Comments by "TeeKay" (@teekay_1) on "Why EVs Aren't The GreenTech Panacea || Peter Zeihan" video.

@lemdixon01 "fusion power generation is just 20 years away." Always has been, always will be.
12
@geheimeWeltregierung Actually his words are timely as VW, Ford, GM, Honda and Toyota (i.e. the biggest automakers in the world) are retrenching on EVs and cancelling future plans to build factories. The majority of consumers right now won't buy one until range doubles, charging times are reduced by an order of magnitude, and charging is as ubiquitous as today's gas stations.
9
@1Esteband Yes. Engineering and Computer Science will continue to be relevant and in demand for decades. If we're serious about expanding the grid, he may want to specialize in power generation/multi-phase, since we'll need a lot of people with that skill.
6
@jjohur For a given class of cars, yes.
4
EVs work really well as a 2nd car for around town. I'll pick a used Leaf at some point just for running to the grocery or hardware store.
4
Exactly. People who who don't understand the distances in western US usually talk about "how things are getting much better" in terms of charger availability, well, the reality is they're not. Perhaps in Eastern cities, but not in the bulk of the country.
3
@sugarfatpie1 Sales were up in the 3rd quarter, yes, but the manufacturers see the demand leveling off, which is why most of the major manufacturers are deferring expansion of EV production for at least a year.
3
@pingpongpaddlehead completely untrue. And it's the only reliable option other than gas/oil/coal for power generation.
3
Ironically Ford has slashed prices on the mustang EV, but it's up to the dealer to pass those savings onto the customer. Ford currently has a 120 day supply of EV's because the demand isn't there.
3
@matthewnelson5680 let me quote this article from Car and Driver: "Unlike gas- or diesel-powered vehicles, which regularly beat their EPA ratings in our highway testing, only three of the 33 EVs that we've run range tests on to date have exceeded their EPA highway and combined figures. Currently, that's the Audi e-tron Sportback, Audi RS e-tron GT, and base-model Porsche Taycan. " and further down: "This brings up another way EVs are different: cold weather affects range dramatically. One of the many reasons for that is that using the heater to warm the cabin—particularly on EVs that have resistive heaters—sucks a lot of juice. In a test with our long-term Model 3 we found that using the heat can increase consumption by as much as 35 percent and kill 60 miles of range, a significant chunk of the Model 3's 310-mile EPA rating. "
3
"Those who have owned an EV for a significant time generally love them" The real reason is these first adopters tend to overlook the shortcomings that are obvious, or strangely, claim they don't exist. They're likely people who don't use their car for much more than going to work or to the grocery store.
2
@yaimavol Apparently the greens think they should use those Uber Scooters and electric bikes.
2
@williammeek4078 Lubricating axles at 10K. That's funny, unless you're referring to a car from 1955. Can I assume you're joking? The car has 75,000 miles.
2
@karlheinz4059 Depends on charge cycles and how often people do quick charges.
2
@matthewnelson5680 "They consume no power while sitting in traffic and remain turned on" Actually they do to run the heat or A/C. The other cool thing about gas cars is that you can run them on the interstates at 75-80 MPH and the latest cars actually do better at that speed. With an EV (Car and Driver just tested this a few months ago), range goes down considerably, anywhere from 33% to 50%.
2
@matthewnelson5680 I can only give you my experiences with sedans from Toyota and Honda and the net loss from traveling at those speeds (if there is one) is less than 10%. For EV's it's significantly higher on the order of 33-50%, which is why I always see EVs in the right hand lanes of the interstates.
2
@hunternotbiden Yes, but around town is the sweet spot for EVs because you avoid idling and you don't need much range, because you're just grabbing groceries and heading home. Because of today's battery technology the push for greater ranges will be ultimately futile, unless we want 3-4 ton behemoths on the road. So do what sports cars have done... strip EVs down to the basics, 4 seats, rear folding seats with a hatch, get the weight down under 2,000 pounds a nicely appointed by practical interior (think of the old VW beetle) with a price of around $17K without subsidies and they'll fly off dealer's lots.
2
@Fomites Indeed, you can. Unless it happens to be summer and you don't want to be sitting in your fancy new EV stewing at 95 degrees, or in winter when you don't want to be freezing at 20 degrees. But I will concede if you live on the Island of Hawaii, you'll turn off the A/C and heater and just roll the windows down. Or get a convertible EV.
