EV Thoughts Thread: cause the old farts did their usual thing

[Roadhawk]

The temperature of the earth has increased 1 degree F over the last 100 years. This is not rapid warming. This was in a document produced by the White House Initiative on Global Climate Change during the Clinton presidency. The question is are we becoming warmer more rapidly in the last 20 years? Has the slope of the graph changed? There are many reports on the increased solar output having a greater effect on our temperature than the amount of carbon dioxide produced by man. There is no question that man's release of carbon dioxide has increased over the last 50 years, but is that the main contributing factor to Climate Change? I am not convinced that it is. I still believe that our climate is extremely complicated and it is very difficult to prove that one variable such as man's increase in carbon dioxide is the main culprit. If I believed otherwise, I would be driving a Prius.

May only be 1 degree (so far) but its on a rapidly rising slope. It does seem that a few degrees can make a big difference as we are having larger more intense storms (recent record seems to confirm) and flooding of lower lying areas (glad I don't live in Bangladesh and I really feel for those people). Miami too...

I'm open to the idea of changing solar conditions affecting planetary warmth (certainly...and I think we are in a relatively cool period in the regard) but haven't seen anything that really suggests this (rapidly) occurring.

Even if so - seems anything we can do to slow warming would be prudent as the warming will lead to bigger storms, higher sea levels and more release of methane etc in the permafrost compounding our problems (I hope you can agree that overall this is all bad...for most). Species loss might also be a problem...(always is)

A big concern does seem to be increasing ocean temps - in general and specifically the potential for disruption of the Gulf current being one example that could be catastrophic to East coast and European climate (actually plunging temps there....crazy stuff as "warming" doesn't always mean right where you are. Climate is indeed complicated and even with increasingly better tools (and data) we may never have all the answers.

Earths history has shown that rising CO2 levels lead to warming...and regardless of whatever is happening with the sun this should be a concern. I agree that we should be implementing whatever technologies we might to attempt to counter...whatever we can do.

I've always said a Prius is a fine car for someone who otherwise would enjoy owning a Camry.

 

[Roadhawk]

to develop these new energy technologies we need lots of cheap reliable energy and fossil fuels is all we have for that.

Its not all we have (anymore) but I agree...were still going to be relying on these fuels for a long time to come (if were still around that it)....

I had a buddy who was in the Navy's nuclear program back in the 1970s. He got out after a debilitating fall off the deck of a ship and was back in school to get a nuclear engineering degree (apparently just having some such in the Navy wasn't good enough) Anyway he had been a huge proponent of nuclear power until he became exposed to the practices of our nuclear power industry (lax safety and fail safes compared to the Navy way)....shame really as nuclear is/may be necessary but we've kind of screwed it up where its non-financially (or politically) viable...unfortunately...

I met Admiral Rickover once (while working on a study based on his critiques). Very interesting and amazing man.

 

[T.O.Blackwing]

I think we should start taking positions on the war in Gaza if we can figure out how to connect it to EVs or Blackwings.
Any takers?

 

[albertw]

This has been an interesting and civil discussion.

One thing I find a bit annoying is the assumption that everyone's opinion on global warming is a belief, in the religious sense of the word. As an agnostic, the only thing I believe is that no one, including me, knows anything for certain. For me, every decision and opinion is a balance of probabilities. As a former scientist I worked with many who were intensely religious, and I found that they were able to restrict their beliefs to religious issues and approached their science just as objectively is I did. I see no reason to think that scientists working on global warming are less capable of being objective.

One thing that seems to be missing from this discussion is an assessment of specific components of the man-made global warming hypothesis. Here's my take.

The physics of greenhouse gases has been known for over 100 years and the underlying theory has been tested so many times and in so many different ways that it it extremely unlikely to be incorrect, at least as used in the global warming hypothesis. More greenhouse gases means that more of the energy arriving from the sun is trapped in the atmosphere (when the sky is clear).

