The whole ev thing is hilarious since it’s very well proven that the environmental impact of making and procuring all those batteries is far greater than petroleum production in the hands of the US. Virtue signaling at its finest
But leftists didn’t invest in Big Oil, they invested in Big Green Energy and all those high-paying, shovel-ready Green Energy jobs.
So, Big Oil is bad; Big Lithium Batteries are good.
They’re now selling “Eagle Credits” for all the protected birds being slaughtered by giant wind mills (when they work). Like carbon credits and just as effective at solving the problem. But somebody is getting rich. I wonder who?
Not scientific but can show you all of the avatars from the Tesla forum I frequent that feature NFL or college teams. Also a few of the ESPNU guys have mentioned their Teslas including Greg McElroy and Danny Kannell. You don’t have to drive the Danny Ford edition F-150 to be a football fan.
Someone has posted this question on Tnet. IT’s pretty easy my vehicles gets about 250 miles of range at highway speed and it’s 150 miles from my house in CLT to Clemson. I drive to the game and then stop at either Piedmont or Greenville on the way home at the Tesla Supercharger to “refuel”. The supercharger is capable of adding up to 750 miles of range per hour of charging so it only takes about 10 - 15 minutes of charging to get enough range to get home. The world is not ending and Elon Musk is not trying to kill football. If you are coming from the low country there are chargers in N Charleston, Sanger, Columbia, and the two aforementioned chargers; you’ll be fine.
Also the “facts” you listed about the environmental impacts of EVs are just stupid and wrong; quit believing everything you read on Breitbart.com. BTW I couldn’t give two sheets about the environment I bought the vehicle because it goes 0 - 60 in about 4 seconds and cost a third of what it does to operate an internal combustion engine vehicle. Enjoy the $4 gas!
Is THE source for true and correct energy data. Every major company in this country uses their data for planning, forecasting, negotiating contracts, and benchmarking results. I’ve had FP&A roles at multiple Fortune 500 companies where I’ve personally used their data for negotiating diesel fuel pegs for use in supply chains contract negotiations. Triple A is a for profit company with their own agenda and a media arm; the EIA is an agnostic data source that is a close to unassailable as you’ll find.
If you want to go there, before I retired and moved back to the SC upstate, I sourced everything from fuel to steel for a Fortune 100 Company that was one of the top 10% greenest, carbon free companies in the world. We looked at everything for energy and it had to be green. We shut down coal and oil plants and kept the nuclear, hydro, some wind and even bought a solar farm. We looked into battery development and backed off when the cost (financial and environmental) was determined. It's nice to have an EV if the electricity used to mine, manufacture, clean up the waste for the new battery is carbon free but thats not the case. Diesel Engines are used in most places in Africa for mining and oil and coal plants in China putting the battery together.
As far as charging a battery to drive an EV, about 70% of the electricity in the U.S. is NOT carbon free. Being in NC and being able to charge up in 6 or so hours is great but in the northern states you can about double that in the winter. The result is more carbon emissions to charge a battery than to drive a combustion engine vehicle from the electricity used.
Don't take me wrong, I'm not against EVs. When I lived near Chicago, I traded my truck and purchased a vehicle that shut off (stop-start system) and ran on batteries at stop lights and in traffic jams - reduced carbon emissions and oil/gas usage. This should be mandatory on every vehicle sold in the U.S. I'm not against a hybrid either and if I could get one that would handle the work on the farm for hauling loads and pulling trailers with 1000's lbs of hay and other material, I would.
Until 80 to 90% of the electricity being produced in the U.S. to power businesses, homes and charge an EV battery is carbon free, then there is no significant gain. Don't even get me started on the negative environmental impact of wind and solar power.
No it does not take twice as long to residentially charge an EV in the north as it does in the south. My vehicle is capable of charging at 250Kw per hour using a supercharger but at home on a level 3 charger it’s 12Kw per hour. While there is a material difference in charging speeds at the upper bound the impact on the much slower standard residential charger is immaterial. The vehicle uses the heating system to maintain the batteries within an operating range so vehicles batteries in the north are within the same temp range as those in the south and are being charged under those same conditions. For reference my vehicle averages about 98% efficiency charging; that is 98% of the electricity drawn from the circuit makes it into the battery; so once again, no even if it took longer to charge at colder temps it would not materially impact the power needed to charge the vehicle. EVs in the north do operate at a higher watt/mile than those in warm weather because they don’t have a series of controlled explosions generating heat for use in the climate system. EVs must consume electricity to warm the vehicle.
Tesla’s batteries for the model 3 and Y, which accounted for 97% of their cars produced in 2021, are made built and assembled in Nevada under US environmental standards. The chief mineral lithium comes from South America where the mining practices are likely less environmentally friendly. But, do you have data that compares the impacts of the material in an internal combustion engine to those in EV batteries?
You threw out a number that said that 90% of electrical production would need to be carbon free in order to make EVs favorable to gas powered vehicles; can you show me your work to get to that number?
Finally my push back wasn’t really about the benefits of EVs but that you summarily dismissed the EIA data just because of the .gov link. That’s not logical it’s illustrative of a political bias. If you had really spent any significant time analyzing energy costs and consumption you would know that their work is essential and unbiased.
Serious question for you. You said you went EV for economic reasons. Your Tesla costs a third of what a gas powered would cost to operate. Aren’t Teslas significantly more expensive than gas powered vehicles? How many miles do you estimate will be driven in your lower cost to operate EV, in order to offset the price difference? Several years ago I toyed with the idea of getting a Prius. Even though it got great mileage the cost break even point was like 14 years based on how many miles I drive per year.
I’m not opposed to EV, but the infrastructure needs to improve greatly before I will be ready to go that route.
I said I chose the vehicle for performance and economics. If you compare a tesla to a Honda Civic then yeah it doesn’t make sense. Compare it to another vehicle with similar capabilities and the price difference goes away. As far as infrastructure; the tesla supercharger network far exceeds the need right now. There are 3,500 charging stations with 32,000 chargers currently in the US; there has never been a case where I needed to charge and could not. Also, 90% of my charging takes place at home. The vehicle has 300+ miles of range for city driving and can recharge at home from 0% in less than 6 hours. If you drive 200 or so miles each day then you should stay with a gas powered vehicle.
cutig86, if you’re serious this is probably the most uninformed post I’ve seen on TigerNet in quite some time, and that says a lot. Just keep driving a regular car for the rest of your life, you’ll be just fine, don’t worry.
If you’re joking and posting for comedy, I’ll give you a score of 2 on scale of 1 to 10.