2
@jeremiahlynn9584 You are correct, however, what it does mean that EV's will only be 7-10% of the total number of cars on the road. There are too many barriers to adoption, particularly in cities and in rural parts of the US to go much higher than that.
1
@jeremiahlynn9584 Well, I just checked this afternoon and gar prices are $3.35 locally in the mid-atlantic, and apparently they're going lower as supply begins to increase.
1
@matthewnelson5680 " modern EVs have great range" Compared with what?
1
@matthewnelson5680 Depending on the model, it may be significantly lower, particularly on the highway. I recently rented a Toyota Camry and traveled 2500 miles over two weeks and averaged about 43 MPG running at 70-80 MPH, with an overall range of roughly 480 miles on a tank of gas. However, I get that most EV owners never venture far from home, and are commuters and grocery getters, which is the apparently the use case EV designers are focused on.
1
@matthewnelson5680 EVs won't be competitive until they can get close to a 500 miles range overall, and fully charge to 100% in 5-10 minutes without damaging the battery. Since that isn't feasible now, the best use case is a commuter with a 60-100 mile range.
1
@matthewnelson5680 Actually 300 miles was chosen by engineers because the battery weight (and cost) increases much faster than the range of the battery because Lithium has poor energy density and the charging of larger batteries becomes an even bigger problem in bigger batteries It wasn't chosen because 300 miles is a good range for consumer, it was chosen for a cost and weight reasons. 300 miles was considered the minimum acceptable to consumers. As to ultimate range, if you charge your battery to 100% quickly, consistently, it is contrary to Tesla's instructions and will have a detrimental effect on the lifespan of the battery.
1
@ElyFrankes Unfortunately, Tesla can't maintain an industry, and they still have issues with not allowing 3rd party parts, you can't take them to your local shop for service when needed (or fix it yourself). The other major issue with Teslas are that they tend to be written off for minor accidents because the insurance company assumes the battery is damaged, at which point the car is essentially salvage.
1
@brettgracey9682 The engineering for electric trains has nothing to do in any way shape or form with EVs. There's nothing similar about the technology or use case between the two.
1
@davidpnewton "Erm that's an awful lot of vehicles fitting that use case." Sure, but it's even more cost-effective to buy a five year old Honda civic; the insurance is cheap, it's reliable, and it will last for 20 years, and you'll get about 30-40 MPG even around town in that car.
1
@WilliamF-o4w "...eventually won't be any new ICE cars". Maybe, but that will be after 2050/2060 even if the EV dream come true. And even that is looking increasingly unlikely as car makers and rental car agencies are drawing down on the EV fleet.
1
@thecustodian1023 rental car agencies are not happy with EVs for a multitude of reasons, first, renters aren't interested in them, and second insurance is eager to total EVs when there is an accident due to uncertainty about the battery pack after an accident and unavailability of 3rd parties to repair them. Do a search on "Hertz pulls back on EV plans citing Tesla price cuts, high repair costs"
1
@bobwhammer4237 That's the perfect use case. I'll keep asking why we're trying to replace 250 Million cars in the US with automobiles that few people want, and even fewer can afford. Instead focus on urban areas with small commuter cars that have a trunk to pick up groceries and such. Perfect first car for city denizen, and a nice 2nd car for people in the suburbs. Part of the answer is the climate activists hate that Americans can travel cheaply anywhere they want by driving. The other part of the answer is climate activists believe in their heart of hearts that everybody should live in cities in tiny little flats, and your recreation should be in a park official sanctioned and approved by city planners.
1
@cloudpoint0 "The lifetime cost of an EV is lower than an ICE. " That's actually unknown since EVs have only been produced at scale for a decade. And when you calculate costs you need to consider depreciation as part of those costs.
1
@andref8246 not many, and not many of them are running. By contrast, lots of normal cars are running at the ripe old age of 20 years.
1
@williammeek4078 If lifetime is measured at 15-20 years, they really aren't. As to increased maintenance, yeah, if that battery in the EV isn't charged, the whole equation goes out the door.
