Electric vehicles achievable? Reality check?

[Topspinmo]

Do to limited electric vehicles on road plus the power problem will the even replace majority of fossil fueled vehicles in this century? Or at least by 2050?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8FHgwgQhCw

So, is this guy wrong?

This just production problems which don’t include the extra power and distribution of power to make dent in reduction of fossil fueled vehicles.

Then, there they cost involved manufacturing EVs due to rising cost rare earth minerals (majority can’t afford 40K plus cost of EV vehicles for around town. Sure small amount EVs helps, but got real problems and distribution to solve IMO before make dent is vehicles on the road.

[Byte1]

I wonder what ever happened to hydrogen fuel cell technology. Not enough profit in it? The byproduct of burning hydrogen is water, I believe. Too simple or too difficult?
Like you said, the materials for making decent batteries is obtained mostly overseas. Until they can make a battery that will fuel a motor vehicle for a 500 mile trip, who wants one? Sitting in line to charge your batteries for hours, makes a distance trip take a long time. Are they planning to build hotels around the charging stations?

[ThirdOfFive]

Do to limited electric vehicles on road plus the power problem will the even replace majority of fossil fueled vehicles in this century? Or at least by 2050?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8FHgwgQhCw

So, is this guy wrong?

This just production problems which don’t include the extra power and distribution of power to make dent in reduction of fossil fueled vehicles.

Then, there they cost involved manufacturing EVs due to rising cost rare earth minerals (majority can’t afford 40K plus cost of EV vehicles for around town. Sure small amount EVs helps, but got real problems and distribution to solve IMO before make dent is vehicles on the road.
A wholesale replacement of petroleum-powered vehicles with electric vehicles is in large part an environmentalist's pipe dream.

It is more than going out and shelling out big bucks for, say, a Porshe Taycan, or slightly fewer bucks for a Cooper electric, Toyota, etc. The fact is that America's industry, and thus America's economy, runs on hydrocarbon fuels. Goods move by two major ways; rail and semi truck on land and by ship on the water. All three burn hydrocarbon fuels, and it is a pretty safe bet that none of us, nor our grandchildren, will see electric semis, locomotives or container ships in our lifetime.

Then there is air transportation (goods and people). Jet-A (Kerosene, actually) accounts for nearly 10% of all the hydrocarbon fuel burned for transportation in America. And don't forget industry. American industry actually burns MORE hydrocarbon fuels (petroleum, natural gas, coal) than does the entire transportation sector; 36% of the total for industry compared to 35% for transportation.

Here's the kicker. We can go out and buy a Toyota Prius or something and feel all warm and fuzzy, but replacing a petroleum-burning automobile for an electric one is less than a very small drop in a very big bucket. WE, as individuals, might "run" on electricity, but our ECONOMY doesn't. And won't. Not for a very long time, if ever.

[dewilson58]

Good Video

[Bay Kid]

China owns us, not just this but everything.
Talking about destruction of earth! Mining destruction and pollution?

[Stu from NYC]

We are a long way from moving away from hydrocarbons. Technology will have to improve substantially.

In the meantime focus on fuel economy.

[MrFlorida]

Not in our lifetime...considering most of us are over 65.

[Mortal1]

why does no one mention the very salient fact that the production and replacement of the vehicles and batteries all use either hydro, coal, nuclear, petroleum or natural gas to power the factories and that their carbon footprint is much larger than all the vehicles on the road today. Disposal of these "green" products also has a mega huge impact for those looking to replace their so-called "green" vehicle. are people just stupid or ignorant? does keeping ones head in the sand make all these issues go away? or is the bigger issue that if you go electric you are somehow contributing to the longevity of the planet?

face it...if you want renewable energy you have to solve these problems FIRST and yet it is rarely mentioned because that would actually require a completely new energy source than sol and wind.

now please go plug in your electric vehicle and ignore all the issues....you'll feel better...like giving the homeless person begging for money(and has a dog)who may make more than you do.

[Stu from NYC]

why does no one mention the very salient fact that the production and replacement of the vehicles and batteries all use either hydro, coal, nuclear, petroleum or natural gas to power the factories and that their carbon footprint is much larger than all the vehicles on the road today. Disposal of these "green" products also has a mega huge impact for those looking to replace their so-called "green" vehicle. are people just stupid or ignorant? does keeping ones head in the sand make all these issues go away? or is the bigger issue that if you go electric you are somehow contributing to the longevity of the planet?

face it...if you want renewable energy you have to solve these problems FIRST and yet it is rarely mentioned because that would actually require a completely new energy source than sol and wind.

now please go plug in your electric vehicle and ignore all the issues....you'll feel better...like giving the homeless person begging for money(and has a dog)who may make more than you do.

Very true and amazing these issues are ignored. Yet GM plans to go to 100% electric perhaps they know something we do not but honestly do not think so.

[ThirdOfFive]

why does no one mention the very salient fact that the production and replacement of the vehicles and batteries all use either hydro, coal, nuclear, petroleum or natural gas to power the factories and that their carbon footprint is much larger than all the vehicles on the road today. Disposal of these "green" products also has a mega huge impact for those looking to replace their so-called "green" vehicle. are people just stupid or ignorant? does keeping ones head in the sand make all these issues go away? or is the bigger issue that if you go electric you are somehow contributing to the longevity of the planet?

face it...if you want renewable energy you have to solve these problems FIRST and yet it is rarely mentioned because that would actually require a completely new energy source than sol and wind.

now please go plug in your electric vehicle and ignore all the issues....you'll feel better...like giving the homeless person begging for money(and has a dog)who may make more than you do.
Excellent points.

Worthy of mention also is the fact that "going electric", does NOT mean going without hydrocarbon fuels. Nearly 60% of electricity in America is produced by--you got it--HYDROCARBON fuels (Natural Gas 40%, Coal 19%). Of the remaining 40% fully half of that comes from nuclear (ironic, considering that it is even more virtuous to hate nuclear than it is to hate hydrocarbon power). Only 20% comes from "renewables". (Energy in the United States, U.S. Energy Information Administration website).

Electrical energy--that stuff that you use to push your little electrical buggy down the road--is far from the clean energy people seem to think it is.

[MartinSE]

Do to limited electric vehicles on road plus the power problem will the even replace majority of fossil fueled vehicles in this century? Or at least by 2050?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8FHgwgQhCw

So, is this guy wrong?

This just production problems which don’t include the extra power and distribution of power to make dent in reduction of fossil fueled vehicles.

Then, there they cost involved manufacturing EVs due to rising cost rare earth minerals (majority can’t afford 40K plus cost of EV vehicles for around town. Sure small amount EVs helps, but got real problems and distribution to solve IMO before make dent is vehicles on the road.

Yes, he is sort of right. EVs, Computers, Phones, etc, etc, etc. need lots of are earth minerals. And China has been aggressively acquiring rights to rare earth minerals around the world for the past few decades, by cuddling up to poor countries building infrastructure in exchange for those rights. We on the other hand haven't been building those relationships, and will find it hard to move forward with out them. I will suggest (and I am sure it will start a political war here), but... the fossil fuel companies have spent a LOT of money lobbying to keep us addicted to fossil fuel and not allowing the government to build an alternative source of energy. it makes sense, it is in their interest to keep us tied to them for energy.

Now, on to predictions,

The fuel for the majority of power plants, factories, gas ovens, furnaces, etc etc etc will probably NOT happen in 30 years.

In talking about EVs, there are a couple issues to be resolved -

1. Batteries. Higher density, faster charging, faster production - the batteries we have now are ALMOST good enough. But, we certainly need higher production rates - more factories etc. Tesla is building new battery plants trying to catch up, but it will help when GM, Ford, Mercedes, VW, et all start making batteries too. This is just developing better tech, and that will happen if there is demand. Right now Tesla can't make enough batteries, and the demand is very high, so there is motivation to develop battery tech. If the other auto companies join the EV push, they will need batteries, that will help since GM, Ford et al, have the cash (or credit) to build massive battery factories.

2. We need a startup (maybe) that provides a cost effective mechanism to covert "gas stations" into recharging stations. That has logistic problems like getting Electricity to the gas stations with high enough current rating to super/fast charge. One alternative to that is the industry comes to a standard battery pack that can be swapped by a "robot"/automatic battery swapping station. So, you drive in, pull up on the platform, robot arms come out, remove the battery pack from your EV and insert a new one. Lots of design considerations, like to you "own" the batteries, or are you renting them. Etc etc.

3. Distributed electrical generation is a MUST have. When I was working at Palo Verdre Nuke plant in AZ there was a lot of debate over distributed generation, where every house, or at most every neighborhood has it's own power generation. The way we do it today is very vulnerable to outages (and sabotage) and expensive. Unfortunately, power companies kind of lose control if everyone (or every neighborhood) has it's own generation - be it Solar, geothermal, wind, hydro, etc, etc.

The big thing we need to understand is that no one thing is a silver bullet to solve our energy problems. Every location needs to customize the solution to what works best for them.

So, with all that in mind, I say, the majority of Automobiles sold in the US will be EVs within 20 years (maybe 10 if there is a lot of government support, but I don't see that happening).

