Still want an EV? (NO POLITICS)

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by gblansten

We've been at this for a while. There isn't likely much we haven't discussed in this thread.

Can't just say it has been discussed already and sweep it under the carpet as if it's been and done, it's happening and needs to be discussed further.
Properties and other vehicles are catching fire on a regular basis from EV fires and just admit that an EV fire is far more powerful and very difficult to extinguish than that of a gas car should it alight for some reason ie a crash. It's not possible to extinguish an eV fire with a portable extinguisher where with a gas car it can be put out if quick action is taken.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by gblansten

We've been at this for a while. There isn't likely much we haven't discussed in this thread.

True, but that article validates it.

[DrVenture]

Originally Posted by gblansten

We've been at this for a while. There isn't likely much we haven't discussed in this thread.

No, and I am certainly not reading 3 years of people talking past each other. Hyper focusing on individual items at the expense of the big picture.

I am interested only in the potential for advancement and breakthroughs. What has occurred in the past 10 years is phenomenal. Now that there is so much emphasis on batteries and more, I expect even more progress. Everything from engine efficiencies to regenerative braking to improved systems management. The whole enchilada.

It certainly isn't science-based to focus on problems and not solutions. Do detractors think this is going away? Do they think no one else knows of the issues regarding current LI batteries? It has been very well publicized. Do they believe that no further advancement will ever occur?

The researchers, automakers, NASA, battery makers, etc are well aware what the problems are. And that is all that matters.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

So,what are you recommending?

Pure series-hybrid. I've posted about it numerous times.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

My takeaway is that for some reason you have been obsessing over this for three years. Which seems personal. And it still isn't going to change a thing. Because it is not the only aspect of this that is relevant, no matter how much you choose to emphasize it. And for the record, I haven't disagreed with any of the data regarding LI batteries, though you appear to be suggesting that I am.

My point has always been that the problems will be addressed and solved or mitigated. And new ones will come up. and so on.

I'm not obsessed about EV. My engineering background let's me fully embrace the efficiency of the electric drivetrain, from current-to-the-motor-to-power-at-the-tire contact patch. Drawing the current from a giant battery is stupid. Using battery chemistry that generates its own oxygen to induce fire and cause thermal runaway makes it even more stupid. Build an on-board electrical generation unit to provide the current, then I'm EV all the way.

Develop that architecture under natural market forces, then my obsession over the societial/economic impacts of forced BEV adoption goes away. Can't delve into that subject any further because [NO POLITICS], but you know the drill.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

No, and I am certainly not reading 3 years of people talking past each other. Hyper focusing on individual items at the expense of the big picture.

I am interested only in the potential for advancement and breakthroughs. What has occurred in the past 10 years is phenomenal. Now that there is so much emphasis on batteries and more, I expect even more progress. Everything from engine efficiencies to regenerative braking to improved systems management. The whole enchilada.

It certainly isn't science-based to focus on problems and not solutions. Do detractors think this is going away? Do they think no one else knows of the issues regarding current LI batteries? It has been very well publicized. Do they that no further advancement will ever occur?

The researchers, automakers, NASA, battery makers, etc are well aware what the problems are. And that is all that matters.

I don't see the last 10 years a phenomenal. It's just really big-ass batteries charged at 800V, with some better thermal management. And a little bit gain in motor efficiency, but with great progress on manufacturing cost reduction (other than batteries). Better batteries may be on the horizon, but are they affordable and cost competitive with ICE? That is where I see the problem.

[DrVenture]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Pure series-hybrid. I've posted about it numerous times.

Will they use LI batteries?

I see a future with EV, hybrid, ICE and possibly others. In terms of complexity, hybrids are no panacea. An EV is far less complex and for those who can plug in at home, a much better choice. New battery tech will make them even more attractive, as it continues to evolve.

I doubt there will ever be a single solution for all potential uses. Not in our lifetimes anyhow. EV development will continue. So will hybrid development.

If the base case for a hybrid is better mileage, with more complexity and all that entails, I remain uninterested. I don't need the added initial cost and complexity to save a few bucks on gas. The folks who charge at home do not either. No doubt they are best for some.

Don't current hybrids combine the dangers of both battery and fuel fires? I got the impression that seems to be a big issue for you.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

Will they use LI batteries?

I see a future with EV, hybrid, ICE and possibly others. In terms of complexity, hybrids are no panacea. An EV is far less complex and for those who can plug in at home, a much better choice. New battery tech will make them even more attractive, as it continues to evolve.

I doubt there will ever be a single solution for all potential uses. Not in our lifetimes anyhow. EV development will continue. So will hybrid development.

If the base case for a hybrid is better mileage, with more complexity and all that entails, I remain uninterested. I don't need the added initial cost and complexity to save a few bucks on gas. The folks who charge at home do not either. No doubt they are best for some.

