Electric vehicles, future development and the 2016 election

[Wry Catcher]

In the not too distant future, they'll be laughing at us and our gasoline powered cars,

yeah, go with that one. I'm enjoying my laugh at you all. There are only two ways, and I repeat, there are two only ways an electric car is viable; once it can be filled up in five to ten minutes and once it can travel more than 200 miles on a charge. otherwise, ain't happening

BTW, what is the battery charge life on one of these boondoggles? And, how does it perform in the cold?

Excuse me, I'm still laughing.

Cold weather takes my Volt from a 40 mile charge to a 24-27. 65 degrees to 70 degrees is where it charges the best.So with the Tesla I'm sure that 200 mile range tightens up in the winter. Also in snow and ice the Volt does not operate real well. There is no way to get traction on ice and snow because the battery won't spin tires to gain traction. We switched to gas to get up hills.

Last time it snowed in my backyard was about one inch in 1976; it melted before lunch time.

 

[Wry Catcher]

OPEC lowered the price of gas in order to elect a Republican?? Based on what, that some idiot NYTimes writer said so??

Wow

I see you owning an interest in a Nigerian diamond mine

We can't know what created the lower price of oil, but cartels act in their own best interest, something even a wackadoodle like you should know. In fact prices have risen of late, maybe because the Cartel has concluded the R's are going to get tossed under the bus come November.

 

[Papageorgio]

In the not too distant future, they'll be laughing at us and our gasoline powered cars,

yeah, go with that one. I'm enjoying my laugh at you all. There are only two ways, and I repeat, there are two only ways an electric car is viable; once it can be filled up in five to ten minutes and once it can travel more than 200 miles on a charge. otherwise, ain't happening

BTW, what is the battery charge life on one of these boondoggles? And, how does it perform in the cold?

Excuse me, I'm still laughing.

Cold weather takes my Volt from a 40 mile charge to a 24-27. 65 degrees to 70 degrees is where it charges the best.So with the Tesla I'm sure that 200 mile range tightens up in the winter. Also in snow and ice the Volt does not operate real well. There is no way to get traction on ice and snow because the battery won't spin tires to gain traction. We switched to gas to get up hills.

Last time it snowed in my backyard was about one inch in 1976; it melted before lunch time.

Good for you, you must be getting the global warming. Snow and freezing temps are common in my area during the winter. 80's to 100's are common during the summer.

 

[flacaltenn]

Today the auto industry is running fast to compete in electric car development. Such competition is spurred on by the Federal Government's, "rules mandating lower carbon emissions and greater fuel economy". The next POTUS will have an opportunity to keep the pedal to the metal in future development or kill it when the window opens in 2017 to change the standards.

Thus we an assume the election of a Republican will increase the odds by tens that the government will set aside the current rules and set back the R&D by a decade or more.

A second consideration is the motivation of OPEC to reduce the cost of a barrel of oil. Is this an effort to manipulate the politics by allowing a Republican Administration to push for a change, as the cost of gas has been going down, as the number of alternative vehicles has increased.

If so, can we expect the costs of that gallon to rise once the rules are changed?

Food for thought.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/13/business/automakers-keep-rolling-out-electric-vehicles.html?_r=0

NOBODY is capable of "setting back R&D on electric vehicles".. It is a COMMODITY item now. Because it's the same technology used in HYBRID vehicles as well. Which are now a permanent feature of the manufacturer's fleet offerings. And HYBRIDS are a much better consumer solution that will result in MUCH higher enviro gains..

You don't MANDATE techno progress. Anymore than bigger whips move Roman Galley cruisers faster. You got the Prez of Chrysler-Fiat publicly stating "" PLEASE don't buy our EVehicles. We lose a ton of money on each one. And they are only there to make the politicians happy"".. That's a very true assessment of what happens when politicians PRETEND to be scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs. And the spectacle of pushing of things like ethanol mandates even further after witnessing the awful side effects.

By pushing MANDATES -- you get SUB-OPTIMAL solutions, that just waste money, manufacturing efficiency and consumer money. .Like those god awful Compact fluorescents that should have WAITED for LEDs.