I see private ownership of automobiles going away within 20 to 30 years. With FSD we will see "timeshare" cars. Where you pay a flat rate per month for use a a car - high subscription, more miles. When you want to go someplace you can schedule a car to arrive at a fixed time every day (good for commuting to work) or you can call a car and it will arrive in 5 to 10 minutes. The car takes you where you are going and then returns itself to the "pool". If you go on a shopping trip, there will be cars waiting to be summoned in the parking lots, so you shop, call the car while checking out, and walk outside and it is waiting to take you home. ETC. This will result in no more insurance, no more maintenance, no more drunk drivers, no more driver caused accidents, and much improved traffic flow both in town and on highways since the cars will all communicate and coordinate with each other.

Oh, and commercial truck drivers will cease to exist as FSD replaces them, making lower insurance, higher efficiency (truck on the move 24/7). etc.

That is my vision of 20 years or so (Maybe 30 for the truckers to be replaced).

Now, for the rest, power plants, factories, air flights, international cargo shipping etc. We will be hard pressed to replace all of they with electric of some other non-fossil fuel alternative in less than 50 years, maybe longer. If we simply ran out of oil, it would happen MUCH sooner. But, oil is too cheap (despite todays high prices) too easy to transport, and too high of an energy density to be replaced any sooner.

Sadly all that is the majority of pollution generated by Fossil fuels. But, we will NEVER get there is we don't start. For example, there are not going to be charging stations every where until there are EVs and there are not going to be enough EVs to support charging stations everywhere until there are charging everywhere. Catch 22. This is where government incentives come in to play, by making it more desirable it will happen sooner. Whether we see those and whether they are enough - I dunno.

All of that assumes we remain with the same battery chemistry - we won't. All of that assumes new sources (space) of rare earth minerals don't become available and financially practical to mine - they will.

So, there are a LOT of connections, like a spider web that will begin wiggling as we begin transitioning and those wiggles will result is massive changes in technology.

One of the difficulties in predicting technology changes, is that historically tech advances at an exponential rate, while we think about it in a linear rate. So, it "seems" like things are changing slowly, while in reality they are changing faster every year. AI is going to be play a BIG role in the design of new batteries and chemistries, and new power generation systems, etc etc.

It would NOT surprise me if 20 years from now Fossil fuel burning is outlawed. But, I can't tell you how we will get there. But it wouldn't surprise me. We made it to the moon in a decade, when everyone said it was impossible. SpaceX is up to 12 reuses of recovered launch vehicles and 10 years ago everyone laughed at the idea. Things can change fast - if we don't prevent it. And Fossil fuel companies have a very big incentive to prevent change.

[MartinSE]

Very true and amazing these issues are ignored. Yet GM plans to go to 100% electric perhaps they know something we do not but honestly do not think so.

So, you are saying some guy on the internet is smarter than GM engineers. That GM is plunging blindly forward into EVs without understand the issues?

That is really strange, one thing US automakers have NEVER been accused of (well, at least since the Edsel) is being rash in making decisions. One of the reasons Japan did so much damage to our auto industry is we wouldn't change production techniques and Japan was very innovative with statistical process control/engineering.

And even if GM is "smoking dope" and being stupid, then I guess every auto manufacturer in the world is too.

[MartinSE]

why does no one mention the very salient fact that the production and replacement of the vehicles and batteries all use either hydro, coal, nuclear, petroleum or natural gas to power the factories and that their carbon footprint is much larger than all the vehicles on the road today. Disposal of these "green" products also has a mega huge impact for those looking to replace their so-called "green" vehicle. are people just stupid or ignorant? does keeping ones head in the sand make all these issues go away? or is the bigger issue that if you go electric you are somehow contributing to the longevity of the planet?

face it...if you want renewable energy you have to solve these problems FIRST and yet it is rarely mentioned because that would actually require a completely new energy source than sol and wind.

now please go plug in your electric vehicle and ignore all the issues....you'll feel better...like giving the homeless person begging for money(and has a dog)who may make more than you do.

Well, there is a chicken and egg issue. But, I would say you have to have demand for EVs BEFORE you can afford to solve the issues you brought up.

Who do you think is going to invest the trillions of dollars to convert to an all electric economy if there are no customers?

Both have to happen - more or less at the same time.

And I don't know why you think no one is "aware" of the elephant in. the room (those problems). Every single company I have looked at are seriously working on those problems.

Chicken and Egg.

[MartinSE]

China owns us, not just this but everything.
Talking about destruction of earth! Mining destruction and pollution?

China has been playing the long game for decades. They DON"T own us, but they certainly are working on controlling our drugs (fuel, rare earth minerals, AI, etc, etc, etc). And they are very good at getting third world countries to "like them" and give them the right to resources in exchange for infrastructure development.

We won't even put money into our own infrastructure, much less using that to acquire rights to resources we need. I will say fore the past 50 or so years, we have been in naval focusing mode, and not playing the long game. This is seriously evident in our major corporations on a short term profits binge.

[fdpaq0580]

I'm not planning on buying an electric car. But I do understand that any change of major type takes time.
For example, once we lit our caves with fires and torches. Along came candles. Then oil lamps. Gas lights were common before electric lighting. Imagine the difficulties in converting a city from gas lighting to electric lighting. There were plenty of folks that found reasons why that was a waste of time and resources, too. Yet, it is what we all use today. Not every advance in technology is easy or universally accepted in its infancy, but, with persistence and improvements changes, progress takes place.
Again, I am not planning on buying an electric. It doesn't make sense in my life. But, in time, with advancements, electric vehicles of all sorts may become the norm, someday.

[Opengineer150]

Didn’t we Liberate and occupy a country (Iraq) that produces roughly 4.4 million barrels a day ? So why can’t we buy or take their surplus…

[MartinSE]

I'm not planning on buying an electric car. But I do understand that any change of major type takes time.
For example, once we lit our caves with fires and torches. Along came candles. Then oil lamps. Gas lights were common before electric lighting. Imagine the difficulties in converting a city from gas lighting to electric lighting. There were plenty of folks that found reasons why that was a waste of time and resources, too. Yet, it is what we all use today. Not every advance in technology is easy or universally accepted in its infancy, but, with persistence and improvements changes, progress takes place.
Again, I am not planning on buying an electric. It doesn't make sense in my life. But, in time, with advancements, electric vehicles of all sorts may become the norm, someday.

Agree, and remember, fire to candles took millions of years, candles to electric lights took thousands of years, incandescent electric lights to LED lights took a hundred years. Technology advances at an exponential rate.

It appears linear to us, but if you take any aspect of technology and trace it from it's origin to today, you will see this exponential nature

Take speed of transportation - walking on all fours, to walking and running upright (3mph average) Millions of years and we start riding horses. Tens of thousands of years and we get boats and wagons. Thousands of years and we get steam. Hundreds of year(s) and we get gas engines. How long for electric? Who knows.

There is abnormal obvious reason for this. Each step along the way uses the previous tech to help the next step. Once we got computers (and computer aided design) things really picked up the pace. Now, with AI design birthing, we can expect the computers to being making faster smarter, and better computers, which will then increase the advance of technology even faster.

We will see where this goes, but 15 years ago, cell phones were HUGE and dumb, now I wear one on my wrist, that is more powerful than the computers used to get us to the moon and back.

I think there is a chance if we don't destroy ourselves first, that we could switch to an electric based economy in 10 to 20 years.

[MartinSE]

Didn’t we Liberate and occupy a country (Iraq) that produces roughly 4.4 million barrels a day ? So why can’t we buy or take their surplus…

Hmm, maybe because it is not ours? But, we never let a little like that stop us. I mean, why not, isn't that what Putin is doing?

[CoachKandSportsguy]

This podcast with Barry Ritholtz and the Executive Director of Ford Electric Vehicles is very interesting as to why they are putting large efforts, or dollars, into that market.

Masters in Business: Darren Palmer on the EV Revolution (Podcast) on Apple Podcasts (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/darren-palmer-on-the-ev-revolution-podcast/id730188152?i=1000554489252)

The interesting point is the opinion of the current EV owners and how they are shaping what Ford believes currently as the future of EVs

skeptical but open minded guy

[MartinSE]

This podcast with Barry Ritholtz and the Executive Director of Ford Electric Vehicles is very interesting as to why they are putting large efforts, or dollars, into that market.

The interesting point is the opinion of the current EV owners and how they are shaping what Ford believes currently as the future of EVs

skeptical but open minded guy

So, you are saying they are listening to the market?

[tophcfa]

So, you are saying some guy on the internet is smarter than GM engineers. That GM is plunging blindly forward into EVs without understand the issues?

That is really strange, one thing US automakers have NEVER been accused of (well, at least since the Edsel) is being rash in making decisions. One of the reasons Japan did so much damage to our auto industry is we wouldn't change production techniques and Japan was very innovative with statistical process control/engineering.

And even if GM is "smoking dope" and being stupid, then I guess every auto manufacturer in the world is too.

The Government Relations department at GM are telling upper level management that “like it or not” they will be forced to move to EV’s in the future. GM engineers are then being told by upper level management to focus on EV’s. The engineers aren’t focusing on EV’s because it’s superior technology, it’s because they are doing what their bosses tell them to do.

[MartinSE]

The Government Relations department at GM are telling upper level management that “like it or not” they will be forced to move to EV’s in the future. GM engineers are then being told by upper level management to focus on EV’s. The engineers aren’t focusing on EV’s because it’s superior technology, it’s because they are doing what their bosses tell them to do.

Okay, I understand. And maybe you can clarify who maintains EVs are "superior" technology? Just asking, because I know I never said that. There are a LOT Of reasons I think we should change to EVs - being superior is not one of them.