The amount of greenhouses gases emitted as a result of human activity over the past 200 years can be estimated reasonably well, and it matches well enough to the actual measurements (which can be done sufficiently accurately). Suggesting that the increase is the result of natural processes requires both an increase in natural emissions and an increase in natural absorption processes that happens to compensate for the increased human emissions. That coincidence seems a lot less likely to me than the theory that the recent increase has been caused by humans.

What the extra energy trapped in the atmosphere does is less well understood. Some warms the air, some heats the oceans, some melts glaciers and icecaps more quickly, and there are many, many additional interacting effects that make a full understanding very difficult. But that does not make it impossible. My sense is that the whole system is now well enough understood that the overall picture is reasonably accurate, despite the many quibblers. That's not based on relevant expertise. No one is an expert in every area of science that bears on the global warming hypothesis. Thus, for everyone it comes down to deciding when the consensus in each of many different fields of research adds up to enough evidence that the global warming hypothesis is sound enough to accept as the best explanation. I think we have reached that point.

The argument about whether there has been actual warming to date is, in my view, irrelevant to the issue of whether to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If we wait until the consequences of continued greenhouse gas emissions show up as increased global temperatures that cannot be denied, it very likely will be too late to avoid seriously dangerous consequences for our grandchildren. For example, if you think the current problems with people trying to get into western countries for economic or political reasons are bad, imagine how much worse it will be when many times more people have to move because their homes are impossible to survive in.

One additional point I think is worth making. Every area of science has its quibblers. In my own area, some occasionally were able to gather enough arguments to convince the majority of people working in the field to take their proposals seriously. The ones who did received widespread acclaim, which is mainly what makes quibbling so attractive to some scientists. However, the majority were not able to convince anyone to take their ideas seriously. My sense is that the current crop of global warming quibblers is destined for the latter status.

 

[rubberduck]

Its not all we have (anymore) but I agree...were still going to be relying on these fuels for a long time to come (if were still around that it)....

So called “renewables” (they really aren’t) barely made a dent in energy needs. They are not abundant, cheap, and reliable. Putting all their eggs in one basket has proven a disaster for Germany. It odd how California thinks it can defy the odds. We’ll see what happens, but the likely outcome is chaos and more people leaving the state.

Germany's Green Energy Disaster: A Cautionary Tale For World Leaders

Another spectacular failure from the command economy playbook.

www.forbes.com

 

[565565]

I think we should start taking positions on the war in Gaza if we can figure out how to connect it to EVs or Blackwings.
Any takers?

Well this originally was the "reactions to your Blackwing" thread, until the EV talk took it over.

I guess it can be now renamed the global warming thread.

Or it can be the "Chat" thread some forums have, or do we already have one of those?

 

[rubberduck]

Well this originally was the "reactions to your Blackwing" thread, until the EV talk took it over.

I guess it can be now renamed the global warming thread.

Or it can be the "Chat" thread some forums have, or do we already have one of those?

The OP left it wide open with the “cause the old farts did their usual thing” clause. So we’re on topic discussing all the things the old farts are doing.

 

[Roadhawk]

Well this originally was the "reactions to your Blackwing" thread, until the EV talk took it over.

I guess it can be now renamed the global warming thread.

Or it can be the "Chat" thread some forums have, or do we already have one of those?

Sorry for my part in this....was never my intention.

And I certainly don't want to be the EV poster boy.

 

[T.O.Blackwing]

Since this thread started I have a nagging question for the OP, @M2Cto4BW, what does the "cause the old farts did their usual thing" mean?

I have no idea what the original poster meant but one way or another I think it’s old farts that are contributing much of the wind that’s heating up the climate, at least around here.

A sort of tree falls in the forest question: Is it still mansplaining even when it appears no women are present?

The OP left it wide open with the “cause the old farts did their usual thing” clause. So we’re on topic discussing all the things the old farts are doing.

… and all the things the old farts are talking about.
Now, back to my post about the Lucid Air: If it was half the price, I would seriously consider it as my next car when the time comes to trade in my Blackwing.
But it’s not, so I won’t, but it does point to a future in which there will be at least a few electric cars that are both fast and fun.