And folks are damn tired of being told that they have to freeze and swelter with poorly energy conservation measures. That THEY are supposed to pull 1W chargers out of the wall to conserve -- so that their neighbor can pull down 1,400 Watts overnight to charge their "earth-saving" EV..

The jig is up.. And unless there's a commitment to make electricity PLENTIFUL and CHEAP instead of RARE and EXPENSIVE -- that MANDATING a move of 1/3 of the USA energy use in transportation from fossil to electricity is fairy tales and unicorns because there ARE NO ALTERNATIVES to RELIABLE generation on the electric grid. It's NOT wind or solar that is gonna supply the INCREASED capacity for your wet EV dreamworld.

And by MANDATING EV sales NOW -- the govt is gonna be actually RETARDING other technologies that COULD be far more efficient and environmentally friendly. Like Fuel Cell run on hydrogen. In fact, the Korean car companies (and many Japanese car makers) are LEAP-FROGGING the development away from silly battery-charged EVs to Fuel Cell vehicles as we speak. .

Don't let politicians design your world,. They are ALWAYS decades behind and hopeless clueless about picking winning and losing technologies.. .

 

[Wry Catcher]

In the not too distant future, they'll be laughing at us and our gasoline powered cars,

yeah, go with that one. I'm enjoying my laugh at you all. There are only two ways, and I repeat, there are two only ways an electric car is viable; once it can be filled up in five to ten minutes and once it can travel more than 200 miles on a charge. otherwise, ain't happening

BTW, what is the battery charge life on one of these boondoggles? And, how does it perform in the cold?

Excuse me, I'm still laughing.

Cold weather takes my Volt from a 40 mile charge to a 24-27. 65 degrees to 70 degrees is where it charges the best.So with the Tesla I'm sure that 200 mile range tightens up in the winter. Also in snow and ice the Volt does not operate real well. There is no way to get traction on ice and snow because the battery won't spin tires to gain traction. We switched to gas to get up hills.

Last time it snowed in my backyard was about one inch in 1976; it melted before lunch time.

Good for you, you must be getting the global warming. Snow and freezing temps are common in my area during the winter. 80's to 100's are common during the summer.

I spent many December Holidays & summer vacations from Jr. HI and High School surfing, since i lived six blocks from Ocean Beach, San Francisco.

 

[Crick]

Today the auto industry is running fast to compete in electric car development. Such competition is spurred on by the Federal Government's, "rules mandating lower carbon emissions and greater fuel economy". The next POTUS will have an opportunity to keep the pedal to the metal in future development or kill it when the window opens in 2017 to change the standards.

Thus we an assume the election of a Republican will increase the odds by tens that the government will set aside the current rules and set back the R&D by a decade or more.

A second consideration is the motivation of OPEC to reduce the cost of a barrel of oil. Is this an effort to manipulate the politics by allowing a Republican Administration to push for a change, as the cost of gas has been going down, as the number of alternative vehicles has increased.

If so, can we expect the costs of that gallon to rise once the rules are changed?

Food for thought.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/13/business/automakers-keep-rolling-out-electric-vehicles.html?_r=0

NOBODY is capable of "setting back R&D on electric vehicles".. It is a COMMODITY item now.

The elimination of CAFE standards and legislation requiring or rewarding the production of electric vehicles would most certainly slow their growth. That is precisely what happened when Republicans stopped the CAFE program in years past.

Because it's the same technology used in HYBRID vehicles as well. Which are now a permanent feature of the manufacturer's fleet offerings. And HYBRIDS are a much better consumer solution that will result in MUCH higher enviro gains..

Hybrids could continue to be a successful product without further gains. There have been no substantial improvements in hybrid technology on any front since they were first introduced. Hybrids are a better consumer solution because they are cheaper than full electric, have much longer range and can be refueled in minutes vice hours. They will NOT result in higher environmental gains than full electrics.

You don't MANDATE techno progress.

It's been done successfully on several fronts and not by pretending to be CEO or engineers but by setting goals with incentives. The CAFE program, crash resistance, seat belts, crash-resistant bumpers, safety glass, safer interiors, catalytic convertors: all the results of industrial development in the face of government mandates.

Anymore than bigger whips move Roman Galley cruisers faster.

Whatever it took, an Imperial decree that his galleys should go faster would have resulted in faster galleys.