[Arctic Fox]

The rest of the World is adopting renewable energy and electric vehicles

A shame that the USA, which used to be at the forefront of new technologies, is now dragging its heels and using whatever excuses it can to remain in the clutches of the oil and coal industries

[mtdjed]

The Government Relations department at GM are telling upper level management that “like it or not” they will be forced to move to EV’s in the future. GM engineers are then being told by upper level management to focus on EV’s. The engineers aren’t focusing on EV’s because it’s superior technology, it’s because they are doing what their bosses tell them to do.

I agree with the above. Unlike others, I believe that transition to Electric Vehicles can happen rather quickly. Government mandate and incentives can speed the conversion.

But that is the easy part. Battery technology will improve and support longer rides. But that neglects the requirement to generate the electricity to charge the EV batteries which is still highly dependent on fossil fuels.

[MartinSE]

The rest of the World is adopting renewable energy and electric vehicles

A shame that the USA, which used to be at the forefront of new technologies, is now dragging its heels and using whatever excuses it can to remain in the clutches of the oil and coal industries

Yeah, around the 70's somehow the US decided it no longer wanted to be the leader in innovation... Sad.

[Stu from NYC]

The rest of the World is adopting renewable energy and electric vehicles

A shame that the USA, which used to be at the forefront of new technologies, is now dragging its heels and using whatever excuses it can to remain in the clutches of the oil and coal industries

Hopefully there are other technologies that will come along in the near future that will be superior to electric.

BTW does not seem the coal industry has all that much power these days.

[MartinSE]

I agree with the above. Unlike others, I believe that transition to Electric Vehicles can happen rather quickly. Government mandate and incentives can speed the conversion.

But that is the easy part. Battery technology will improve and support longer rides. But that neglects the requirement to generate the electricity to charge the EV batteries which is still highly dependent on fossil fuels.

Yup, not too long ago the government mandated seat belts. There was a LOT of heated disagreement and endless debates over all sorts of nonsense about them. Now 50 years later they have saved an estimated 500,000 lives and are averaging saving about 20,000 per year now, with having only reached 90% usage compliance. But, auto manufacturers spent(d) a lot of money lobbying and fighting the change.

The government mandating things, in my not so humble opinion, is the only way to get the predatory capitalists to change things so that their products are better for the people instead of better for their bank accounts.

Our auto industry is steeped in being very conservative when it comes to changes - they do not like to make any changes that are not necessary - Edsel was a learning experience.

[CoachKandSportsguy]

So, you are saying they are listening to the market?

listen to the podcast yourself and make your own interpretation.

its just another information point for whatever you want to believe.

behavioral bias guy

[Arctic Fox]

BTW does not seem the coal industry has all that much power these days.

You're right - for generating electricity, it has dropped from around 40% in 2014 to 20% today, largely as a result of being replaced by natural gas

[Topspinmo]

Well, there is a chicken and egg issue. But, I would say you have to have demand for EVs BEFORE you can afford to solve the issues you brought up.

Who do you think is going to invest the trillions of dollars to convert to an all electric economy if there are no customers?

Both have to happen - more or less at the same time.

And I don't know why you think no one is "aware" of the elephant in. the room (those problems). Every single company I have looked at are seriously working on those problems.

Chicken and Egg.

Don’t you mean no power??. Few fully electric vehicles are enjoying the not crowed charging points right now. add 10 or even hundreds of thousands and you just cant fill up in 10 minutes or so, you have to wait till there open charging point to even start the regeneration. Hybrid makes good sense IMO right now until there will be enough power generated and enough fast charging to satisfy demands when number explode?

[Topspinmo]

listen to the podcast yourself and make your own interpretation.

its just another information point for whatever you want to believe.

behavioral bias guy

Lots of them around…:)

[Topspinmo]

Didn’t we Liberate and occupy a country (Iraq) that produces roughly 4.4 million barrels a day ? So why can’t we buy or take their surplus…


We supposedly don’t do that, communist countries do. :)

[MartinSE]

Don’t you mean no power??. Few fully electric vehicles are enjoying the not crowed charging points right now. add 10 or even hundreds of thousands and you just cant fill up in 10 minutes or so, you have to wait till there open charging point to even start the regeneration. Hybrid makes good sense IMO right now until there will be enough power generated and enough fast charging to satisfy demands when number explode?

Well. Maybe a a shift in thinking. If you're driving around town is the issue, I expect charging at night while you sleep is the answer. The charging stations are for when you go more than 400 miles in a day (current range of Tesla's - sort of). Most people's local driving is not over 300 miles a day, so lots of buffer there.

And honestly I don't mind if they would make it illegal to drive more than 6 to 8 hours without a break, at some point in there the driver becomes a hazard. A 15 to 30 minute potty and snack break can be refreshing.

Everyone I know that has a Tesla says that it's range is not a serious limitation on cross country driving.

I guess if someone is used to having two 50 gal side thanks on the pickem'up truck, that could be simulated with a UHaul like trailer full of batteries, although that might get a little expensive - LOL!

[Topspinmo]

Agree, and remember, fire to candles took millions of years, candles to electric lights took thousands of years, incandescent electric lights to LED lights took a hundred years. Technology advances at an exponential rate.

It appears linear to us, but if you take any aspect of technology and trace it from it's origin to today, you will see this exponential nature

Take speed of transportation - walking on all fours, to walking and running upright (3mph average) Millions of years and we start riding horses. Tens of thousands of years and we get boats and wagons. Thousands of years and we get steam. Hundreds of year(s) and we get gas engines. How long for electric? Who knows.

There is abnormal obvious reason for this. Each step along the way uses the previous tech to help the next step. Once we got computers (and computer aided design) things really picked up the pace. Now, with AI design birthing, we can expect the computers to being making faster smarter, and better computers, which will then increase the advance of technology even faster.

We will see where this goes, but 15 years ago, cell phones were HUGE and dumb, now I wear one on my wrist, that is more powerful than the computers used to get us to the moon and back.

I think there is a chance if we don't destroy ourselves first, that we could switch to an electric based economy in 10 to 20 years.

Actually went to steam and electricity vehicles first. Original Henry ford vehicles was supposed to run on renewable alcohol. Then found use for waste highly combustible by product fuel that kerosene produced.

[MartinSE]

We supposedly don’t do that, communist countries do. :)

:bigbow:

[MartinSE]

Actually went to steam and electricity vehicles first. Original Henry ford vehicles was supposed to run on renewable alcohol. Then found use for waste highly combustible by product fuel that kerosene produced.

They were tried but found not to be practical - basically, they could not compete with th energy density of fossil fuels. So, they were relegated to the back burner until now, and even now, we are just beginning to be able to use electric for that reason (energy density).

But, I am sure you saw my point - thing usually seem to take forever, until they happen then all of a sudden we look around and ask, how did that happen so fast. :)

[Topspinmo]

Well. Maybe a a shift in thinking. If you're driving around town is the issue, I expect charging at night while you sleep is the answer. The charging stations are for when you go more than 400 miles in a day (current range of Tesla's - sort of). Most people's local driving is not over 300 miles a day, so lots of buffer there.

And honestly I don't mind if they would make it illegal to drive more than 6 to 8 hours without a break, at some point in there the driver becomes a hazard. A 15 to 30 minute potty and snack break can be refreshing.

Everyone I know that has a Tesla says that it's range is not a serious limitation on cross country driving.

I guess if someone is used to having two 50 gal side thanks on the pickem'up truck, that could be simulated with a UHaul like trailer full of batteries, although that might get a little expensive - LOL!

Those trucks are for specific use, most never owned them or thought about owning them.

Driving already a hazard. Tesla enjoy the low volume of fully electric vehicles on road right now. Not so much when that number explodes. As far as driving around town, yes electric way go. Most of population can’t afford 40 to 100K vehicles to just drive around town.

[Keefelane66]

Didn’t we Liberate and occupy a country (Iraq) that produces roughly 4.4 million barrels a day ? So why can’t we buy or take their surplus…
Unfortunately it was one of the biggest mid truths. President fired his economic adviser, Lawrence Lindsey, for saying that the total cost of invading Iraq might come to as much as $200 billion. President instead stood by such advisers as Paul Wolfowitz, who said that the invasion would be largely "self-financing" via Iraq's oil, and Andrew Natsios, who told an incredulous Ted Koppel that the war's total cost to the American taxpayer would be no more than $1.7 billion.

[Two Bills]

Good Video

I don't think the narrator breathed once during the whole film!

[Byte1]

Next time you are impatiently waiting in line for gasoline and that guy in front of you seems to be taking more than ten minutes to fill up and wash his window, think about how long you would have to wait for him to charge his battery powered vehicle. Think about two or three in front of you. Better off thinking of the old city street cars that had power hanging over the top of them as they road down the street.

[Blueblaze]

Achieveable? Sure. But not with the current battery technology. Good idea? Only if you like polluting the environment with coal-burning power plants and digging up the 3rd world for the rare minerals to build them with.

That 1000 lb battery in your Telsa required some Mexican to dig 250 TONS of the highest-grade lithium ore in the world, from a giant open pit mine in Sonora, Mexico. Then he had to treat it with another 250 tons of poisonous, stinking sulphuric acid to leach out the half-ton of lithium needed for your ONE battery. We've got lithium in America, but no sane American would allow an ecological disaster like that in their own back yard.

