FACT: Electric vehicles will NOT replace gasoline engine vehicles anytime soon

Renewed Marathoner wrote:

Same question with oil.

Also, A small internal combustion engine is many times less efficient than even the dirtiest coal plant. So much so that we could run all our electric cars on the dirtiest coal plant and still use way less carbon.

If we renewable he grid that's just extra carbon savings. Which we should do

The misinformation on this site is depressing.

Two questions.

Do you have a source for that ridiculous statement about efficiency or are you just making sh!t up?

Do you know how to calculate energy efficiency?

voting by mail wrote:

correct answer wrote:

This is correct. The infrastructure is not in place to eliminate gasoline vehicles.

Correct answer.

No where close to being ready to support en masse usage of electric vehicles.

Things change fast. Faster than nearly anybody predicts. The entire country is electrified. Not like to need to run miles of new pipes or anything

Well, when you state, ‘anytime soon’, you’re probably right that it won’t happen in the next couple of years. But within 10 years, I can see EVs having significant market share.

More than infrastructure available or not, I think demand for these EVs will determine how fast EVs will grow. If consumers really want some of these vehicles, especially when EV trucks become readily available, I think there will be a huge uptick of consumers wanting them. With more sales, infrastructure will follow.

Harambe wrote:

Bad Wigins promptly vacated the thread after blathering nonsense that was immediately falsified. Par for the course.

I used to think he just trolls because no one could be as dumb as he is....

....not so sure now.

Henry Ford II wrote:

But where you get all that Lithium from?

And who is getting it out of the ground?

Who needs Lithium...stop reading yesterday's news

...bit expensive at moment, but 'just add water'...have enough solar, and you are off grid with 3 days average household supply

Infrastructure is not in place to support more than 5% of total vehicles being electric.

Not even close.

Stick to V8 engines.

Perhaps you’ve never heard of Norway? The economics of electric cars is starting to pencil out. It doesn’t make sense until it makes dollars and cents, then at that point you can’t stop it

voting by mail wrote:

Infrastructure is not in place to support more than 5% of total vehicles being electric.

Not even close.

Stick to V8 engines.

it's literally just electricity. Yawn.

You sound like a "no demand for more than 5 computers in the world" dude.

Affirmative action rewards incompetence (blacks, democrats, etc).

voting by mail wrote:

Affirmative action rewards incompetence (blacks, democrats, etc).

Yeah, like...why are they not still slaves?

voting by mail wrote:

Affirmative action rewards incompetence (blacks, democrats, etc).

Uh... what?

.

There you go, source. There's hundreds if you Google long tailpipe theory. Please for the love of God be willing to change your mind when presented with credible evidence. The endless arguing on this site with no one willing to change their mind no matter what is ridiculous.

Having an electric vehicle now, I would not go back to a combustion engine given the choice. For me the switch has already happened although I am glad it isn't too widely adopted yet. My electric bike only does level one charging and draws 1300 watts at 12A for about 10 hours for a full charge from 0%. More than one of those will blow a home circuit. Even if a lot of homes beefed up their circuits the handle that kind of power, if a lot of people did that I don't think our current electrical system could handle that.

That’s not recent data.. It doesn’t talk about the “dirtiest coal plant” In the US example the data is over ten years old snd references the Nissan Leaf which is a horrible example what back then was a basic proof of concept vehicle. The batteries were very unreliable and inefficient. I know this because I tested them.

You mentioned efficiency. The article you linked talks about emissions. It doesn’t mention efficiency. Efficiency is much more objective than emissions because efficiency compares total energy used to obtain the same amount of work from different sources. Efficiency refers to measurable, comparable and verifiable data.

You never answered my second question.

bfef wrote:

Having an electric vehicle now, I would not go back to a combustion engine given the choice. For me the switch has already happened although I am glad it isn't too widely adopted yet. My electric bike only does level one charging and draws 1300 watts at 12A for about 10 hours for a full charge from 0%. More than one of those will blow a home circuit. Even if a lot of homes beefed up their circuits the handle that kind of power, if a lot of people did that I don't think our current electrical system could handle that.

It’s not drawing 1300 watts for the entire charge cycle. The last 90% of charge is slower. Your numbers don’t make since. On a 120v circuit you would be drawing under 11 amps. 1.3 kw isn’t very significant.

I suggest not discharging your battery to zero percent. That reduces the overall life of the battery. 10-20%max discharge is as low as I would go on a daily basis. 30%is better. Charging to 100% isn’t worthwhile either. Stop at 90%.

In my country most people buy electric vehicles. In the towns there are cheap chargers everywhere. People who use them dont have to pay for using the roads. People with ordinary salaries buy teslas and others buy leafs and such.

Bad Wigins wrote:

The entire concept of massive EV use is moronic and ignorant. Electricity doesn't just appear out of nowhere. The excess demand will be met by excess supply converted from fossil fuels, which is inefficient and counterproductive.

And then there's batteries, a whole new layer of inefficiency compounded by the hidden environmental footprint of creating, maintaining and disposing of them.

If you think EV's are carbon-negative, prove it.

Electric vehicles use the power generated by burning fossil fuels more efficiently, not less.

A combustion engine is something like 20% efficient. All the changing speeds and revs is just not efficient at all.

Burning fuel in a power station at the exact stoichiometric ratio required to get the most energy out of the fuel as possible, and then sending that to electric cars which are 85-90% efficient makes much more sense.

Plus once built, renewable sources continue to give us electricity long after they are installed. Better to use the oil to build wind turbines and solar panels than to just burn it to go from A to B.

Electric vehicles don’t work.