 

[jbawden]

EV's are fast, but fall short on the fun, or at least the ingredients I consider fun. As I've mentioned a few times, my wife drives a model 3 performance and 0-35mph is an amusement park ride. That was cool for a few months, but now the car is just an commute and errand appliance. Going forward range will be more a priority over performance. The future is next gen nuclear power plants and solid state batteries.

 

[T.O.Blackwing]

EV's are fast, but fall short on the fun, or at least the ingredients I consider fun. As I've mentioned a few times, my wife drives a model 3 performance and 0-35mph is an amusement park ride. That was cool for a few months, but now the car is just a commute and errand appliance. Going forward range will be more a priority over performance. The future is next gen nuclear power plants and solid state batteries.

No one is making little electric sports cars right now, but they’re coming, and my guess is that at least some of them will be fast and fun.
If I didn’t find Elon Musk so annoying I’d be excited about the second generation Roadster, as one example, and I’m sure there will be others, i hope one from Lucid, and Porsche and others will soon have some EV 2 seaters too, no doubt..

 

[1Evil55]

I'll just go to the local indoor K1 for electric fun. Anybody upgrading their adult use power wheels with bigger superchargers, pulley kits, meth injections, etc. to make them faster? That would at least spark a little interest for me.

 

[Roadhawk]

No one is making little electric sports cars right now, but they’re coming, and my guess is that at least some of them will be fast and fun.
If I didn’t find Elon Musk so annoying I’d be excited about the second generation Roadster, as one example, and I’m sure there will be others, i hope one from Lucid, and Porsche and others will soon have some EV 2 seaters too, no doubt..

Agree (wrt Musk etc). I'm anxiously awaiting the new MR2 which could be EV, Hybrid or ICE depending on what reports to believe. Maybe it will be all 3....unlikely.

A few years back i had heard that Toyota got a patent for an EV MT....not sure how that would work...but of course I'm intrigued. If so and if EV or whatnot....next gen MR2 could be the car for me. I did so love my supercharged 1st gen....

 

[rubberduck]

No one is making little electric sports cars right now, but they’re coming, and my guess is that at least some of them will be fast and fun.
If I didn’t find Elon Musk so annoying I’d be excited about the second generation Roadster, as one example, and I’m sure there will be others, i hope one from Lucid, and Porsche and others will soon have some EV 2 seaters too, no doubt..

https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/a-lamborghini-style-ev-byd-goes-upmarket-to-outmaneuver-tesla-2b698578?mod=djemwhatsnews

 

[BrakeFade]

I was eyeing a Porsche Taycan Turbo S for a while. The reviews on it give it very high praise. That nutball Elon Musk pulled the rug out of EV market pricing when he slashed prices on all new Teslas. The Porsche Taycan and every other EV’s prices tanked. I was hoping the Taycan Turbo S market would drop under $100k with less than 9k miles. It got close but just didn’t make it ($115k for Turbo S with less than 10k miles). So I ended up with a widebody hellcat charger instead.

 

[BimmerFan]

If I didn’t find Elon Musk so annoying...

The OP left it wide open with the “cause the old farts did their usual thing” clause. So we’re on topic discussing all the things the old farts are doing.

OK, so first of all, I can't help being old, and I can't help it if I have a bit of flatulence. Give us old farts a break, eh?

Second, I read a biography of Musk a few years ago. I need to give him credit for overcoming (as many of us did, of some nature) his childhood and taking huge chances on things like SpaceX. But really, I think, anyone that sees/watches/reads what he does has to agree that the line between genius and insanity is very blurry and often wavers. That said, we're not supposed to discriminate against the crazy people, right? They can't help it.

Of course, add to that, that we don't really know his agenda (which may likely change from day to day) so we need to be wary of that.

As for the OT, EVs, as the resident "car guy" around here at work, people always ask me about them, especially Tesla. I have a friend who is an engineer at Tesla. I personally like many aspects of the Model S (the model 3, not as much) but there are also many things that I don't like about it, and in addition to that I suffer from range anxiety, and I'm not going to buy something that expensive that I only use for commuting and errands. So, no EV for me.