You got the Prez of Chrysler-Fiat publicly stating "" PLEASE don't buy our EVehicles. We lose a ton of money on each one. And they are only there to make the politicians happy""..

He was talking about Fiat 500e, which cannot be sold for what it costs to manufacture them BECAUSE PEOPLE WON'T PAY THAT MUCH FOR A FIAT 500. But Tesla is able to make a profit selling a far superior vehicle. Even the gasoline powered Fiat 500 is generally regarded as a piece of shit by most reviewers. I suspect that might be the core problem.

That's a very true assessment of what happens when politicians PRETEND to be scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs.

Like Inhofe with AGW?

And the spectacle of pushing of things like ethanol mandates even further after witnessing the awful side effects.

What awful side effects?

By pushing MANDATES -- you get SUB-OPTIMAL solutions, that just waste money, manufacturing efficiency and consumer money. .Like those god awful Compact fluorescents that should have WAITED for LEDs.

With that excuse you can put anything off forever.

And folks are damn tired of being told that they have to freeze and swelter with poorly energy conservation measures. That THEY are supposed to pull 1W chargers out of the wall to conserve -- so that their neighbor can pull down 1,400 Watts overnight to charge their "earth-saving" EV..

I don't know what you were actually trying to say with "poorly energy conservation measures", but folks raising their thermostats in the summer and lowering them in the winter saves significant and meaningful amounts of energy AND LOWERS THEIR BILLS. There is no legislation pushing that behavior. If you want to keep your thermostat at 68 all Summer and 78 all Winter, feel free, but you'll get to pay the price.

The jig is up..

Sorry, but there is no jig and nothing is up.

And unless there's a commitment to make electricity PLENTIFUL and CHEAP instead of RARE and EXPENSIVE -- that MANDATING a move of 1/3 of the USA energy use in transportation from fossil to electricity is fairy tales and unicorns because there ARE NO ALTERNATIVES to RELIABLE generation on the electric grid. It's NOT wind or solar that is gonna supply the INCREASED capacity for your wet EV dreamworld.

Ask Mr Locke. How do you bring the price of a commodity down? Reduce demand and increase supply.

And by MANDATING EV sales NOW -- the govt is gonna be actually RETARDING other technologies that COULD be far more efficient and environmentally friendly. Like Fuel Cell run on hydrogen. In fact, the Korean car companies (and many Japanese car makers) are LEAP-FROGGING the development away from silly battery-charged EVs to Fuel Cell vehicles as we speak. .

I hate to break this one on you, but fuel cell-powered cars ARE EVs. The following link is a listing of all the federal and state incentive programs that would apply to fuel cell cars TODAY

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/search?loc[]=AL&loc[]=AK&loc[]=AZ&loc[]=AR&loc[]=CA&loc[]=CO&loc[]=CT&loc[]=DE&loc[]=DC&loc[]=FL&loc[]=GA&loc[]=HI&loc[]=ID&loc[]=IL&loc[]=IN&loc[]=IA&loc[]=KS&loc[]=KY&loc[]=LA&loc[]=ME&loc[]=MD&loc[]=MA&loc[]=MI&loc[]=MN&loc[]=MS&loc[]=MO&loc[]=MT&loc[]=NE&loc[]=NV&loc[]=NH&loc[]=NJ&loc[]=NM&loc[]=NY&loc[]=NC&loc[]=ND&loc[]=OH&loc[]=OK&loc[]=OR&loc[]=PA&loc[]=RI&loc[]=SC&loc[]=SD&loc[]=TN&loc[]=TX&loc[]=UT&loc[]=VT&loc[]=VA&loc[]=WA&loc[]=WV&loc[]=WI&loc[]=WY&loc[]=US&tech[]=HY

Don't let politicians design your world,. They are ALWAYS decades behind and hopeless clueless about picking winning and losing technologies.. .

The cars we drive today have better fuel economy and are dramatically safer - due almost ENTIRELY to government mandates. In the not too distant future, we will see automobile accident fatalities fall to near zero due to autonomous vehicles, inter-vehicle communication and other technologies driven by government mandates.Your contentions fail.

