Jump to content

RV_

Validated Members
  • Posts

    6,374
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RV_

  1. LG makes all the GM battery packs in the Bolts, which failed in 10% of the first 2000 delivered to customers from the first batch. They aren't the only ones using LG battery packs, as Ford has ordered major production increases by LG for its eMustang. The F150 Lightning battery packs are made by SK. "As Clean Technica has learned, citing “extremely strong” sources, LG Energy Solution (LG’s subsidiary in charge of making batteries) is currently producing about 5,000 battery modules per day for the Ford Mustang Mach-E. Considering that each Mustang Mach-E has 10 modules in its battery, LG’s production capacity would be sufficient for 500 batteries per day. With that data in hand, let’s now make annual production estimates. Assuming that LG Energy Solution produces batteries for 340-350 days a year, we would be talking about a production of batteries for between 170,000 and 175,000 Mustang Mach-E units per year. Now suppose, in an exercise of prudence, that the Clean Technica information refers to a production peak that may decrease in the following weeks; LG could have produced a spike now in anticipation of possible semiconductor outages later, for example. In that case, there could be an annual output of 150,000 batteries for the Mustang Mach-E. At this point, perhaps some are thinking of the electric Ford F-150 Lightning. Nevertheless, It is unlikely (if not impossible) that LG batteries will be used in Ford’s electric pick-up, as it will use batteries from SK Innovation with a different capacity and technology. The electric F-150 will use cells that we could consider ‘NCM (9 ½ ½)’, as they contain 90% nickel, 5% cobalt and 5% manganese." Source: https://www.newsylist.com/the-ford-mustang-mach-e-prepares-for-a-big-production-jump-in-2022-today-hybrids-and-electric/ This will be worth watching.
  2. Noteven, That's great news! We'll be seeing a lot of non-Tesla brands getting press as they begin to get some sales. Some great, some not so great as the market and manufacturers sort out their winners and losers. All current vehicle manufacturers won't be around in a decade or three. And we will see some new ones too. BTW, in 2019 Tesla did it in 72 hours: The Fastest EV Lightning Run Across Canada In A Model 3 Towards the end of 2019, Tesla completed its Trans-Canada Supercharger route from Vancouver to Halifax as a part of the expansion of its Supercharger network. In celebration of this, Ian Pavelko and Trevor Page drove a Tesla Model 3 from Tsawwassen, BC, to Halifax, and did it within 72 hours." https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/teslas-are-great-for-road-tripping-ignore-the-anti-tesla-myths/ Exciting times for electric vehicle enthusiasts.
  3. Sheesh! People still believe this happy horse manure? Excerpt: "HotCars recently published an article titled “10 Biggest Problems with Owning a Tesla,” and the article is, frankly, filled with misinformation — almost from top to bottom. I’m just tackling two of the issues here, since they are probably fairly common misperceptions (thanks in part to misleading articles like the one above), or at least things that many potential buyers might ask about. The article claims that buying a Tesla would put you at “risk of problems most other car owners don’t have to deal with.” The evidence is lacking. One of the so-called problems listed is range. According to the article, Teslas are not very good cars for traveling on long road trips. The article claimed that the average range of a Tesla Model 3 is around 350 miles on a single charge, and pointed out that this is dependent on speed, weather, and interstate driving. He stated that “they still are not very good cars for traveling on long road trips.” Clearly, the author of this article hasn’t even tried to go on a long road trip in a Tesla, nor has he done his research on Tesla road trips. I’m sure if he had asked Tesla owners who took such trips, he would have found out how easy and pleasant road trips are for them. Since he hasn’t done his research into Tesla road trips and range, I’ll do some for him. Taking A 2015 Tesla Model S Across Europe Interestingly, in the midst of the misinformation, the author used a CleanTechnica photo (illegally) of a Tesla Model S that very conveniently took a trip across Europe — from Poland to Paris — in 2017. In fact, our chief editor, Zachary Shahan, and one other person took that trip and wrote about it here on CleanTechnica. Zach called it “the most comfortable and convenient long-distance road trip I’ve ever taken.” (Side note: the Model S photo is fine to use, as long as you indicate the source — Zachary Shahan, CleanTechnica — and link to our site.) North American Road Trip Wade Anderson actually drove from Arizona to the Arctic Circle in his Tesla Model 3 in 2019. Wade drove a total of 18,857 miles in his Tesla and literally made a big circle around the United States and Canada. Wade started his trip in July 2019 and even came through Baton Rouge. He was the first person who ever took me on a ride in a Tesla — I had recently started writing for CleanTechnica and we got connected due to his trip. Wade drove from Arizona to Florida, up the coast to Maine, then on to Canada, where he was interviewed by CBC Canada. After that, he continued on to Alaska and made his way to the Arctic Circle, where he took some of the coolest photos of a Tesla ever taken. You can read more about his journey here. The Fastest EV Lightning Run Across Canada In A Model 3 Towards the end of 2019, Tesla completed its Trans-Canada Supercharger route from Vancouver to Halifax as a part of the expansion of its Supercharger network. In celebration of this, Ian Pavelko and Trevor Page drove a Tesla Model 3 from Tsawwassen, BC, to Halifax, and did it within 72 hours. Charging Stations The article also mentioned a lack of charging stations outside of cities, and although this was a concern a couple of years ago, Tesla has been expanding its Supercharging network fast. Currently, Tesla has over 25,000 Superchargers in the world. This makes it the largest global, fast-charging network in the world. It is in fact Tesla’s extensive Supercharging network and its brilliant navigation system that together make Tesla road trips so easy, convenient, and comfortable. Many owners also like to meet other Tesla owners they share a charge with. The article, to me, read as if the author was trying to convince his readers to not buy a Tesla, but also to not buy an EV at all. There are many points that can be refuted, but this one practically jumped off the page: Screenshot of HotCars claiming no Tesla can tow. This claim is 100% incorrect: “Every Tesla model out there is unable to tow.” I have seen with my very own eyes a Tesla Model X tow a boat. Let me show you the receipts. Source with more pics and links here: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/teslas-are-great-for-road-tripping-ignore-the-anti-tesla-myths/
  4. Why the "Green" in "Green Hydrogen" is intentionally misleading. There is a lot of talk about green hydrogen, but to be really green, the feedstock needs to be water (not so called “natural gas,” aka fossil methane) and the energy used for electrolysis needs to come from renewable energy (not coal or gas). In high school, we did an experiment where we ran a current through water and collected the hydrogen and oxygen that was produced. This is how green hydrogen is produced, but on a much more massive scale. Based in Western Australia, Strike Energy’s hydrogen is purported to be green, but is it? Sure, the plant will be powered by geothermal and renewable energy, but the feedstock is 98% “lower carbon” gas. Only 2% will be green! It might produce low-carbon urea as a fertilizer, but its hydrogen is not green. Strike Energy is a gas company. In every jubilant article about green hydrogen, we need to ask the question: “What is the feedstock?” It’s like the difference between an “electrified” vehicle (like Toyota produces) and an electric car (with a plug). Read carefully and see if an article mentions: water, desalination plants, and electrolysers. Calling the hydrogen green when it is produced from methane is just not cricket. Be careful with the misleading term “renewable hydrogen” as well. This appears to refer to hydrogen produced from methane with renewable energy. Certainly that’s somewhat greener than hydrogen produced with power from coal, but is it green enough? No. That’s like a petrol/gas station being powered by renewables rather than coal. The petrol’s still petrol. Currently, the economics of green hydrogen don’t stack up. “According to a presentation by global energy giant Iberdrola at the Ammonia Energy conference in Australia last week – the cost of wind and solar will need to fall by around 30-40 per cent, the cost of electrolyser technology (which splits water into hydrogen and oxygen) will need to fall by at least 50 per cent. The efficiency, or load factor, of electrolysers will need to lift by 10-20 per cent.” Those are major, major requirements needed to get green hydrogen competitive." Source: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/green-hydrogen-needs-to-actually-be-green-it-aint-easy-being-green/