By the way, there are 1.5 billion vehicles in the world and at least 4.5 billion people still waiting for theirs. Do the math

No doubt, some day, all vehicles will be electric, but they will draw their power directly from the atmosphere, as Tesla demonstrated over a 100 years ago. They will probably also fly, using some as yet undiscovered mechanism. And the power won't come from a coal burning power plant, but from a solar farm in orbit, where the sun shines all the time and isn't filtered through 100 miles of atmosphere (or require mowing down a forest the size of Texas).

We've still got 100 years worth of fossil fuels left. What's the hurry?

[MartinSE]

Those trucks are for specific use, most never owned them or thought about owning them.

Driving already a hazard. Tesla enjoy the low volume of fully electric vehicles on road right now. Not so much when that number explodes. As far as driving around town, yes electric way go. Most of population can’t afford 40 to 100K vehicles to just drive around town.

I agree with you. And yes, most can't afford new technology of any kind.

I have mentioned before (maybe not here) that I can recall the first time I saw a flat screen TV. In 1997, Sharp and Sony introduced the first large flat screen TV. It was created using the PALC technology and measured 42 inches, a record size at the time. This first model sold for more than $15,000, making it well out of reach for most Americans.

I expect everyone here has flat screen displays - computers, TV's, phones, etc. And most of them cost a little less than that.

It's the early adopters that can afford it that encourage the money people to invest and drive the product into mass production. In the case of EV's it is a major paradigm shift, which has to drag with it more than just cars, but our entire energy economy. And that is not going to be easy. EVERYTHING, from business financing to manufacturing processes are based on cheap high density energy. Banks make credit available to companies, based on business plans that as based on cheap high density energy.

So, yeah, this is not going to be easy or fast. But, it won't ever happen if we don't start. American can choose to lead the world or follow the world but I believe it is coming, and it would be a shame for us to pass up the opportunity to lead the world in this shift.

[MartinSE]

Achieveable? Sure. But not with the current battery technology. We've still got 100 years worth of fossil fuels left. What's the hurry?

Well, I agree, and so do all the engineers (including Musk) that the battery chemistry has to improve before mass production is viable, but here are two things that come to mind about the "rush".

1. It will take, probably, at least 50 years to wean ourselves from high energy density fossil fuels in all fields, manufacturing, transportation, medicine, farming, electrical generations, heating, cooling, etc, etc, etc. Everywhere it is used. That change should probably happen BEFORE we run out. The 100 years is one estimate, there are others, and there is no point to debating the exact number. Oil is a finite resource. It will run out some day. If we don't have in place a viable replacement BEFORE it runs out, how do you think that is going to turn out for cities like NYNY that have 25,000 trucks moving in and out of the city every day bringing food and products and taking out trash and garbage? That is just one large city.

2. Oil is a finite resource and used in a lot of places, like medicine, fertilizer, etc. And if we waste what we have left moving 5,000 lb of metal car carrying 200 lbs of people meat (4 percent payload - LOL!) back and forth to work, then we may find some of those life saving medicines might not be available when we need them later. And all those crops that feed our 7 billion people might struggle without fertilizer.

Just saying, waiting until you HAVE to do something is not always the best choice, when it can become a matter of life and death.

So, my feeling is let's start now, like Tesla is, and let those that can or want to afford to be early adopters fund it. Let them be the pioneers that refine and develop the tech.

Better to slowly grow the number of EVs over a couple decades, so we can learn where the bugs are and how to make them safer, and better and cheaper, and etc etc etc.

Then when we need them, we will have a pretty good idea how to make them - or maybe we will have figured out that they are not the best way to go, and look someplace else, like hydrogen fuel cells, or maybe micro nuke power plants, or who knows.

[mtdjed]

Originally Posted by MartinSE View Post
Well, there is a chicken and egg issue. But, I would say you have to have demand for EVs BEFORE you can afford to solve the issues you brought up.

Who do you think is going to invest the trillions of dollars to convert to an all electric economy if there are no customers?

Both have to happen - more or less at the same time."

Using the term "all electric economy" is not having all electric cars and does not eliminate use of Fossil Fuels. Electricity does not just exist simply by plugging in to the wall. Electricity is made by solar, water power, nuclear, wind, chemical reaction and guess what Fossil fuels. You need to increase the per centage produced by renewable power sources substantially to reduce fossil fuel needs. That has been a slow change and there is no breakthrough news saying that is near term .

I am all for EVs, but we shouldn't mistake that as elimination of our need for fossil fuels just because they are electric. It certainly would be a step to reduce pollutants.

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by MartinSE View Post
Well, there is a chicken and egg issue. But, I would say you have to have demand for EVs BEFORE you can afford to solve the issues you brought up.

Who do you think is going to invest the trillions of dollars to convert to an all electric economy if there are no customers?

Both have to happen - more or less at the same time."

Using the term "all electric economy" is not having all electric cars and does not eliminate use of Fossil Fuels. Electricity does not just exist simply by plugging in to the wall. Electricity is made by solar, water power, nuclear, wind, chemical reaction and guess what Fossil fuels. You need to increase the per centage produced by renewable power sources substantially to reduce fossil fuel needs. That has been a slow change and there is no breakthrough news saying that is near term .

I am all for EVs, but we shouldn't mistake that as elimination of our need for fossil fuels just because they are electric. It certainly would be a step to reduce pollutants.

I think you pretty much agreed with my posts. Tesla is doing the job of being a pioneer, and getting EVs into consumers hands. It is budding demand (they currently can't keep up) and making significant advances on battery chemistry already.

There is a massive amount of work to be done before we can shift from a fossil fuel economy to an electric economy. Yes, all the sources you mentioned and more can be used to create/generate the electricity. There is no one size fits all, like there is (more or less) with fossil fuels. Each area will need it's own source and distribution systems.

But, we have to start someone, and now is as good a time as any. Momentum will build, demand will build and we will get there, probably total conversion will take 50 years - maybe sooner, maybe not.

[Sandy and Ed]

I wonder what ever happened to hydrogen fuel cell technology. Not enough profit in it? The byproduct of burning hydrogen is water, I believe. Too simple or too difficult?
Like you said, the materials for making decent batteries is obtained mostly overseas. Until they can make a battery that will fuel a motor vehicle for a 500 mile trip, who wants one? Sitting in line to charge your batteries for hours, makes a distance trip take a long time. Are they planning to build hotels around the charging stations?
Or separate hydrogen from water and produce a burnable gas and oxygen. Use electricity or magnesium to separate??

[tsmall22204]

This thread is full of comments from those who have no clue of what they are talking about.

[Sandy and Ed]

This thread is full of comments from those who have no clue of what they are talking about.
Yeah? But it is thought provoking!

[ithos]

Unhappy Tesla owners wait in long line to have their electric cars charged | Wheels (https://www.news24.com/wheels/news/gear_and_tech/unhappy-tesla-owners-wait-in-long-line-to-have-their-electric-cars-charged-20180305)

Video Shows Long Line of Louisiana Tesla Owners Wait to Recharge (https://710keel.com/video-shows-long-line-of-louisiana-tesla-owners-waiting-to-recharge/)

If you only drive locally and can recharge at your home every night, then EVs are great. But major advances in technology will be required for mass adoption.

Bigger Grid, more generation and so much more. But for some reason no major policy recommendations to accommodate the increase demand for electricity and charging stations.

Can you imagine what a mass evacuation for a hurricane would be like if most people owned EV's?

[Papa_lecki]

Unhappy Tesla owners wait in long line to have their electric cars charged | Wheels (https://www.news24.com/wheels/news/gear_and_tech/unhappy-tesla-owners-wait-in-long-line-to-have-their-electric-cars-charged-20180305)

Video Shows Long Line of Louisiana Tesla Owners Wait to Recharge (https://710keel.com/video-shows-long-line-of-louisiana-tesla-owners-waiting-to-recharge/)

If you only drive locally and can recharge at your home every night, then EVs are great. But major advances in technology will be required for mass adoption.

Bigger Grid, more generation and so much more. But for some reason no major policy recommendations to accommodate the increase demand for electricity and charging stations.

Can you imagine what a mass evacuation for a hurricane would be like if most people owned EV's?

Isn’t the prevailing wisdom, if we all have EV, no more climate change, thus no more hurricanes?

[Two Bills]

No one is forcing anyone to change from gas to battery.
So what's the big deal?
Live and commute in a city, low mileage user?
Electric is an option.
Travel long distances?
Gas until the battery range, and charging points numbers are compatible with long distance driving.
So simple!
Remember, most of us will be a distant memory when all the ICE cars are completely phased out, if they ever are.
Definitely not my problem or worry.

[Stu from NYC]

Isn’t the prevailing wisdom, if we all have EV, no more climate change, thus no more hurricanes?

Hmmm scary when you meet people who actually think that

[Herbflosdorf]

This reminds me of the arguments circa 1900 about the new automobiles never replacing the hose and buggy because of lack of rubber for tires and lack of commercially available fuels.

[Guitarman1951]

Not to mention when people realize that, due to the extremely high cost for battery replacement and very low trade-in or resale value due to that fact, EV's are not going to be as of attractive transportation alternative. Add to that, the lack of distance capability and we'll be back to horses!!

[ThirdOfFive]

Agree, and remember, fire to candles took millions of years, candles to electric lights took thousands of years, incandescent electric lights to LED lights took a hundred years. Technology advances at an exponential rate.

It appears linear to us, but if you take any aspect of technology and trace it from it's origin to today, you will see this exponential nature

Take speed of transportation - walking on all fours, to walking and running upright (3mph average) Millions of years and we start riding horses. Tens of thousands of years and we get boats and wagons. Thousands of years and we get steam. Hundreds of year(s) and we get gas engines. How long for electric? Who knows.