 

[Papageorgio]

In the not too distant future, they'll be laughing at us and our gasoline powered cars,

yeah, go with that one. I'm enjoying my laugh at you all. There are only two ways, and I repeat, there are two only ways an electric car is viable; once it can be filled up in five to ten minutes and once it can travel more than 200 miles on a charge. otherwise, ain't happening

BTW, what is the battery charge life on one of these boondoggles? And, how does it perform in the cold?

Excuse me, I'm still laughing.

Cold weather takes my Volt from a 40 mile charge to a 24-27. 65 degrees to 70 degrees is where it charges the best.So with the Tesla I'm sure that 200 mile range tightens up in the winter. Also in snow and ice the Volt does not operate real well. There is no way to get traction on ice and snow because the battery won't spin tires to gain traction. We switched to gas to get up hills.

Last time it snowed in my backyard was about one inch in 1976; it melted before lunch time.

Good for you, you must be getting the global warming. Snow and freezing temps are common in my area during the winter. 80's to 100's are common during the summer.

I spent many December Holidays & summer vacations from Jr. HI and High School surfing, since i lived six blocks from Ocean Beach, San Francisco.

Cool glad you enjoyed it, pretty area.

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL........electric vehicles are having and will have zErO impact on the election. They sell about 120,000 a year. Truck sales alone top 1,000,000/year.

duh

The climate crusaders are so ******* clueless when it comes to this......Americans love their cars and mostly love their BiG aSs cars!!! This is not Europe!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Americans Still Love Their Big Vehicles | AIER

Maybe 253 people will vote based upon want for more electric vehicles!!

 

[Crick]

A larger number of people will be basing their vote on the candidate's positions on global warming, of which electric vehicles are only a small part.

Then, of course, there's the correlation telling us that those on the upper end of the spectra of intelligence and education are exCEEDingly unlikely to vote for Cruz or Trump in any case. Actually, anyone not at the bottom of those spectra.

 

[flacaltenn]

Today the auto industry is running fast to compete in electric car development. Such competition is spurred on by the Federal Government's, "rules mandating lower carbon emissions and greater fuel economy". The next POTUS will have an opportunity to keep the pedal to the metal in future development or kill it when the window opens in 2017 to change the standards.

Thus we an assume the election of a Republican will increase the odds by tens that the government will set aside the current rules and set back the R&D by a decade or more.

A second consideration is the motivation of OPEC to reduce the cost of a barrel of oil. Is this an effort to manipulate the politics by allowing a Republican Administration to push for a change, as the cost of gas has been going down, as the number of alternative vehicles has increased.

If so, can we expect the costs of that gallon to rise once the rules are changed?

Food for thought.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/13/business/automakers-keep-rolling-out-electric-vehicles.html?_r=0

NOBODY is capable of "setting back R&D on electric vehicles".. It is a COMMODITY item now.

The elimination of CAFE standards and legislation requiring or rewarding the production of electric vehicles would most certainly slow their growth. That is precisely what happened when Republicans stopped the CAFE program in years past.

It would slow the growth of the MARKET ACCEPTANCE ---- but not the technology.. You ARE PAYING people to buy a sub-optimal vehicle. When you juice the standards so that the only way you can MEET CAFE is to DITCH fossil ICE vehicles --- you are doing NOTHING to push solutions to the problems of EVs..

Because it's the same technology used in HYBRID vehicles as well. Which are now a permanent feature of the manufacturer's fleet offerings. And HYBRIDS are a much better consumer solution that will result in MUCH higher enviro gains..

Hybrids could continue to be a successful product without further gains. There have been no substantial improvements in hybrid technology on any front since they were first introduced. Hybrids are a better consumer solution because they are cheaper than full electric, have much longer range and can be refueled in minutes vice hours. They will NOT result in higher environmental gains than full electrics.

Again -- you're not doing the math.. If you have an market ACCEPTED solution (which is a Hybrid design) and you can sell 100 times MORE of those without MASSIVE subsidies and MANDATES -- the environment is gonna be better off. Hybrids are actually cleaner than EVs on most grid generation systems anyways.

You don't MANDATE techno progress.

It's been done successfully on several fronts and not by pretending to be CEO or engineers but by setting goals with incentives. The CAFE program, crash resistance, seat belts, crash-resistant bumpers, safety glass, safer interiors, catalytic convertors: all the results of industrial development in the face of government mandates.