  5. We keep hearing erroneous claims about "Green Hydrogen" When it is actually made from fossil fuels using even more fossil fuels to make it. I'd laugh if Toyoda's (Toyoda is the CEO of Toyota) excuses for his failure to bring on Toyota's EV program personnally had not resulted in his vilifying electric in favor of Hydrogen - which makes no sense whatsoever. Why? Read on. Note: The graphs are reduced to see them correctly just left click on each. Excerpt: "Published 2 days ago In the first part of this series, I projected and explained the plummeting hydrogen demand from petroleum refining and fertilizer, the biggest sources of demand today, through 2100. In the second part, I explored the flat demand segments, and the single source of significant demand increase I see for hydrogen in the next 20 years. In this final assessment, I look at the great but false hopes for a hydrogen economy: transportation, long-term storage, and heat. Hydrogen demand through 2100, by author. Transportation — 0 rising to 1 (one) million tons H2 This is one of the great hopes of the current fossil fuel industry, and a couple of car companies which have managed to capture their governments in Korea and Japan. However, there’s no significant place for hydrogen or synthetic fuels made from it in ground transportation. Electrification is simply too easy, prevalent, cheap, and effective. Hydrogen can’t compete outside of tiny niches like vintage vehicles. For short- and medium-haul aviation, and short- and medium-haul water freight shipping, the clear path is battery electric as well. That only leaves long-haul shipping and long-haul aviation as areas where hydrogen might have a play. Mark Z. Jacobson and I discussed this on CleanTech Talk a year and a half ago. His perspective was that in order to get to a zero-carbon world, hydrogen would have to be used for long-haul shipping and aviation. His perspective on shipping was that we needed to eliminate black carbon, with its 100-year global warming potential of 1,055–2,240. Subsequently, I spent a couple of hours talking with Hadi Akbari, a PhD of mechanical engineering who has spent the last several years of his fascinating career spanning two continents building scrubbers for heavy marine vessels. Just as particulates are scrubbed from coal plant emissions, they can be scrubbed from marine emissions, and so biofuels with their lower black carbon emissions will be fit for purpose in my opinion. (Note: this is my opinion after talking with Hadi and researching further, not Hadi’s expressed opinion.) Biofuels use nature to do most of the heavy lifting and have advanced substantially over the past decade. There is no value in using them in ground transportation, they no longer consume food sources and there is little real concern about them competing with agriculture, although there is a lot of expressed concern nonetheless. On aviation, Jacobson rightly points out that we have to solve emissions, but it’s a hard problem, with CO2 emissions, nitrous oxide emissions (anything burned in our atmosphere combines the nitrogen and oxygen into nitrous oxides), and the water vapor which creates contrails. In discussion with Paul Martin, it’s clear that both hydrogen storage and fuel cells would have to be in the fuselage, leaving a lot less room for passengers and luggage or making the fuselage bigger with attendant efficiency losses, and creating a heavy burden of excess heat from the fuel cells that makes them deeply unlikely. In his perspective, hydrogen would be burned directly in jet engines in this model, and that wouldn’t eliminate nitrous oxides or water vapor hence contrails. Once again, low-carbon biofuels are likely to be the solution here. Certified versions have existed since 2011, after all, while there are exactly zero certified hydrogen drive train planes in the world. And contrails require fairly minimal operational changes, as a regular CleanTechnica reader who holds my feet the fire pointed out (and thank you for doing so, Hazel). Those operational changes still have to be mandated for the airlines, but it’s not as significant a problem as I had originally assumed. Biofuels are enhanced with some hydrogen in some cases, and there are always going to be edge cases where hydrogen persists, but my projection for all modes of transportation including biofuel use is still only an increase from effectively 0 tons today to a million tons a year by 2100. Long-term storage — 0 rising to 1 (one) million tons Hydrogen is also projected as a solution for the dunkelflaute, long dreary periods when there is little wind or sunshine. However, it only makes into the also-ran categories of my projections for grid storage, not into the three major technologies. Projection of grid storage capacity through 2060 by major categories by author Even there, it’s not going to be a big player in the also ran