[Dadnatron]

At the age of 66 with a broad educational interest the self driving cars and trucks boggles my mind yet I am sure they are going mainstream.

From Amazon I just ordered the $59 AONE Lane Keeping and Frontal Crash warning system for our recently purchased 2010 Subaru Forester so I can play around with it. It connects to the OBD plug and uses your own Android 5.0+ smart phone. I would like a new Subaru with the Interactive EyeSight driving aids.

When all vehicles on the road are "aware" of one another then insurance rates are to drop.

I think this is key... there will be a critical mass which is required in order for self driving vehicles to work well. Because, they will work consistently and when interacting with one another, should work well. Obviously there are always issues, however, it is the oddball human driver out there who decides to 'run the red light' which would never happen with a self driving car, mainly because lights would be obsolete, that is most likely to cause the accidents.

There obviously needs to be the 'human capable' driving, but there needs also to be a 'hands free' version. Similar to Will Smith's car in iRobot, without the killer laden buses.

irobot car scene - YouTube

 

[daugen]

I think this is key... there will be a critical mass

Where and when will that happen I wonder? Limited access California highways? Inner city busses?
This is genuine artificial intelligence on the road, and as someone who has been reading scifi for over fifty years, it's fun to see these visionary
ideas come true. But no matter what, unless you get on a train or something similar, you still have to pay attention to your driving.
That Tesla guy who got killed going under the truck sure wasn't paying attention.
I'm afraid it will be a long time before I feel comfortable letting the car do all the thinking. Right now I think that's called public transportation.

I think short haul busses would make the most sense. Known route, known consumption, should be able to get good cost per mile numbers.
Long haul trucks without a dedicated truck supercharger system is probably a nonstarter unless this is heavily controlled terminal to terminal plug in overnight trucking.

 

[4570Man]

Why would you want a short haul electric truck? There's a bakery locally that has a fleet of short haul trucks. Fuel costs for those is pretty marginal in their trucking operation and pennies compared to their overall budget.

 

[crazyal]

120kW is assuming that you're charging in series, there's no reason they couldn't do it in parallel. Most supercharger sites are 10 spots x 60kW each(they share a pair and will send 120kW if the other pair is unused).

600kW could still charge a 500kW pack in ~45 minutes. There's other benefits to doing it in parallel as they could run a higher pack voltage which helps with loss due to resistance/heating(V=IR and all that). My guess is they aren't going to use this for long-haul trucking in the short term but for scheduled point to point routes.

It's possible but now you are running into a power problem. If you are only worried about charging one truck at a time that would be ok but what happens when trying to charge 10 or more? 120kW super charger at 480v is 250 amps of current. To do what you are talking about would need 1000 amps per truck. Charging stations would need to be located at substations to handle that kind of power to keep the electrical loss to a minimum. Increasing the voltage isn't going to change the demand on the electrical grid needed to support it but it will bring new issues to deal with. It can be done but it will require plenty of changes to make it work.

Maybe the primary battery pack is in the trailer so it can be charged at the terminal overnight while loading?

Seems to me Musk must have included the parameters you describe in his calculations, and concluded it was workable.

Else why would he proceed as far as he has with his semi project? This guy is underbidding the traditional aerospace contractors for rockets, he's no dummy. I think he genuinely sees an opportunity here in trucking as well.

A lot of trailers are owned by different companies than the truck. Often they go hundreds or even millions of miles in their useful life. A 600kWh battery pack would cost (rough guess) $50k. That's a lot of money. When it's time to replace it the drivers are going to want it changed early (since less capacity means shorter driving times between charges) while trailer owners are going to be more likely to wait as long as possible to get their money out of the investment. If Tesla owned all the battery packs and did the charging and used a swap station it could work but the investment would be huge. 20,000 battery packs at $50k each would be a billion dollars. Then there's the cost of the charging and swap stations. Doable, of course, but it will be difficult for Tesla given their strained financial situation.

This showed up several months ago. Two of them were given to a local bus company for city routes. My wife was lucky enough to get to ride on one of them. She said it was very quiet when it pulled up but kind of noisy inside. Part of her route is on the interstate at 65, the buss struggled to even come close. When they came to a reasonable short hill it had to climb people on the bus were joking about getting a discount if they had to get out and help push it up the hill. When pushing the motor that hard she said it was very noisy. As far as I know they were parked and haven't been used since. These buses cost about not quite twice the cost of a diesel bus. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for advancements. In this case though the buses were to be charged by burning wood chips (which is destroying the forests around here) and I question just how much better it is for the environment.