Mandates HAVE NO incentives. Other than to avoid PUNISHMENT and permission to stay in business. I'm constantly amazed at what you don't seem to know. OR what you know -- and discount in order to make an argument,. MOST of the stuff you listed as MANDATES was stuff ALREADY in PRODUCTION at one or more auto companies before the "mandate".. Did not require massive LEAPS in technology. With fingers crossed and fairy dust and unicorns at the ready... It DID determine winners and losers in the marketplace tho -- as patents and intellectual property had to be acquired and traded to meet these mandates.

You got the Prez of Chrysler-Fiat publicly stating "" PLEASE don't buy our EVehicles. We lose a ton of money on each one. And they are only there to make the politicians happy""..

He was talking about Fiat 500e, which cannot be sold for what it costs to manufacture them BECAUSE PEOPLE WON'T PAY THAT MUCH FOR A FIAT 500. But Tesla is able to make a profit selling a far superior vehicle. Even the gasoline powered Fiat 500 is generally regarded as a piece of shit by most reviewers. I suspect that might be the core problem.

Tesla ain't making a profit yet. And they are selling trophy cars to Millionaires who have the extra garage space. MANDATES for companies like Chrysler/Fiat who make cars for "regular one/two car people" are just gonna produce crap. Superior is great if you can afford 3 cars.

That's a very true assessment of what happens when politicians PRETEND to be scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs.

Like Inhofe with AGW?

And the spectacle of pushing of things like ethanol mandates even further after witnessing the awful side effects.

What awful side effects? You are totally dense... Go ask Al Gore....

By pushing MANDATES -- you get SUB-OPTIMAL solutions, that just waste money, manufacturing efficiency and consumer money. .Like those god awful Compact fluorescents that should have WAITED for LEDs.

With that excuse you can put anything off forever.

No --- not at all. You just don't understand what the process is for techno innovation. Like that Roman Emperor that MANDATES that the galley ships go faster by NEXT YEAR --- MANDATES will divert investment from BETTER SOLUTIONS --- into patchwork compromises to please authority....

And folks are damn tired of being told that they have to freeze and swelter with poorly energy conservation measures. That THEY are supposed to pull 1W chargers out of the wall to conserve -- so that their neighbor can pull down 1,400 Watts overnight to charge their "earth-saving" EV..

I don't know what you were actually trying to say with "poorly energy conservation measures", but folks raising their thermostats in the summer and lowering them in the winter saves significant and meaningful amounts of energy AND LOWERS THEIR BILLS. There is no legislation pushing that behavior. If you want to keep your thermostat at 68 all Summer and 78 all Winter, feel free, but you'll get to pay the price.

Again you are totally dense.. You cannot BUY a heat pump that works when it's less than 40degs outside anymore and is still efficient. The MANDATES have removed all alternate choices from the market. You have to be deaf and dumb to miss all the legislation and REGULATION behind what you THINK is voluntary. Energy star regulation has produced shitty products that barely work. Washing machines that require 2 cycles to get clothes clean. Toilets that have to be flushed TWICE to do their job.. There is a massive NEGAWATT campaign to make energy RARE and EXPENSIVE rather than a plan to make electricity CHEAP and PLENTIFUL. And the ludicrous idea that you are gonna add 20 or 30% grid generation to charge your "coal-fired plug-ins" is a sad commentary on MANDATES in general..

The jig is up..

Sorry, but there is no jig and nothing is up.

And unless there's a commitment to make electricity PLENTIFUL and CHEAP instead of RARE and EXPENSIVE -- that MANDATING a move of 1/3 of the USA energy use in transportation from fossil to electricity is fairy tales and unicorns because there ARE NO ALTERNATIVES to RELIABLE generation on the electric grid. It's NOT wind or solar that is gonna supply the INCREASED capacity for your wet EV dreamworld.

Ask Mr Locke. How do you bring the price of a commodity down? Reduce demand and increase supply.

Sure thing BullWinkle --- and how does my pulling 1W chargers out of the wall allow my neighbor to tap out 1400W over night to feed his 80 mile range plug-in?? Does that REDUCE DEMAND or INCREASE SUPPLY?

