So who thinks they will be driving electric in 10 years?

Regarding fast charging at home. Yeah, no cheap solutions there. You can slow charge a big bank if batteries or supercapacitors and then dump the energy to the car's battery quickly but those are very expensive solutions and in the case of a big bank of batteries involves more energy loss. Also, fast charging isn't all that great on the long term health of li-on batteries if you do it all the time. Regarding charging safety, generally, the charging voltage/current is not turned on by the charger until a few seconds after the car-end connector is plugged in. There is a safety interlock.
You touch on several things here. I don't know if it is true, but I understand the Tesla fast charger station we used has a truly mighty battery under the place, and it is being continuously charged at a rate the grid at the facility can manage, so that it can deliver huge charge rates to the cars, when they are there. My pal's Tesla Model "S" took about 20 minutes to bring the charge up to 80%, though I am unsure how much was in there before the charge. The charge rate concept was 332mph equivalent. It was enough time for a cup of tea, and to use the facilities at the motorway service stop.

Folk are used to the minutes they spend at a fuel stop. It is perhaps surprisingly more than many would estimate, but even so, if they go electric, I expect they will have to plan for it more. The Tesla owner told us that he did try hybrid, describing it as "the worst of both worlds". He said he did have "range anxiety" at first, but after a few all-electric travels into France, and another through Germany, and on to Poland, that feeling went away.

I don't expect batteries can be "swapped out" in any form anytime soon. It would be a serious safety issue, and the value of a battery, depending on condition, is not constant like the liquid. There would have to be "standardization". I don't think so!

We will be forced into something other than fossil-fueled cars, if only because we used the stuff up. I know human nature might ensure we take a lot of discomfort, and disagreement in the selfish quest to extract every last bit of Sun energy that was stored in the vegetation over millions of years, but one contributor is right to suggest we may be forced off the fossil fuel somewhat sooner for other reasons.

If at all we can get fusion power going, especially using perhaps one using the Proton-Boron reaction that does not generate toxic long-lived radioactive waste, then we can use the electricity to extract hydrogen from water, and either burn the hydrogen in engines with only steam in the exhaust, or make more concentrated liquid fuels taking CO2 back out of the air. These would be "carbon neutral". Hydrogen is so light, it is inconvenient for cars. Some would fear the safety implications of driving around with a tank of gaseous hydrogen under pressure, and I hesitate to compare that to driving around with up 60 litres of petrol.

Charging is not only difficult for the grid energy infrastructure. Millions in cities cannot park up on their own property and have a point for overnight charge. I cannot see how a row of cars in the street alongside terrace houses can all have a way of getting the charge to them without all sorts of problems. I guess many of us will change to a no-car lifestyle, while those who can afford it, will be going electric. To an extent, that separation is society has already started. I need a car, second-hand depreciated, reliable, low cost, and available. I look at the line of Teslas in my picture, and I know that the owners live with different norms compared to my life!
 
huh?? So relying on petroleum is somehow diverse? I don't get that one at all.

With electric you are stuck with YOUR electric company, you have no choice as to which provider your house is connected to, therefore there is no diversity and they can charge whjat they want to. With liquid fuel I still have a complete choice of who I purchase my fuel from so they still have to compete for my business.
 
With electric you are stuck with YOUR electric company, you have no choice as to which provider your house is connected to, therefore there is no diversity and they can charge whjat they want to. With liquid fuel I still have a complete choice of who I purchase my fuel from so they still have to compete for my business.
It isn't quite as simple as that. Here in CA gas is expensive and so is electricity. There is no serious competition between gas stations as gas suppliers are too smart to allow it. By shifting to a Time of Use electricity plan I cut the cost by over one third when the car is being charged (and most of the day). The result is that, compared with a gas car, my Tesla 3 gets about 105 miles to the gallon, twice as much as the hybrids I have owned. If gas was cheaper and electricity wasn't then the amount saved would be less, but then again the routine servicing my car needs is a tire rotation and filling up the window washer.
 