 

[daugen]

Why would you want a short haul electric truck? There's a bakery locally that has a fleet of short haul trucks. Fuel costs for those is pretty marginal in their trucking operation and pennies compared to their overall budget.

Only because it would allow overnight charging within a planned test territory, without a requirement of a national charging infrastructure.
Just trying to figure out what would work first.

 

[/pine]

End of the road: will automation put an end to the American trucker?

End of the road: will automation put an end to the American trucker? | Technology | The Guardian

 

[vvanders]

It's possible but now you are running into a power problem. If you are only worried about charging one truck at a time that would be ok but what happens when trying to charge 10 or more? 120kW super charger at 480v is 250 amps of current. To do what you are talking about would need 1000 amps per truck. Charging stations would need to be located at substations to handle that kind of power to keep the electrical loss to a minimum. Increasing the voltage isn't going to change the demand on the electrical grid needed to support it but it will bring new issues to deal with. It can be done but it will require plenty of changes to make it work.

[snip]

I dunno, they just added another 10 bays at Centralia without any major changes(was chatting with the construction crew on my way through). That's ~20 bays x 60kW each. Agreed that there's probably some changes but I don't think it's going to be as significant as people think. Each supercharger is basically 2 standard house services(450v x 133A) so you can probably plan for it similar to how housing subdivisions are done.

One thing to keep in mind is operating costs for EVs are way below similar diesel/petrol engines. We pay $0.07/kWh here(and that's just residential, not wholesale) so a full "tank" for me is ~$6 for 300mi.

 

[houstonscott]

End of the road: will automation put an end to the American trucker? End of the road: will automation put an end to the American trucker? | Technology | The Guardian

First one hacked and kills a family all the driverless crap will be outlawed.

 

[vvanders]

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.

I agreed, I've never really liked the ZEV name, I've always called them BEV(Battery Electric Vehicle).

I think the lowest impact anyone can do is to keep their car around for as long as possible. Heck, I was driving a $500 car('03 Saturn Ion w/ 145k miles, original clutch!) before the Tesla and probably would have kept it another 5-10 years if I could. I'd never own anything in the same class as the Tesla, however we do think where Tesla(and EVs in general) is where the future is so we saw the purchase as an investment in the future of the company. Musk's approach to funding the mass market cars has been to use higher priced vehicles build the next thing(just like SpaceX).

The good news about Li-Ion is it's actually not that hazardous from a chemical perspective, it just tends to catch on fire if crushed so they don't like you to throw them away. The batteries themselves are recyclable and they're already using "worn" Tesla batteries as stationary power storage before finally breaking down the packs for material recycling.

Environmental issues aside I still believe that EVs will pave the future, if only for cost reasons. The operating costs for an EVs are pretty darn cheap. For instance where I'm at my costs break down with:

$0.07/kWh @ 325W/mi = $0.023/mi
35kmi per set of tires($1k) = $0.028/mi

Similar ICE would run:
35mpg @ $3.00 = $0.086/mi
Oil change 3k @ $40 = $0.013/mi
Tires(let's call this the same for comparison sake since they can vary widely) = $0.028/mi

$0.051/mi vs $0.127/mi

Also this is on a vehicle that has 500hp+ and weighs 5k lbs. You won't find a car that makes that kind of power, gets 35mpg and runs on regular so the gap widens. If you start comparing to a S-Class for instance the number gets closer to $0.200/mi.

As battery prices fall(which they will since they're a tech and not a resource) you'll see it start making more economic sense to run an EV for the cases where it fits than a traditional car.

 

[TemporaryKubotaOwnerMark]

First one hacked and kills a family all the driverless crap will be outlawed.

I'm sure people said the same thing about automobiles, but they replaced the horse anyway.

 

[TemporaryKubotaOwnerMark]

Nuclear power will solve the electrical generation issue

It could. It should.

I see no sign of that happening. When was the last time we built a nuke plant? And how long did the permitting process take for that one?