And by MANDATING EV sales NOW -- the govt is gonna be actually RETARDING other technologies that COULD be far more efficient and environmentally friendly. Like Fuel Cell run on hydrogen. In fact, the Korean car companies (and many Japanese car makers) are LEAP-FROGGING the development away from silly battery-charged EVs to Fuel Cell vehicles as we speak. .

I hate to break this one on you, but fuel cell-powered cars ARE EVs. The following link is a listing of all the federal and state incentive programs that would apply to fuel cell cars TODAY

If the required dates on the mandates can not be met for superior Fuel Cell solutions --- that technology and the companies that pursue them with excellent engineering in mind will suffer. Because the EMPEROR who fancy's himself a technowizard will KILL long term development of superior ideas with arbitrary deadlines that bear NO relationship to the actual state of technology. . Like I said --- don't allow political hacks to design your world,....

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/search?loc[]=AL&loc[]=AK&loc[]=AZ&loc[]=AR&loc[]=CA&loc[]=CO&loc[]=CT&loc[]=DE&loc[]=DC&loc[]=FL&loc[]=GA&loc[]=HI&loc[]=ID&loc[]=IL&loc[]=IN&loc[]=IA&loc[]=KS&loc[]=KY&loc[]=LA&loc[]=ME&loc[]=MD&loc[]=MA&loc[]=MI&loc[]=MN&loc[]=MS&loc[]=MO&loc[]=MT&loc[]=NE&loc[]=NV&loc[]=NH&loc[]=NJ&loc[]=NM&loc[]=NY&loc[]=NC&loc[]=ND&loc[]=OH&loc[]=OK&loc[]=OR&loc[]=PA&loc[]=RI&loc[]=SC&loc[]=SD&loc[]=TN&loc[]=TX&loc[]=UT&loc[]=VT&loc[]=VA&loc[]=WA&loc[]=WV&loc[]=WI&loc[]=WY&loc[]=US&tech[]=HY

Don't let politicians design your world,. They are ALWAYS decades behind and hopeless clueless about picking winning and losing technologies.. .

The cars we drive today have better fuel economy and are dramatically safer - due almost ENTIRELY to government mandates. In the not too distant future, we will see automobile accident fatalities fall to near zero due to autonomous vehicles, inter-vehicle communication and other technologies driven by government mandates.Your contentions fail.

My replies are in Brown in the quotes above...

 

[elektra]

Research? What needs to be researched? Electric motors? Batteries? Only an ignorant fool would think the government can improve research of a product that is already matured. It is as if Duracell or General Electric do not exist and the fools in government have made a new discovery.

I cant wait to see the new ObamaAA-Battery.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

1. Performance. An electric motor develops max torque at 0 rpm. So EV's can beat the socks of of ICE's in performance. And still be docile and quiet on the road.

Hauling power. The Teslas, designed specifically as EV's and taking advantage of that, have far more luggage and people room than ICE's of the same dimensions.

Range. This one still goes to the ICE's. For the present. They have made, in the lab, batteries that have 4 times the storage capacity of the Tesla battery pack. That would give the Tesla over a thousand miles of range. Only a matter of time until the ICE's come in a distant second on this, also.

2. Since the cost of an automobile also includes the cost of fuel to run it, if the EV costs 20% more than a ICE, it is still the cheaper vehicle. At present, the ICE's still beat the EV's on initial cost. Except for the Tesla. A comparable sports sedan from Mercedes or BMW will cost as much or more than the Tesla.

3. Already well past that. An EV has far fewer moving parts. And no need for oil changes. At present, the EV is far cheaper on maintenance than an ICE.

4. Every day, there are more and more electric charging stations, everywhere from parking garages to grocery stores. And Tesla has a coast to coast series of Supercharging stations, as well as many smaller chargers at motels and hotels.

You can buy a C-Class for under 40k and an E-Class for around 52k.
You dont get to the cost of the Tesla until you hit the S-Class at 95k.

 

[Crick]

That you can buy Mercedes for less than a Tesla has nothing to do with the interior volume available in an EV. With motors built into the wheels and the battery a great slab under the floor, the space available for pax & cargo is far greater than that of any ICE powered vehicle.