There is abnormal obvious reason for this. Each step along the way uses the previous tech to help the next step. Once we got computers (and computer aided design) things really picked up the pace. Now, with AI design birthing, we can expect the computers to being making faster smarter, and better computers, which will then increase the advance of technology even faster.

We will see where this goes, but 15 years ago, cell phones were HUGE and dumb, now I wear one on my wrist, that is more powerful than the computers used to get us to the moon and back.

I think there is a chance if we don't destroy ourselves first, that we could switch to an electric based economy in 10 to 20 years.
Excellent points about technology development. I recall hearing awhile back that the sum total of mankind's knowledge doubles every two years. I don't know how accurate that observation is but the development of technology would certainly to bear that out.

Odd, though: a lot of people see technology development as linear. I've often thought that seeing it that way can be limiting. Case in point: the Stirling engine. Most people have never heard of it, but it was invented well over 200 years ago (with the roots going back more than a century before that); a closed-system pressure-differential engine that depending on the fuel, can be very low-emission or even emission-free. They've been around in a limited fashion, used for mine-pumping and the like, but they never really caught on because even though they're an environmentalist's dream they're pretty underpowered, at least at their current state of development. You can buy 'em online: most are toys but some are designed to provide significant (if slow) power.

There's been some work done on using solar power to power 'em. I saw a deal a few years back where someone rigged a fresnel lens to focus sunlight on the heat element of the engine, and the little bugger was humming along at breakneck speed. Pretty impressive, both from a performance aspect and the fact that there was power being produced at absolutely no environmental cost.

Back to the future?

[forebubba]

Not in our lifetime...considering most of us are over 65.

Just like our goverment... over 65. Time for them to retire too.
I wonder what the thoughts were when the conversion from horses to cars was. Are they going to build more gas stations? What if we run out of gas on our trip?....

[tophcfa]

Just like our goverment... over 65. Time for them to retire too.
I wonder what the thoughts were when the conversion from horses to cars was. Are they going to build more gas stations? What if we run out of gas on our trip?....

By that time, the horse would have dropped dead.

[OhioBuckeye]

Well electric cars will be way to expensive for a lot of people to afford. I wouldn’t get to worked up about it!

[Topspinmo]

This thread is full of comments from those who have no clue of what they are talking about.

And obvious you do. Professor. But I see you made no effort to refute the video, O I see you never listened to it?

[Joe C.]

The day that we go totally electric, China or North Korea will hit us with an EMP.

Now THAT is something that will make all the worry worts bite their fingernails.

[nhtexasrn]

Do to limited electric vehicles on road plus the power problem will the even replace majority of fossil fueled vehicles in this century? Or at least by 2050?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8FHgwgQhCw

So, is this guy wrong?

This just production problems which don’t include the extra power and distribution of power to make dent in reduction of fossil fueled vehicles.

Then, there they cost involved manufacturing EVs due to rising cost rare earth minerals (majority can’t afford 40K plus cost of EV vehicles for around town. Sure small amount EVs helps, but got real problems and distribution to solve IMO before make dent is vehicles on the road.

IMO it's the "greenies" not seeing the forest for the trees....for instance, oil is used to generate the heat used to heat the water to produce the steam that turns the turbines that a generator converts into electricity. Even wind turbines us 60 gallons of oil for lubrication and that must be replaced every 500 hours. We are far from eliminating fossil fuels from this earth. :shocked:

[Blackbird45]

This topic keeps on up. EVs are improving as far as mileage and charging, the better the improvements the more demand from the public. The more EVs on the road the more profit for electric providers, which means they will be forced to improve their systems. At the end like anything else it all comes to profitability. It doesn't matter if it's a hotel, a mall, a gym, or a state putting charging station on every inch of the highway, if they can make money it's going to happen.

[JMintzer]

Isn’t the prevailing wisdom, if we all have EV, no more climate change, thus no more hurricanes?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d7/c0/39/d7c039271687ad3d05d79f6737369cbb.jpg

[MartinSE]

Isn’t the prevailing wisdom, if we all have EV, no more climate change, thus no more hurricanes?

I can't tell if you are joking, being sarcastic or serious. So, I will assume you are serious.

NO ONE is saying that, except maybe people that don't believe it.

According to the EPA: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation account for about 29 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, making it the largest contributor of U.S. GHG emissions.

That is about 1/3 of the problem. It will not solve it, it is one step.

There are no silver bullets in life. You can workout everyday all day and if you eat wrong, you will get fat. You can eat well, and never work out and you won't be able to walk around the block soon. Add in smoking and your lungs will die before you do. On and on.

It is one thing, one thing we as individuals can do. There are a LOT of other things that need to be done, and those we as individuals can't help with other than voting.

[ThirdOfFive]

I can't tell if you are joking, being sarcastic or serious. So, I will assume you are serious.

NO ONE is saying that, except maybe people that don't believe it.

According to the EPA: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation account for about 29 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, making it the largest contributor of U.S. GHG emissions.

That is about 1/3 of the problem. It will not solve it, it is one step.

There are no silver bullets in life. You can workout everyday all day and if you eat wrong, you will get fat. You can eat well, and never work out and you won't be able to walk around the block soon. Add in smoking and your lungs will die before you do. On and on.

It is one thing, one thing we as individuals can do. There are a LOT of other things that need to be done, and those we as individuals can't help with other than voting.
Careful! Isn't a reference to voting--well--political?

[jimjamuser]

China owns us, not just this but everything.
Talking about destruction of earth! Mining destruction and pollution?
We still hold better cards than China and Dictatorships are inherently inefficient. They need us more than we need them. So, we should slowly move away from our relationship with them. It would be hard for a decade or so, but then the US industry could be producing manufactured goods even cheaper than they do. Remember "American innovation" - it NEVER died it just got LAZY.

[jimjamuser]

Yes, he is sort of right. EVs, Computers, Phones, etc, etc, etc. need lots of are earth minerals. And China has been aggressively acquiring rights to rare earth minerals around the world for the past few decades, by cuddling up to poor countries building infrastructure in exchange for those rights. We on the other hand haven't been building those relationships, and will find it hard to move forward with out them. I will suggest (and I am sure it will start a political war here), but... the fossil fuel companies have spent a LOT of money lobbying to keep us addicted to fossil fuel and not allowing the government to build an alternative source of energy. it makes sense, it is in their interest to keep us tied to them for energy.

Now, on to predictions,

The fuel for the majority of power plants, factories, gas ovens, furnaces, etc etc etc will probably NOT happen in 30 years.

In talking about EVs, there are a couple issues to be resolved -

1. Batteries. Higher density, faster charging, faster production - the batteries we have now are ALMOST good enough. But, we certainly need higher production rates - more factories etc. Tesla is building new battery plants trying to catch up, but it will help when GM, Ford, Mercedes, VW, et all start making batteries too. This is just developing better tech, and that will happen if there is demand. Right now Tesla can't make enough batteries, and the demand is very high, so there is motivation to develop battery tech. If the other auto companies join the EV push, they will need batteries, that will help since GM, Ford et al, have the cash (or credit) to build massive battery factories.

2. We need a startup (maybe) that provides a cost effective mechanism to covert "gas stations" into recharging stations. That has logistic problems like getting Electricity to the gas stations with high enough current rating to super/fast charge. One alternative to that is the industry comes to a standard battery pack that can be swapped by a "robot"/automatic battery swapping station. So, you drive in, pull up on the platform, robot arms come out, remove the battery pack from your EV and insert a new one. Lots of design considerations, like to you "own" the batteries, or are you renting them. Etc etc.

3. Distributed electrical generation is a MUST have. When I was working at Palo Verdre Nuke plant in AZ there was a lot of debate over distributed generation, where every house, or at most every neighborhood has it's own power generation. The way we do it today is very vulnerable to outages (and sabotage) and expensive. Unfortunately, power companies kind of lose control if everyone (or every neighborhood) has it's own generation - be it Solar, geothermal, wind, hydro, etc, etc.

The big thing we need to understand is that no one thing is a silver bullet to solve our energy problems. Every location needs to customize the solution to what works best for them.

So, with all that in mind, I say, the majority of Automobiles sold in the US will be EVs within 20 years (maybe 10 if there is a lot of government support, but I don't see that happening).

I see private ownership of automobiles going away within 20 to 30 years. With FSD we will see "timeshare" cars. Where you pay a flat rate per month for use a a car - high subscription, more miles. When you want to go someplace you can schedule a car to arrive at a fixed time every day (good for commuting to work) or you can call a car and it will arrive in 5 to 10 minutes. The car takes you where you are going and then returns itself to the "pool". If you go on a shopping trip, there will be cars waiting to be summoned in the parking lots, so you shop, call the car while checking out, and walk outside and it is waiting to take you home. ETC. This will result in no more insurance, no more maintenance, no more drunk drivers, no more driver caused accidents, and much improved traffic flow both in town and on highways since the cars will all communicate and coordinate with each other.

Oh, and commercial truck drivers will cease to exist as FSD replaces them, making lower insurance, higher efficiency (truck on the move 24/7). etc.

That is my vision of 20 years or so (Maybe 30 for the truckers to be replaced).

Now, for the rest, power plants, factories, air flights, international cargo shipping etc. We will be hard pressed to replace all of they with electric of some other non-fossil fuel alternative in less than 50 years, maybe longer. If we simply ran out of oil, it would happen MUCH sooner. But, oil is too cheap (despite todays high prices) too easy to transport, and too high of an energy density to be replaced any sooner.