1
@williammeek4078 Well, what I'm saying it's unknown because these cars have been around in large numbers for less than a decade. What we do know is that if the battery fails, the car is scrap. What we also know is that fixing Tesla when they break is expensive because Tesla controls the repair process. We'll have actual data by 2030. What we also know is the long-term costs of Hondas and Toyota are enough that you can realistically keep these cars for 20+ years, which is cheaper than buying a 2nd car because the battery failed. To put it parlance most people will understand, if the battery fails in an EV, it's the equivalent of the engine and transmission failing all at once in a normal car.
1
@williammeek4078 You clearly are wrong. I have several new cars. In fact a Ford that has gone 7 years with nothing but tires (which EVs wear out like candy), and oil changes which the dealer covers for free. It has a range of 350 miles even when the temp gets down to 0 or below, and can be recharged in 3 minutes. Nothing has ever broken or required service on this car. And if I really needed service, I can get it fixed not only at Ford dealers, but the mechanic down the block Or the Honda SUV that has 100,000 miles and 6 years with less than $750 spent. It has a range of 450 miles and can be recharged in 5 minutes (it has a bigger tank). Or We could talk about the 25 year old Honda, which has had a total over $1200 of service over that time (excluding tires and oil). Call me when an EV can go for 25 years. I have a few other cars as well, but you kinda get the point (even if you won't agree with it). Modern cars are so reliable that it's actually shocking when one has an issue if it's less than 10 years old. And most people won't own an EV for 10 years because they're likely leasing them, as recommended by Consumer Reports.
1
 @williammeek4078 I would say the opposite is true. Lubricate the wheel bearings. You're just trolling.
1
"For most transportation needs, small electric carts and bikes would work " As most EV adherent do, what you really mean is "....They work for *ME*. But unless you live in a city, they don't work very well at all.
1
That's a great choice, and the best use case for local/commuting purposes as a 2nd car.
1
@tonywilson4713 Trying to force technical revolutions never works. Governments, even the US don't have the money or power to force consumers to buy things they don't want. When market solution are available, they will be used. Until then, when government decrees something that is not within their power (e.g. thou shalt buy $50K electric cars), they're demonstrating they learned nothing from King Cnut.
1
@Echophone2046 Well, yes but it was always a crappy EV. That's what I dislike about the automotive press; they depend on the manufacturer to loan them a car to test, and they will immediately tell you it's the greatest car and that you should consider putting a down-payment on one now. And then when they do a comparo test a year later, they put it at the bottom of the rankings.
1
@matthewnelson5680 So a couple things: 1) The article test demonstrated normal cars do better than the EPA highway estimates when traveling at 75-80 MPH 2) The tests further showed that only 4 EVs can match their actual EPA and advertised rating in normal driving 3) EVs lose anywhere from 10% for some brands to 25% for Teslas to 42% for Hyundais when traveling at 75-80 MPH 4) EVs lose up to 35% of range with cold weather (defined as under 37 degrees) So for those needing to travel distances in the cold weather in an EV, you need to drive slower, and consider that you won't be able to make it very far, even with something like a Tesla S with a larger battery. Evangelists will overlook the obvious flaws in products they love, but these are first gen products with all the attendant issues. As long as these cars use lithium for energy storage (which is not an ideal substance) manufacturers should be focused on around-town driving, because it's what they do best. And if you live in a cold climate, waiting until non-lithium batteries are the norm might be the best financial answer.
1
@Fomites Ah, so I see someone took high school physics. That's great. Most kids will take gym class at that time, so you're a credit to your family. You're forgetting something important: all EVs today are designed around a 300 mile range, which means the engineers optimized the power converters assuming people would be traveling roughly the speed limit in most instances. The reality is on the interstate , people are traveling 80+ MPH, and normal car engineers have made different assumptions about gearing, allowing the engines to run in an RPM range that take best advantage of the torque curve of the engine. No doubt in the next 10-20 years, EVs will catch up.
1
@Fomites You funny, Mr. Physics man.
1
@Shakazuloeman You sound like one of those people who don't like facts You appear to be one of those people who don't know the facts.
1
@Shakazuloeman All cars have flaws. EVs they have flaws that were solved 100 years ago.
1
@Shakazuloeman All EVs have the same issue that the batteries don't have the energy density necessary and take too long to charge. This is a science problem not an engineering problem even for Tesla. Engineers at SpaceX work on mant parts of the cars No doubt you believe that.
1
@Shakazuloeman As do electric cars.
1