Yea sure. And in the 50's the automakers said everybody in the 70's will be driving flying cars. How well did that work out? Or back in the 90's when hydrogen was the latest fad. I'm still waiting to buy my nuclear powered ride. Refuel every 100,000 miles.
Why the big push to eliminate ICEs?
- Thread starter grampi
- Start date
- Status
That was a very different situation. Then, ICE powered vehicles were vastly superior to horse drawn buggy/wagons. That isn't the case when comparing EVs to ICE vehicles...
I'm not saying it will or won't happen, I'm just pointing out what's being pushed...
It's being "pushed" for good reasons that can be discovered by doing the hard yards learning about it.
The no traffic deaths by 2020 campaign was also paid for with tax payers dollars, it ran back in 2016. It's all down the memory hole now but I remember how hilarious it was then & now. This no ICE by eight & 1/2 years is equally amusing legislation contingent on impossibilities.
Maybe If Gov. Inslee can find a lithium powered jet aircraft with 4,400 mile range it'll work out by '30?
Love these no-engineering types with no familiarity with the table of elements dreaming. They got it wrong for four years in the future, they most certainly cannot predict 105 months into the future either. Special pointless legislation passing aninals indeed.
What do you make of the paragraph below the ceramic coatings picture. It looks like it is a nothing burger as they say if 75% of the vehicles have to be paying the ev road taxes, but it isn’t the actual text of the law. If it was so simple as all ev by 2030 for under 10,000 lb vehicles you are going to see a lot of 10,001 lb vehicles with gas engines being sold. Pretty confusing.
A state/government saying “No new ICE by 2030!” makes the front page and is blasted all over the internet. When they backpedal on it, it ends up buried on page 10.
I agree, it's all pretty much a non-obtainable dream from a practical engineering point of view. But that doesn't mean people that have authority to cause choas won't cause choas trying. Inslee is pretty non-practical when it comes to stuff like this.
They are working on swiching from a gas tax to a "pay per mile" road tax, which will include all EVs. Passenger cars and trucks are way below 10,000 lbs ... that's why they set the limit so high. They have it all planned out for success. If it actually happens by 2030, it will chaotic.
As stated above, it's for CO2 reduction.
It is also good to note that natural gas is methane, CH4, with just one carbon atom per molecule. It's BTU content vs CO2 production numbers are favorable. About 1/2 that of coal, per BTU and about 1/3 that of coal per KWH.
Solar and wind are incapable of doing the job we need done, even if batteries were up to the task. There is already backroom talk of nuclear acceptance among the group that shuns nukes!
Fuel to power plant, to transformers, to high tension lines, to transformers, to power meter, to charger, to battery, from battery, to controller to motor to wheel. That's a stack of epic losses, and it's forbidden to mention them in any EV publications today. It's why the EV "facts" use watt-hours-per-mile measured at the controller, as that is very favorable. But it has little in common with how much fuel was consumed to generate the power used to charge the EV.
Same goes for electrical costs. They regularly publish 10 cents per KWH as the rate. But those of us who pay electric bills know the total bill includes taxes, fees and charges that can double the cost. It's utter NONSENSE to quote the KWH rate and ignore the rest.
Charge your EV with the most efficient portable inverter generator and get 12 to 19 MPG.
It is also good to note that natural gas is methane, CH4, with just one carbon atom per molecule. It's BTU content vs CO2 production numbers are favorable. About 1/2 that of coal, per BTU and about 1/3 that of coal per KWH.
Solar and wind are incapable of doing the job we need done, even if batteries were up to the task. There is already backroom talk of nuclear acceptance among the group that shuns nukes!
Fuel to power plant, to transformers, to high tension lines, to transformers, to power meter, to charger, to battery, from battery, to controller to motor to wheel. That's a stack of epic losses, and it's forbidden to mention them in any EV publications today. It's why the EV "facts" use watt-hours-per-mile measured at the controller, as that is very favorable. But it has little in common with how much fuel was consumed to generate the power used to charge the EV.
Same goes for electrical costs. They regularly publish 10 cents per KWH as the rate. But those of us who pay electric bills know the total bill includes taxes, fees and charges that can double the cost. It's utter NONSENSE to quote the KWH rate and ignore the rest.
Charge your EV with the most efficient portable inverter generator and get 12 to 19 MPG.