Sadly all that is the majority of pollution generated by Fossil fuels. But, we will NEVER get there is we don't start. For example, there are not going to be charging stations every where until there are EVs and there are not going to be enough EVs to support charging stations everywhere until there are charging everywhere. Catch 22. This is where government incentives come in to play, by making it more desirable it will happen sooner. Whether we see those and whether they are enough - I dunno.

All of that assumes we remain with the same battery chemistry - we won't. All of that assumes new sources (space) of rare earth minerals don't become available and financially practical to mine - they will.

So, there are a LOT of connections, like a spider web that will begin wiggling as we begin transitioning and those wiggles will result is massive changes in technology.

One of the difficulties in predicting technology changes, is that historically tech advances at an exponential rate, while we think about it in a linear rate. So, it "seems" like things are changing slowly, while in reality they are changing faster every year. AI is going to be play a BIG role in the design of new batteries and chemistries, and new power generation systems, etc etc.

It would NOT surprise me if 20 years from now Fossil fuel burning is outlawed. But, I can't tell you how we will get there. But it wouldn't surprise me. We made it to the moon in a decade, when everyone said it was impossible. SpaceX is up to 12 reuses of recovered launch vehicles and 10 years ago everyone laughed at the idea. Things can change fast - if we don't prevent it. And Fossil fuel companies have a very big incentive to prevent change.
Very thoughtful post. Kudos!

[Bay Kid]

We still hold better cards than China and Dictatorships are inherently inefficient. They need us more than we need them. So, we should slowly move away from our relationship with them. It would be hard for a decade or so, but then the US industry could be producing manufactured goods even cheaper than they do. Remember "American innovation" - it NEVER died it just got LAZY.

I believe in the good old USA.

[Topspinmo]

The 1st thing that an English teacher would markdown is the "do to", which should be DUE to. Then there are about 10 more markdowns.
.......But, on the understandable part......2099 is so far away that 1/2 of the Earth's population may be on Mars and man-made orbiting globes.
........2050 EV success will depend on continuing research in battery technology and clean energy development. Federal Government-sponsored research will be important - our world could be one of all science deniers by then .....sadly.
.........Electric motors have several advantages over IC engines because they are more efficient, reliable, quiet, and have fewer parts. Electric motors basically spin in a circle with equal power supplied to all 360 degree rotation. Internal combustion engines have to convert jarring linear piston motion into rotary motion - with jarring explosions at only one cycle of its 4 cycle operation.
.........Not ALL countries produce oil and that fact seems to have contributed to wars. All countries have some form of renewable energy, so IF (?) technology like solar panels and storage batteries could be improved maybe (?) there would be less need for wars?


Thanks 3 grade substitute teacher. I see you had no rebuttal of the Video. So how come all electric vehicles are so expensive without the horrible gas engines and transmission? I would think the would be cheaper with less moving parts? We’re not going to be on mars buy 2099. 3099 maybe. And what going to do when they get there beings have to haul everything with them? O wait back to Stone Age.

[MartinSE]

Thanks 3 grade substitute teacher. I see you had no rebuttal of the Video. So how come all electric vehicles are so expensive without the horrible gas engines and transmission? I would think the would be cheaper with less moving parts? We’re not going to be on mars buy 2099. 3099 maybe. And what going to do when they get there beings have to haul everything with them? O wait back to Stone Age.

Well,

"In 1997, Sharp and Sony introduced the first large flat screen TV. It was created using the PALC technology and measured 42 inches, a record size at the time. This first model sold for more than $15,000, making it well out of reach for most Americans. "

I expect people said the same thing, why change to flat screen, CRTs are fine and cheaper.

And, I will bet you a dollar we have a colony on the Moon by 2030, and on Mars by 2040.

[ThirdOfFive]

Well,

"In 1997, Sharp and Sony introduced the first large flat screen TV. It was created using the PALC technology and measured 42 inches, a record size at the time. This first model sold for more than $15,000, making it well out of reach for most Americans. "

I expect people said the same thing, why change to flat screen, CRTs are fine and cheaper.

And, I will bet you a dollar we have a colony on the Moon by 2030, and on Mars by 2040.
Great points. I remember the first handheld calculators; LEDs and they ran on AA batteries. I had one of the first ones back in the early 70's. Texas Instruments, as I recall. It could add, subtract, multiply and divide, and do some other simple slide-rule - type things. I remember buying it in '72 or '73 for $89.00. By the 90's they were giving away calculators that made that 1970 Texas Instruments model look like it came over on the Mayflower.

Remember Voyager II and it's tour of the outer Solar System? Awe-inspiring to say the least. It is now in interstellar space. But given the rate that technology develops--what are the chances that our great-great grandchildren will be seeing it on display at the Smithsonian at some point in the future. Even though it sounds impossible, I wouldn't bet against it.

[jimbo2012]

It doesn't take that long to charge.

U can buy an ev and drive 300 miles for less than $35,000

Nevada mines hold 25% of the world's lithium supply.
The State of Maine discovery a huge deposit.

The batteries are 95% recyclable.

Per figures reported by Cox Automotive, EV sales totaled 487,560 units in 2021,
an 89-percent increase over the 257,872 units sold in 2020. The figures also reveal a 71.8-percent increase in EV sales in Q4 of 2021, up to 147,799 units as compared to the 86,010 units sold in Q4 of 2020.

According to Cox Automotive, EV sales may have risen even higher had production and inventory not been impacted by the ongoing global microchip shortage.

Adding up the annual sales beginning from 2010 gets us to approximately 26.2 million cumulative electric vehicles sold, but factoring in an increasing rate of EVs going out of operation each year, we arrive at ~25.19 million EVs in operation. This is an increase of 14X from the roughly 1.8 million at the end of 2020.

Get with the times people it's happening in your lifetime.

[Topspinmo]

The 1st thing that an English teacher would markdown is the "do to", which should be DUE to. Then there are about 10 more markdowns.
.......But, on the understandable part......2099 is so far away that 1/2 of the Earth's population may be on Mars and man-made orbiting globes.
........2050 EV success will depend on continuing research in battery technology and clean energy development. Federal Government-sponsored research will be important - our world could be one of all science deniers by then .....sadly.
.........Electric motors have several advantages over IC engines because they are more efficient, reliable, quiet, and have fewer parts. Electric motors basically spin in a circle with equal power supplied to all 360 degree rotation. Internal combustion engines have to convert jarring linear piston motion into rotary motion - with jarring explosions at only one cycle of its 4 cycle operation.
.........Not ALL countries produce oil and that fact seems to have contributed to wars. All countries have some form of renewable energy, so IF (?) technology like solar panels and storage batteries could be improved maybe (?) there would be less need for wars?

I can see why yoy confusion or lack of comprehension.


Thank you 3rd grade substitute teacher. But, after you rant I see you never commended on the video which this is about. You would think being full electric vehicles would be cheaper than the dreaded combustion engine and transmissions being the have less parts? O I see the cost of batteries (or what they charge) far exceeds the cost of all that manufacturing combustion engines and transmissions. Hence the reality, the cost of fully electric has to come way down before they will be the majority. I willing to bet there Hugh profit margin on EV due (see mommy) to limited numbers being sold.

[Topspinmo]

It doesn't take that long to charge.

U can buy an ev and drive 300 miles for less than $35,000

Nevada mines hold 25% of the world's lithium supply.
The State of Maine discovery a huge deposit.

The batteries are 95% recyclable.

Per figures reported by Cox Automotive, EV sales totaled 487,560 units in 2021,
an 89-percent increase over the 257,872 units sold in 2020. The figures also reveal a 71.8-percent increase in EV sales in Q4 of 2021, up to 147,799 units as compared to the 86,010 units sold in Q4 of 2020.

According to Cox Automotive, EV sales may have risen even higher had production and inventory not been impacted by the ongoing global microchip shortage.

Adding up the annual sales beginning from 2010 gets us to approximately 26.2 million cumulative electric vehicles sold, but factoring in an increasing rate of EVs going out of operation each year, we arrive at ~25.19 million EVs in operation. This is an increase of 14X from the roughly 1.8 million at the end of 2020.

Get with the times people it's happening in your lifetime.


Please name that brand.

[Topspinmo]

Great points. I remember the first handheld calculators; LEDs and they ran on AA batteries. I had one of the first ones back in the early 70's. Texas Instruments, as I recall. It could add, subtract, multiply and divide, and do some other simple slide-rule - type things. I remember buying it in '72 or '73 for $89.00. By the 90's they were giving away calculators that made that 1970 Texas Instruments model look like it came over on the Mayflower.

Remember Voyager II and it's tour of the outer Solar System? Awe-inspiring to say the least. It is now in interstellar space. But given the rate that technology develops--what are the chances that our great-great grandchildren will be seeing it on display at the Smithsonian at some point in the future. Even though it sounds impossible, I wouldn't bet against it.

IMO they will see the great debt unless at some point the world files bankruptcy.

[Topspinmo]

It doesn't take that long to charge.

U can buy an ev and drive 300 miles for less than $35,000

Nevada mines hold 25% of the world's lithium supply.
The State of Maine discovery a huge deposit.

The batteries are 95% recyclable.