With electric you are stuck with YOUR electric company, you have no choice as to which provider your house is connected to, therefore there is no diversity and they can charge whjat they want to. With liquid fuel I still have a complete choice of who I purchase my fuel from so they still have to compete for my business.
Huh? I ain't STUCK with nobody, my solar array makes sure of that. So you make your own fuel?

It's funny to think oil companies "compete". No matter if the price at the barrel goes down to $60 they still charge you like they are still paying over $90.
 
No I don't Have to so I will find something more intelligent to do......................
 
I am quite sure the fully autonomous vehicle is going to happen soon. There are cars already out there doing it for "research". They are many, and the efforts extensive. Uber have the dubious distinction of having their self-driving experimental SUV kill a woman in Tempe, Arizona, but they continue to conduct tests. Probably what they currently call "AI driver-assist mode" is actually already capable of fully autonomous driving, but Tesla and the rest will not go fully autonomous until they have ironed out even the rare problem situations.

The thing is, the cars are already 100% network connected. It will not take various authorities long to seek to analyze metadata (where were you and when?), apply taxes, force speeds, destinations, routes chosen (regardless you wanted to divert to visit Grandma) or have the car stop with the doors locked because your name is the same as some freak on the wanted list.

(PS. Not seriously conspiracy theories. Just using an artificial extreme to make the point!)
 
I've been shocked and surprised and should have known better. Almost nothing can be discussed without it getting personal. And I'll admit I get triggered too.

But a car for me was always just a way to get from A to B. Not a status symbol or appendage extension. I always drove VW's because there were very few cars in the 60's that got 30mpg and I could maintain them super cheaply. That felt like the bare minimum to me. Then the first gas crunch came in '72 and it's never gone away. Hanging over us like the sword of Damocles. With every president since then having a speech about "our addiction to oil" from both sides of the isle. Meanwhile I was working on cars for a living and it was clear to me the whole ICE concept was lipstick on a pig.

In the 50's when I'd read like Popular Mechanic's etc there was always some article about this glorious future and it usually didn't include ICE. ICE is barely different from when it was first conceived over 100yrs agon. It should have been a bridge to something better like steam was to ICE, but we let the complete takeover halt us. Proponents of the ICE have ALWAYS said electric was impossible. And now it's become some kind of freedom thing. Well I've not been free to buy what I want until some 40yrs later because of monopoly's that have kept us immobile. There is no real logic in basing your world and economy on a finite resource. And when you see who's making $$$(Saudi Arabia etc) on it and spilling our blood and treasure to keep despots and tyrants safe and can sell us oil, I wanted the freedom to give them as little as I can get away with.
 
China is also forging ahead with LFTR plants invented by the man who invented the light and heavy water nuclear power plants here in the US. It was funded as a portable nuclear option for the military in Oak Ridge facility. Can't melt down, far simpler than light and heavy reactors and best of all runs on "spent" fuel rods and can refine and reuse until gone. We have a 300yr supply just in what's being stored. He asks "ok if this is so good why isn't it being used?" Because it doesn't produce fissionable material for bombs and "depleted uranium " munitions used in every war since Bosnia in tank and down to ,50cal rounds. You know how much of the fuel rod is used before its called "depleted"? 5-7%. So it's actually 95-93% un depleted.

I am not aware of any .50 caliber DU ammunition, and the smallest used in the US today is 25mm, for the Bradley IFV. The 20mm used in the Phalanx was replaced with tungsten although there may be some left in stock. DU isn't made in fuel rods, it's made in the uranium refining process. When you enrich one pile of uranium, that means you have to deplete another pile, which is where what is used in munitions come from. It's radioactivity is low, but it is dangerous because of heavy metal poisoning.
 
Your claims of bogus science are your opinion, which in my opinion is just as bogus and unintelligent !!
I served this country to help protect my right as well as yours, to voice our collective opinions !!
As far as what I believe in you couldn't be any more wrong ! I stand up for my convictions and beliefs based on my own research
and experience. So if you don't agree, prove me wrong with out flinging insults, that's what intelligent people do...................
 
Back
Top