Last edited:
I believe some of the urgency has to do with competing with China. China is pouring tremendous resources toward being #1 in electric vehicle manufacturing and innovation. I firmly believe that EV are the future, and it doesn't make sense to bury our head in the sand and let China lead the way, while we play second fiddle.
Remember that ICE have had decades and decades of R&D to get where we are now. I won't argue with anyone who says EVs are not for them and won't work for everybody-- that's certainly a valid point TODAY. But as the years go by, the technology will improve, quite quickly given the speed that many countries are adopting EVs on a large scale. There's still problems to solve, but enormous resources are being put to the task all across the globe.
Appreciate everybody staying civil, I enjoy reading the different perspectives, even the ones that seem based purely on political regurgitation.
Remember that ICE have had decades and decades of R&D to get where we are now. I won't argue with anyone who says EVs are not for them and won't work for everybody-- that's certainly a valid point TODAY. But as the years go by, the technology will improve, quite quickly given the speed that many countries are adopting EVs on a large scale. There's still problems to solve, but enormous resources are being put to the task all across the globe.
Appreciate everybody staying civil, I enjoy reading the different perspectives, even the ones that seem based purely on political regurgitation.
Our electricity in NZ is 78% renewable today and it's only going to get better. It seems ridiculous to use imported fossil fuels that cost many times more per distance driven, despite the much higher purchase cost of the car.
I'm also amused how suddenly environmentally-aware some people have become about mining. Perhaps extend that concern further down the road as well.
I'm also amused how suddenly environmentally-aware some people have become about mining. Perhaps extend that concern further down the road as well.
A small place like NZ with enough infrastructure to support all EVs would be easily doable and be pretty practical. But to expect a country like the USA to do the same is a pipe dream, especially in a non-realistic timeframe.
New Zealand looks like a beautiful place and I have family there. The comparison though would be better if compared to the state of Idaho.
I have an antique EV, it’s over 40 years old and works fine
In so far as your
ITS MINING virtue signaling
see the tar sand mine as far as the eye can see that provided our crude 2005+
http://www.wilderutopia.com/wp-cont...d-Smoke-in-Alberta-Tar-Sands-Alex-MacLean.png
Picture, yep, I can show you entire mountains removed for coal
Recess Holes larger than that Australian Qualcomm owned open pit mine to help mitigate a former gold mine and of coarse “other” open pit mines some of which deliver your table salt or copper, or aluminum or even iron.
Mines of all forms are ugly and likely aren’t going away.
Petroleum extraction pollutes water tables as do all other forms of mining, even salt dome mines are guilty of destroying sections of the Everglades
The mine pictured also gets more than just lithium as an FYI and there are safer less intensive ways of getting lithium which I’m sure you know but don’t want to discuss
Last edited:
Exactly. Our electric cost is ~$0.124 per kWh. What they don’t tell you is they have riders that jack that up… so my last months 643kWh was $0.162 per kWh, not including taxes which brings it up to over $0.17 per kWh.
Well... People who could actually afford a vehicle back then when gas powered vehicles started being built.... Were very, very few in that beginning. It took a couple of decades for the hydrocarbon vehicles to become affordable and sought put by the masses.
WW I horses were still used extensively.
Some first vehicles were battery powered.
It's amazing to really think.... How people went from flying wooden biplanes... To jets in a little over 40 years. That the heavy bombers of WW II were so far, far, far more capable vs the planes of WW I.
Let's see a battery powered airplane fly across the US carrying hundreds of people.
Or a battery powered boat carry massive cargo across the ocean.
There are limitations.
EVs can be utilized by a good number of people.
But not everyone wants one or needs one.
Or a battery powered boat carry massive cargo across the ocean.
There are limitations.
EVs can be utilized by a good number of people.
But not everyone wants one or needs one.
Last edited:
Working on it? Not very clear what this article actually means, sounds strange. It’s someone’s interpretation of the legislation, not the actual legislation. I know passenger cars are below 10,0000 lbs.
I guess gas will be cheaper up in Washington for the tourists. Or are they working on that too? If you lived near the state border you could gas up in WA and go back home. Or are they going to look at every car’s odometer at the border as it arrives and as it leaves? Maybe we will need a passport to travel to Washington?
- Status