Per figures reported by Cox Automotive, EV sales totaled 487,560 units in 2021,
an 89-percent increase over the 257,872 units sold in 2020. The figures also reveal a 71.8-percent increase in EV sales in Q4 of 2021, up to 147,799 units as compared to the 86,010 units sold in Q4 of 2020.

According to Cox Automotive, EV sales may have risen even higher had production and inventory not been impacted by the ongoing global microchip shortage.

Adding up the annual sales beginning from 2010 gets us to approximately 26.2 million cumulative electric vehicles sold, but factoring in an increasing rate of EVs going out of operation each year, we arrive at ~25.19 million EVs in operation. This is an increase of 14X from the roughly 1.8 million at the end of 2020.

Get with the times people it's happening in your lifetime.

Drop in bucket to estimated two billion plus internal combustion engine vehicles. Yes, progress good and who wouldn’t want electric vehicle that masses could use to replace internal combustion. But, numbers and cost far from reality in my life time.

[jimbo2012]

Please name that brand.

Several, google it

[Topspinmo]

Several, google it


Not interested, but thought it would be good for one interested.

[JMintzer]

Well,

"In 1997, Sharp and Sony introduced the first large flat screen TV. It was created using the PALC technology and measured 42 inches, a record size at the time. This first model sold for more than $15,000, making it well out of reach for most Americans. "

I expect people said the same thing, why change to flat screen, CRTs are fine and cheaper.

And, I will bet you a dollar we have a colony on the Moon by 2030, and on Mars by 2040.

Around the same time (1996) there were various companies trying to build electric cars (GM being one of them, with the EV1).

So, by your logic, electric cars should be the standard by now, just like flat panel TVs...

[Bill14564]

Several, google it

Tried that but no luck.

Under $35,000 don't get 300 miles. (https://www.edmunds.com/electric-car/articles/cheapest-electric-cars/)

300 miles cost well over $35,000 (https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1133620_range-life-the-8-evs-epa-rated-for-300-miles-or-more)

Now perhaps you will share your google search that backs up your claim.

[MartinSE]

Around the same time (1996) there were various companies trying to build electric cars (GM being one of them, with the EV1).

So, by your logic, electric cars should be the standard by now, just like flat panel TVs...

Not at all. Flat screen were around a lot before they finally had a design people would buy and a company behind them that was willing to take a chance on selling a silly EXPENSIVE flat screen TV.

The same with electric cars, been around a LONG time, I think before Gas. But, never had a company that could produce and stand behind them. Now we do, and we are seeing the same thing - sales are taking off. Slowly at first, but it will grow exponentially, and 10 years from now we will look back and go WOW, how the did happen so fast.

[jimbo2012]

here you go after rebate of $7500
Alternative Fuels | Hybrid & Electric Cars & SUVs | Kia (https://www.kia.com/us/en/ev?chid=sem&ppc=y&aud=&CID=20259070&SID=4132975&PID=204385952&AID=404219172&CRD=0&gclid=Cj0KCQjw3IqSBhCoARIsAMBkTb1ZMxNBSXi6P5wlpC1I wNfvnllfnvSSDgfGx9Lr9DKMqjDvR8_yEWQaAs82EALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds)

More at 250mile range

Several more under $50K

recharge time about 15 min on average

Of course if you don't want to believe it you will not find them.

[Bill14564]

here you go after rebate of $7500
Alternative Fuels | Hybrid & Electric Cars & SUVs | Kia (https://www.kia.com/us/en/ev?chid=sem&ppc=y&aud=&CID=20259070&SID=4132975&PID=204385952&AID=404219172&CRD=0&gclid=Cj0KCQjw3IqSBhCoARIsAMBkTb1ZMxNBSXi6P5wlpC1I wNfvnllfnvSSDgfGx9Lr9DKMqjDvR8_yEWQaAs82EALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds)

More at 250mile range

Several more under $50K

recharge time about 15 min on average

Of course if you don't want to believe it you will not find them.

You’re reaching. The non-Kia site lists the mileage at 237. Far from recharge in 15 minutes, the Kia site says 18 minutes to add 217 miles. And all that after MSRP-rebate but before options, dealer prep, and taxes.

Of course, if you just want to be right then these are simply insignificant details

[Stu from NYC]

You’re reaching. The non-Kia site lists the mileage at 237. Far from recharge in 15 minutes, the Kia site says 18 minutes to add 217 miles. And all that after MSRP-rebate but before options, dealer prep, and taxes.

Of course, if you just want to be right then these are simply insignificant details

Would be great if you never ever have to wait on line to charge. Wonder how often that will happen in the real world

[Bill14564]

Would be great if you never ever have to wait on line to charge. Wonder how often that will happen in the real world

Don’t know the answer to that but with nearly 500,000 more EVs on the road last year the charging stations must be getting busy.

[jimbo2012]

You’re reaching. The non-Kia site lists the mileage at 237. Far from recharge in 15 minutes, the Kia site says 18 minutes to add 217 miles. And all that after MSRP-rebate but before options, dealer prep, and taxes.



I'm not referring to Non-kia why are you mixing apples and oranges?

Bill it clearly says Up to 310 miles of range.

Moreover, how many times do you go that far?
A few times a year maybe

You are just dead set against any EV.
Ever test drive one?

I would bet you have a gas cart.


I think you're reaching, if you just want to be right then these are simply insignificant details.

[Brad-tv]

Would be great if you never ever have to wait on line to charge. Wonder how often that will happen in the real world

Maybe in Los Angeles not around here if so a rarity. More likely to wait on a gas line especially with all the volatility around oil shortages lately and Biden shutting down US drilling. Besides if you own a EV you must have a home charger. So how often do you drive 2-300 miles a day? Not very often so plug in at night full charge in the morning. Cost about $5 for a full charge. A lot cheaper that $50 at the pump Long distance travel you stop every 3-4 hours for 15 min . If I’m in a car for 3-4 hours I will probably stop to use the bathroom and get a snack anyway.Many think it’s worth it to drive a great car ( insanely fast too) but not all especially around here.

[jimbo2012]

Tesla (TSLA) - Get Tesla Inc Report dominates the electric vehicle market, and its lead is likely to grow. That's because the manufacturer of the Model 3 sedan and the Model Y SUV is one of the few automakers able to meet demand in the face of supply-chain disruptions and rising prices for raw materials such as nickel, aluminum and palladium.

The automotive group will officially open its fourth production plant, in Austin, on April 7. This would enable it to produce just over 1.42 million vehicles in 2022 against 930,442 in 2021, industry sources estimate.

[JMintzer]

Not at all. Flat screen were around a lot before they finally had a design people would buy and a company behind them that was willing to take a chance on selling a silly EXPENSIVE flat screen TV.

The same with electric cars, been around a LONG time, I think before Gas. But, never had a company that could produce and stand behind them. Now we do, and we are seeing the same thing - sales are taking off. Slowly at first, but it will grow exponentially, and 10 years from now we will look back and go WOW, how the did happen so fast.

Only if the price comes down... (like they did with flat screen TVs...)

[JMintzer]

You’re reaching. The non-Kia site lists the mileage at 237. Far from recharge in 15 minutes, the Kia site says 18 minutes to add 217 miles. And all that after MSRP-rebate but before options, dealer prep, and taxes.

Of course, if you just want to be right then these are simply insignificant details

18 minutes, but ONLY if you can find one of the "ultra fast charging stations"...

And he's ignoring the federal rebates/tax credits. Without them the EVs cost significantly more...

[MartinSE]

Only if the price comes down... (like they did with flat screen TVs...)

Yup, and we will see. With every other automaker jumping into the game, Tesla making it's design available in public domain - I expect in two years we will see a LOT of different designs.

The BIGGEST challenge I see right now to getting the exponential growth going is the battery supply. All the other manufacturers are going to have a hard time catching up with Tesla's battery supply - Tesla has a big lead and makes their own.

But, maybe not, we could all be nuked back into the Stone Age - someone said, if WWIII is fought with nukes, WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones...

[Bill14564]

I'm not referring to Non-kia why are you mixing apples and oranges?

Bill it clearly says Up to 310 miles of range.

Moreover, how many times do you go that far?
A few times a year maybe

You are just dead set against any EV.
Ever test drive one?

I would bet you have a gas cart.


I think you're reaching, if you just want to be right then these are simply insignificant details.

You might want to look at the links I provided before discounting them. The non-KIA site is an independent evaluation of the vehicle you linked to.

You are taking a KIA marketing line, up to 310 miles (going downhill with a tailwind and the air conditioner off on a good day) and disputing an independent evaluation. Even the KIA information of charging to 217 miles in 18 minutes makes me question the 310. Would they really advertise a 70% charge in 18 minutes or would they advertise a commonly-quoted 80% charge? If the 80% charge then their range would be 270 miles which, while greater than the 237 found by Edmunds, and though technically fitting the "up to 310 miles" marketing line, is less than 300 miles of usable range.

I'm not against EVs at all, I would love to find one that is both affordable and meets my needs. Doesn't exist yet.

What I am against is unsubstantiated claims such as that there are several manufacturers of EVs with a 300 mile range and a price tag under $35,000. Google won't find them because they don't exist, at least without the marketing qualifiers of "up to 310 miles" and "after rebates."

To answer your question, I have made at least 10 trips of 300 miles or more (several were 900-1200 miles) in the last 12 months.

And yes, a gas cart. A pretty safe bet given the ratio of carts on the paths these days. In my case, price and availability trumped zealotry.

[MartinSE]

You might want to look at the links I provided before discounting them. The non-KIA site is an independent evaluation of the vehicle you linked to.