Don't current hybrids combine the dangers of both battery and fuel fires? I got the impression that seems to be a big issue for you.

Pure series hybrid is less complex as compared to current parallel hybrids because there is no mechanical connection between the engine and the drive wheels. Pure series uses a much smaller battery, around 20kWh (vs. 90kWh in a 300-mile EV). 20kWh battery can be made using a safer chemical mix, or solid state. Because it's not 90kWh, it can be smaller but more expensive per hWh yet still affordable to use in a pure series platform. If an ICE is used to generate the electricity it can be made of different, heat-tolerant materials for more efficient combustion (less heat loss). Because it's not directly driving the wheels it is isolated from driveline shock, so it can be lighter weight and tuned to it max power efficiency in a narrow RPM band. It's simpler because there is no transmission.

You see a mix of different fuel-type architectures, all well and good, but [NO POLITICS] are keyed only to BEV. That's the problem. No diversity of (engineering) thought.

I really don't care about the fire issue, statistically it's nill. In my 1.4M miles of driving I've seen just one (1) on fire. It was a BMW E90 and probably the CCV heater valve caused it (LOL). I've seen numerous accidents but all did not result in a fire. I do think a battery with a built-in oxidizer is stupid, but I've already said I think batteries powering electric cars is stupid.

[DrVenture]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I'm not obsessed about EV. My engineering background let's me fully embrace the efficiency of the electric drivetrain, from current-to-the-motor-to-power-at-the-tire contact patch. Drawing the current from a giant battery is stupid. Using battery chemistry that generates its own oxygen to induce fire and cause thermal runaway makes it even more stupid. Build an on-board electrical generation unit to provide the current, then I'm EV all the way.

Develop that architecture under natural market forces, then my obsession over the societial/economic impacts of forced BEV adoption goes away. Can't delve into that subject any further because [NO POLITICS], but you know the drill.

I am not at all interested in the political angle. I am pretty certain that people of all political beliefs own EVs. I have noticed that those who are adamantly against them are less diverse. I would also submit that economics is only political to those who choose to make it so. Like the saying, give a small child a hammer and the whole world is a nail.

I encourage you, or anyone to do what Elon Musk did, disrupt. Build a company to produce a vehicle that drives with on-board power generation. Be forewarned however that every single automaker in the world, has been exploring this approach and came to the conclusion that they needed to go the present route. Maybe someone can figure out an angle that they cannot. It was, after all, Elon that forced automakers to jump on this, so as not to be left behind. Tesla existed before there were EV incentives and will presumably exist when they are gone. If it were up to me there would be no EV incentives.

Meanwhile we live in a Democracy, if that isn't too political to assert. And in a democracy, a majority rules. As the saying goes, democracy is the worst form of government...except all the rest.

[DrVenture]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Pure series hybrid is less complex as compared to current parallel hybrids because there is no mechanical connection between the engine and the drive wheels. Pure series uses a much smaller battery, around 20kWh (vs. 90kWh in a 300-mile EV). 20kWh battery can be made using a safer chemical mix, or solid state. Because it's not 90kWh, it can be smaller but more expensive per hWh yet still affordable to use in a pure series platform. If an ICE is used to generate the electricity it can be made of different, heat-tolerant materials for more efficient combustion (less heat loss). Because it's not directly driving the wheels it is isolated from driveline shock, so it can be lighter weight and tuned to it max power efficiency in a narrow RPM band. It's simpler because there is no transmission.

You see a mix of different fuel-type architectures, all well and good, but [NO POLITICS] are keyed only to BEV. That's the problem. No diversity of (engineering) thought.

I really don't care about the fire issue, statistically it's nill. In my 1.4M miles of driving I've seen just one (1) on fire. It was a BMW E90 and probably the CCV heater valve caused it (LOL). I've seen numerous accidents but all did not result in a fire. I do think a battery with a built-in oxidizer is stupid, but I've already said I think batteries powering electric cars is stupid.

Toyota is doing just that, using expensive solid state on a smaller scale to start. Eventually it will translate to larger scale, then become even cheaper. It is what is already happening. It is also important to note that hybrid sales are rising as EV sales slip. The market is doing its thing. automakers are responding. In absolute terms, any hybrid is substantially more complex than an EV. Any ICE is substantially more complex. If there is a significant breakthrough in battery tech, hybrids may be hard to justify. Or at least drop in market share.

Now that we agree that the whole fire thing is a bit overstated, it can be put to rest. And it didn't even take us three years to get here.

Diversity of engineering requires funding. I've posted only a fraction of what is going on in the transportation engineering ecosystem. The automakers, including Tesla, are not going to take any real chances that destroy shareholder value. Imagine they did and no one would step up to buy at the true price point. Shareholders are screwed, engineers are fired, management is tossed and bankruptcy is announced. Pure research is hard to find these days, much is done at the university level and requires subsidization. Big companies rarely take chances.