I had a new BMW iX (the electric SUV) as a service loaner last year, and it was kind of fun and amusing, as something different from the ICE SUV (wife's) that I had brought it for service. As fairly comparable cars in performance, the EV was about $30K more expensive (before credits). Natch cheaper to run over the life of it (assuming no batteries need replacing) but not enough to make up the initial price difference. And since we use her SUV often as our trip car (the BW getting rather horrendous gas mileage) that range anxiety and the convenience of gasoline stations really makes a difference.

 

[BrakeFade]

OK, so first of all, I can't help being old, and I can't help it if I have a bit of flatulence. Give us old farts a break, eh?

Second, I read a biography of Musk a few years ago. I need to give him credit for overcoming (as many of us did, of some nature) his childhood and taking huge chances on things like SpaceX. But really, I think, anyone that sees/watches/reads what he does has to agree that the line between genius and insanity is very blurry and often wavers. That said, we're not supposed to discriminate against the crazy people, right? They can't help it.

Of course, add to that, that we don't really know his agenda (which may likely change from day to day) so we need to be wary of that.

As for the OT, EVs, as the resident "car guy" around here at work, people always ask me about them, especially Tesla. I have a friend who is an engineer at Tesla. I personally like many aspects of the Model S (the model 3, not as much) but there are also many things that I don't like about it, and in addition to that I suffer from range anxiety, and I'm not going to buy something that expensive that I only use for commuting and errands. So, no EV for me.

I had a new BMW iX (the electric SUV) as a service loaner last year, and it was kind of fun and amusing, as something different from the ICE SUV (wife's) that I had brought it for service. As fairly comparable cars in performance, the EV was about $30K more expensive (before credits). Natch cheaper to run over the life of it (assuming no batteries need replacing) but not enough to make up the initial price difference. And since we use her SUV often as our trip car (the BW getting rather horrendous gas mileage) that range anxiety and the convenience of gasoline stations really makes a difference.

We had an Etron for a couple of years and loved it. Range sucked though at 202 miles during the summer. My wife wanted a hybrid because of the combined range so we went with an X5 50e. The X5 has 40 miles of straight electric range which works well for a daily commuter. In 2.5 years of ownership on that Etron the only thing we ever had to do to it was replace tires (excessive weight and premature wear). Thats why I’m curious to see how owning a true “performance” EV like the Taycan would play out. Can’t be any worse than 202 miles that Etron gave us. The iX is really nice but my wife couldn’t get over the grill design. As for Tesla, My brother owns 2 Teslas and loves them. Never had any issues with either of them (model 3 & y). The EV market is crazy volatile right now with Psycho Musk’s price shenanigans and big MFGs scaling back production due to demand. I expect to see it stabilize in the next year or so as some flagship models start hitting the showroom floor. EVs are amazing daily commuters, just need prices to come down where the masses can truely afford them….

 

[Roadhawk]

A friend of mine reverse inherited a Tesla 3 from his daughter when she moved to China last year (for business) and he can't stop raving about it and claiming how it can beat any ICE car and how its better than his beloved Acrua TSX? sports sedan in every way. Well after beating him pretty good (twice) in my GTI he's modified his claim that it will beat any ICE car but one of mine...lol. He built his own fast? charging station at his house using a 240v circuit and loves to go on about how much money he saves driving it.

Of course previously he claimed his Acura was the ultimate sports sedan and I needed to drive it (he's now urging me to drive the Tesla...and I want to...but haven't had the chance). Of course, in the past, I've been telling him he needs to drive my ZHP if he really wants to know the "ultimate" sports sedan driving experience....of course I've since updated that claim (to him) substituting the CT 4 V BW...

 

[Jim2000]

There was a study done in Great Britain that concluded that EVs actually produce more pollution to our air than an ICE car. Apparently the production of electricity is not that green. Of course it depends on the source of energy that produces the electricity.

 

[Finally-a-V]

That has been part of the conversation for several years. If your electric is from coal, your EV isn't very green. Add to that your additional weight destroying our roads faster and your faster wear on tires because of weight, and are you really greener? I wish I had the article, but someone calculated that most EV's don't become greener than gas until around 50,000 miles depending on cost, range, etc.