 

[Skull Pilot]

They will decrease the charge of your battery. But, guess what? Turning those things on in your gasoline car will do the exact same thing. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

There is the point that electric cars all recover energy from braking, something no gasoline car hs figured out how to do.

But you car won't run out of gas if you turn on the heat. Your electric car will not go as far in the winter if you run the heat or in the summer if you run the AC. Cars don't need regenerative braking because the engine produces ample power to turn the alternator for battery recharge.

So again I ask what is the "real" performance of these cars. We all know that no car lives up to the EPA mileage figures on the sticker so I'm sure no electric car will actually perform as well as they claim

 

[Wyatt earp]

They will decrease the charge of your battery. But, guess what? Turning those things on in your gasoline car will do the exact same thing. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

There is the point that electric cars all recover energy from braking, something no gasoline car hs figured out how to do.

But you car won't run out of gas if you turn on the heat. Your electric car will not go as far in the winter if you run the heat or in the summer if you run the AC. Cars don't need regenerative braking because the engine produces ample power to turn the alternator for battery recharge.

So again I ask what is the "real" performance of these cars. We all know that no car lives up to the EPA mileage figures on the sticker so I'm sure no electric car will actually perform as well as they claim

The real concern is pedestrian's , I almost got hit by an electric bus 4 years ago when the local town was renting space in the factory I was working in.


Nearly silent electric or hybrid cars 'are a risk to pedestrians'


Nearly silent electric or hybrid cars 'are a risk to pedestrians': Walkers 40% more likely to be involved in accident

 

[Crick]

Intelligent, autonomous vehicles will reduce pedestrian accidents. And you can always require EV to make some sort of noise artificially, like the backing up alarms on almost all commercial vehicles.

 

[Crick]

They will decrease the charge of your battery. But, guess what? Turning those things on in your gasoline car will do the exact same thing. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

There is the point that electric cars all recover energy from braking, something no gasoline car hs figured out how to do.

But you car won't run out of gas if you turn on the heat.

It most certainly will. First, turning on the heater in an electric car, unless it is seconds from dying anyway, is not going to bring your EV car to a halt. Second, let's put two identical gas cars side by side, both at a fast idle. Turn the heat on in one of them. Guess who runs out of gas first?

Your electric car will not go as far in the winter if you run the heat or in the summer if you run the AC.

Neither will your gas car.

Cars don't need regenerative braking because the engine produces ample power to turn the alternator for battery recharge.

It's not a matter of "need". If a car could somehow produce gasoline from braking, I guarantee you it would benefit the car. That an EV can recapture energy normally lost as heat every time you put on the brakes is an enormous benefit.

So again I ask what is the "real" performance of these cars. We all know that no car lives up to the EPA mileage figures on the sticker so I'm sure no electric car will actually perform as well as they claim

As will no gasoline car. I have a Hyundai Elantra that claimed 40 mpg highway when I bought it. Hyundai was sued in a class action suit for falsifying this figure and they are now paying cash to Elantra owners to compensate them for having to buy more gas then the original claim would have required. Nothing is perfect and all businesses try to maximize profits. However, I guarantee you that a hybrid or EV car will consume less gasoline and produce less GHG emissions that will everything shy of that 3-wheeled go-kart they're always advertisting for $8,300. If every watt of your household electrical power is produced in a dirty coal power plant, your CO2 footprint may be no better than a 40 mpg car, but it will still be better than the vast majority of cars on the markets and, as alternative energy use in the national grid increases, your footprint will do nothing but get better.

 

[elektra]

That you can buy Mercedes for less than a Tesla has nothing to do with the interior volume available in an EV. With motors built into the wheels and the battery a great slab under the floor, the space available for pax & cargo is far greater than that of any ICE powered vehicle.

Yet the carrying ability of a Mercedes or an Internal Combustion Engine will far exceed that of a Tesla. That extra weight in a Tesla will kill the range. Why do you think the Tesla is so damned tiny? Further working that battery hard under heavy load will kill its life span as well.

Tesla is a loser in this day and age, most likely, forever.

 

[Papageorgio]

Many of the gas/electric use the brakes to generate energy. In the winter I lose 30% of my distance due to cold weather. I still like my VOLT but I will never go totally electric. Doesn't make sense in my area.

The recharge time is a big issue for me.