Right now though, automakers are diving in. Even if this is just a transition phase, it has brought many good jobs to the marketplace. Seventy years ago, Sunbeam was making toasters that weighed 20 lbs and are all now in a landfill. it doesn't matter because it employed people who went out and bought Chevies and the salesmen's wives bought Wonderbread. All that is gone now and here we are. Was that all for nothing?

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by DrVenture

Toyota is doing just that, using expensive solid state on a smaller scale to start. Eventually it will translate to larger scale, then become even cheaper. It is what is already happening. It is also important to note that hybrid sales are rising as EV sales slip. The market is doing its thing. automakers are responding. In absolute terms, any hybrid is substantially more complex than an EV. Any ICE is substantially more complex. If there is a significant breakthrough in battery tech, hybrids may be hard to justify. Or at least drop in market share.

Now that we agree that the whole fire thing is a bit overstated, it can be put to rest. And it didn't even take us three years to get here.

Diversity of engineering requires funding. I've posted only a fraction of what is going on in the transportation engineering ecosystem. The automakers, including Tesla, are not going to take any real chances that destroy shareholder value. Imagine they did and no one would step up to buy at the true price point. Shareholders are screwed, engineers are fired, management is tossed and bankruptcy is announced. Pure research is hard to find these days, much is done at the university level and requires subsidization. Big companies rarely take chances.

Right now though, automakers are diving in. Even if this is just a transition phase, it has brought many good jobs to the marketplace. Seventy years ago, Sunbeam was making toasters that weighed 20 lbs and are all now in a landfill. it doesn't matter because it employed people who went out and bought Chevies and the salesmen's wives bought Wonderbread. All that is gone now and here we are. Was that all for nothing?

I disagree on the complexity issue. EV with proper thermal management and large batteries are as complex as ICEV. Adding an engine to generate electricity in a series hybrid and removing a planetary gearset transmission that parallel hybrids use is simplification.

An ICE-powered EV series hybrid has all the upside of EV efficiency and all the upside of ICEV recharging simplicity. My opinion is after hanging on an EV forum for over a year now, overall, ICEV are far less complex to own and operate as a complete use case. Add cost in as a factor and I see no advantage to BEV adoption at this point. You can talk about the EV future all you want, but that's not now.

As far as fires go, although both are statistically insignificant, I'll take an ICEV fire over an EV fire in terms of safety and survivability. It's the qualitative aspect of the phenomenon rather than the quantitative. That's been my discussion point all along.

[eugenebmw]

Let's put the EV fire on the side. We have more concerns from the Tesla owned public charging stations need to be address. Everyone need to practice "sharing is caring" and see how it go

Reason 105 not to buy Tesla’: Tesla driver warns against charging up next to a Cyber truck

https://www.dailydot.com/news/chargi...la-cybertruck/

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by eugenebmw

Let's put the EV fire on the side. We have more concerns from the Tesla owned public charging stations need to be address. Everyone need to practice "sharing is caring" and see how it go

Reason 105 not to buy Tesla’: Tesla driver warns against charging up next to a Cyber truck

https://www.dailydot.com/news/chargi...la-cybertruck/

Reason number three not to get any EV are the infernal tv ads for them that plague advert time non stop seemingly on every single serial break .

[gblansten]

Originally Posted by eugenebmw

Let's put the EV fire on the side. We have more concerns from the Tesla owned public charging stations need to be address. Everyone need to practice "sharing is caring" and see how it go

Reason 105 not to buy Tesla’: Tesla driver warns against charging up next to a Cyber truck

https://www.dailydot.com/news/chargi...la-cybertruck/

I doubt many share your pedantic concerns.

[eugenebmw]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Reason number three not to get any EV are the infernal tv ads for them that plague advert time non stop seemingly on every single serial break .

This is called brain wash my friend.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by eugenebmw

This is called brain wash my friend.

Easily rectified by the mute button

[RM7]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Reason number three not to get any EV are the infernal tv ads for them that plague advert time non stop seemingly on every single serial break .

Do boomers still watch TV?

[pbonsalb]

I don’t see any EV ads on my TV or cable or streaming.

[M5Rick]

^ Non stop over here, I have a good laugh at them spending silly money on tv ads for vehicles that fewer people want.
Cue Talking Heads - On a Road To Nowhere.

[M5Rick]

12 council EV vans have replaced diesel vans on the Isle of Wight.[no political content]

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by Ugly Kar

OK, edited, but this article is specifically about what Toyota is doing in the EV market, unfortunately the president of Toyota stated the P word.

Noted, Toyota boss can and we can't.

[M5Rick]

This chap attempted to do a long trip in a Renault Zoe 'GT' EV . It's a small car made in France and according to the title it wasn't all an electric drive.

''I managed to find a charger but it wasn't working'.