You are taking a KIA marketing line, up to 310 miles (going downhill with a tailwind and the air conditioner off on a good day) and disputing an independent evaluation. Even the KIA information of charging to 217 miles in 18 minutes makes me question the 310. Would they really advertise a 70% charge in 18 minutes or would they advertise a commonly-quoted 80% charge? If the 80% charge then their range would be 270 miles which, while greater than the 237 found by Edmunds, and though technically fitting the "up to 310 miles" marketing line, is less than 300 miles of usable range.

I'm not against EVs at all, I would love to find one that is both affordable and meets my needs. Doesn't exist yet.

What I am against is unsubstantiated claims such as that there are several manufacturers of EVs with a 300 mile range and a price tag under $35,000. Google won't find them because they don't exist, at least without the marketing qualifiers of "up to 310 miles" and "after rebates."

To answer your question, I have made at least 10 trips of 300 miles or more (several were 900-1200 miles) in the last 12 months.

And yes, a gas cart. A pretty safe bet given the ratio of carts on the paths these days. In my case, price and availability trumped zealotry.

You had me completely with you until the last word. "Zealotry" really wasn't needed.

[Chi-Town]

How long will it be until an electric long hauler is robot driven? Probably not too far in the future.

[MartinSE]

How long will it be until an electric long hauler is robot driven? Probably not too far in the future.

Tesla has several orders we know of, but can't produce the trucks right now because they can not produce enough batteries to keep up with the demand of the auto market.

The design is complete-ish, and it waiting for batteries to begin delivery.

Tesla is building more battery factories as fast as they can around the world, and upgrading existing factories to "better" batteries.

I expect they will start delivering functional beta's within a year. I also expect at least for a year or two they will require a driver to be present - "just in case". But the advantages are so enormous that customers are ready to pounce when they become available.

Currently there are around 300,000 to 500,000 long haul drivers in the US. I expect it will take at least 5 to 10 years to produce that many trucks.

Also, other truck companies have announced they are going to be producing soon. There are several components. The engines may be produced by one company, the cabs and trailers by another. The software for the Full Self Driving yet another. I read that Cummins has announce some electric drive trains, I am not sure if they are long haul or not.

Detroit has also announced electric drive trains to their product lines, I do not know their delivery schedules.

I expect a diesel drive train could be installed in a FSD (Full Self Driving) chassis, but I have not heard of anyone planning that. I don't see why that would be "harder" than electric, and so that could help increase the rate of conversion to "robot" FSD long haul trucks.

[Stu from NYC]

How long will it be until an electric long hauler is robot driven? Probably not too far in the future.

When it comes will probably be out west where there is less traffic with humans making first pickup drive to interstate handing off to robot who will drive to terminal for final delivery made by human/

[Mrprez]

When it comes will probably be out west where there is less traffic with humans making first pickup drive to interstate handing off to robot who will drive to terminal for final delivery made by human/

I don’t see totally autonomous robot driven trucks with no human in the cab anytime soon. There is a lot going on in the cab of a truck that requires brain power, not computer chips.

[MorTech]

Very true and amazing these issues are ignored. Yet GM plans to go to 100% electric perhaps they know something we do not but honestly do not think so.

GM has a government/Blackrock/CFR gun to their head.

[JMintzer]

Tesla has several orders we know of, but can't produce the trucks right now because they can not produce enough batteries to keep up with the demand of the auto market.

The design is complete-ish, and it waiting for batteries to begin delivery.

Tesla is building more battery factories as fast as they can around the world, and upgrading existing factories to "better" batteries.

I expect they will start delivering functional beta's within a year. I also expect at least for a year or two they will require a driver to be present - "just in case". But the advantages are so enormous that customers are ready to pounce when they become available.

Currently there are around 300,000 to 500,000 long haul drivers in the US. I expect it will take at least 5 to 10 years to produce that many trucks.

Also, other truck companies have announced they are going to be producing soon. There are several components. The engines may be produced by one company, the cabs and trailers by another. The software for the Full Self Driving yet another. I read that Cummins has announce some electric drive trains, I am not sure if they are long haul or not.

Detroit has also announced electric drive trains to their product lines, I do not know their delivery schedules.

I expect a diesel drive train could be installed in a FSD (Full Self Driving) chassis, but I have not heard of anyone planning that. I don't see why that would be "harder" than electric, and so that could help increase the rate of conversion to "robot" FSD long haul trucks.

You "expect" a lot...

[Topspinmo]

I don't think the narrator breathed once during the whole film!


Scotty has millions of viewer’s followers on utube. he’s a Toyota whore, has been mechanic since teenager. he claims he’s millionaire from his online posting and reviews. You either hate him or love him due to his raw opinionated pod casts. Few can dispute majority of his reviews with facts.

[Topspinmo]

You "expect" a lot...

Anytime you can eliminate labor and benefits CEO’s/companies going to be all in. I predict some day the right lane will be only for driverless trucks. But, not in my lifetime. :duck:

[Topspinmo]

GM has a government/Blackrock/CFR gun to their head.

What you get when federal government bails you out several times. :duck:

[Topspinmo]

Tesla has several orders we know of, but can't produce the trucks right now because they can not produce enough batteries to keep up with the demand of the auto market.

The design is complete-ish, and it waiting for batteries to begin delivery.

Tesla is building more battery factories as fast as they can around the world, and upgrading existing factories to "better" batteries.

I expect they will start delivering functional beta's within a year. I also expect at least for a year or two they will require a driver to be present - "just in case". But the advantages are so enormous that customers are ready to pounce when they become available.

Currently there are around 300,000 to 500,000 long haul drivers in the US. I expect it will take at least 5 to 10 years to produce that many trucks.

Also, other truck companies have announced they are going to be producing soon. There are several components. The engines may be produced by one company, the cabs and trailers by another. The software for the Full Self Driving yet another. I read that Cummins has announce some electric drive trains, I am not sure if they are long haul or not.

Detroit has also announced electric drive trains to their product lines, I do not know their delivery schedules.

I expect a diesel drive train could be installed in a FSD (Full Self Driving) chassis, but I have not heard of anyone planning that. I don't see why that would be "harder" than electric, and so that could help increase the rate of conversion to "robot" FSD long haul trucks.

trains are electric driven, it takes big Diesel engine to drive the generator to produce the electricity to move the train ( the original hybrid engine producing vehicle) Now I guess could have train load of battery cars 20 deep and wrap them out every 100 or two hundred miles. Take a lot of energy to move train and that’s on level ground.
Trains have been electric driven when they retired steam engine trains. As far as long haul trucks not going to happen in my life , one ot two hundred miles is not long haul IMO.

[dhdallas]

Polluting, smelly, noisy complex internal combustion engines (and their expensive maintenance) are thankfully going the way of the dinosaurs as are those who refuse to embrace new technology. When you can't stand change (even when it is a good thing) you know you are too old.

P.S. Check your grammar

[TCNY61]

Polluting, smelly, noisy complex internal combustion engines (and their expensive maintenance) are thankfully going the way of the dinosaurs as are those who refuse to embrace new technology. When you can't stand change (even when it is a good thing) you know you are too old.

P.S. Check your grammar

At work we use $100,000 battery packs (run time a couple of hours) to handle the data center load until the Diesel generators can stabilize. Batteries will never replace the generators.

[Two Bills]

At work we use $100,000 battery packs (run time a couple of hours) to handle the data center load until the Diesel generators can stabilize. Batteries will never replace the generators.

That is a very bold statement!
Very similar to the early quotes regarding horses, and ICE.

[MartinSE]

Originally Posted by TCNY61 View Post
At work we use $100,000 battery packs (run time a couple of hours) to handle the data center load until the Diesel generators can stabilize. Batteries will never replace the generators.

I think NEVER is a lot longer than a lot of people realize.

41 years ago there were no cell phones. Today most people don't have a land line (unless they are our age - LOL)

I had a boss that refused to use an ATM just 30 years ago.

Technology marches on faster than most people think.

[Topspinmo]

Polluting, smelly, noisy complex internal combustion engines (and their expensive maintenance) are thankfully going the way of the dinosaurs as are those who refuse to embrace new technology. When you can't stand change (even when it is a good thing) you know you are too old.

P.S. Check your grammar

Quoted:


This very case is widely disputed even within the US Supreme Court, let alone the many grammar experts.

In this case (possessive of a singular word ending with “s”), both ways are acceptable, according e.g. to The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Grammarly and various other sources. The New-York Times, Associated Press ans Penguin books are even officially opting for Markus’ car

Many purists still require Markus’s car. There are even experts who apply different rules depending on whether the name is monosyllabic or not, and, if not, apply a different rule depending on which syllable receives the stress. Their only exception would go to Biblical proper names, like Moses’. So, you see…

To prevent the accumulation of “esses”, I would opt for Markus’ car. And I guess usage, the ultimate long term judge, will choose the same way, i.e. simplicity

[Topspinmo]

That is a very bold statement!
Very similar to the early quotes regarding horses, and ICE.

Not really when A LOT of energy required.

[Topspinmo]

I think NEVER is a lot longer than a lot of people realize.

41 years ago there were no cell phones. Today most people don't have a land line (unless they are our age - LOL)

I had a boss that refused to use an ATM just 30 years ago.

Technology marches on faster than most people think.


Never not that far off for me…. I can say I will never see lots of things like human space travel to another planet or batteries replacing diesel powers train generators. :)