category, fighting for scraps with all the other contenders a long way back in the pack. Some of the reasons are the same as always. It’s ineffective, it’s inefficient and it will be vastly more expensive. But more than that, the need just isn’t there unless you assume a whole bunch of other solutions aren’t already occurring. High-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission has been around since the 1950s, but in 2012 they finally solved a major technical inhibitor to its wide scale use. Despite the presence of multiple grids on continents already sharing electricity with HVDC asynchronous connections between high-voltage alternative current (HVAC) synchronized grids, despite massive HVDC construction projects under way, planned and proposed, despite electricity already being transmitted long-distances today with much more lossy HVAC, many people seem to think that electricity won’t be transmitted from renewables between opposing ends of continents and even across continents. Electricity already flows from Africa to Europe across the Bosphorus Strait. Expanding that with big HVDC pipes from solar installations and wind farms in northern Africa is trivial, just as getting more HVDC pipes to ease the logjam from North Sea offshore wind into the population centers of Europe is straightforward and being constructed. Renewables are cheap to build, and just as with every other form of electrical generation except nuclear, will be overbuilt and run under capacity part of the year. Demand management strategies vs V2g projection by author And the emergence of massive electrification increases the ability to do demand management at much larger scales. The assumption of the need for long-term storage assumes narrow geographical boundaries, an archaic concept of energy independence in a world of global trade, and actively hostile neighbors. Liebreich and I have started this conversation online, with his opening salvo being a question of whether Japan would ever accept the proposed HVDC links with China, to which I respond now that China is already 20% of Japan’s annual trade, so why is electricity different? Germany will likely be the one outlier in this space. They have underground salt deposits that they can turn into caverns, they have a weird love affair with hydrogen too, and dunkelflaute being a German word isn’t a coincidence. If anybody builds significant hydrogen storage, it will probably be them. As a result, my projection for global demand for hydrogen for electricity storage rises from effectively zero tons today to a million tons in 2100. Someone will waste the money, but very few. Heating — 0 tons rising to … 0 (zero) tons And finally, heating, the beloved hope of natural gas utilities globally, all of whom are lobbying hard to convince governments to let them ship hydrogen into homes and buildings to replace natural gas, and to allow them to inject tiny amounts of hydrogen into existing natural gas lines to produce close to zero emissions reductions. There are no certified hydrogen home furnaces or stoves today. The existing natural gas distribution network would have to be completely replaced to handle hydrogen. Current challenges with leaking natural gas would be multiplied vastly by leaking hydrogen due to the tiny size of the molecule. SGN in Scotland is trying to retrofit 300 homes in Fife with hydrogen appliances for free, one of the many efforts going on around the world by utilities whose life is rapidly ending. No, what will happen is that all of that natural gas distribution infrastructure will be shoved into electrical minimills to create steel for useful things, and the world will convert to heat pumps and induction stoves. My projection for global demand for hydrogen for heating is effectively zero tons today, and remaining at so far under a million tons through 2100 that it rounds down to zero. And so, that’s the projection. It’s flawed, of course, but not fatally in my opinion. It’s my first iteration of the projection, and it’s withstood me writing 4,000 words over three articles explaining it, so there’s that. But as with my projections on grid storage and vehicle-to-grid, I offer it to create a useful discussion about what the world will become, and welcome challenges to it. Hydrogen demand today is two-thirds for petroleum refining and fertilizer manufacturing. Both of those uses are going to drop precipitously in the coming decades. The one growth area, steel, will not replace them, in my opinion. Green hydrogen only has to replace the useful two-thirds of hydrogen demand seen today, and grow to 75% of 2021 demand by 2100 to fulfill all needs. Source: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/hydrogen-demand-and-now-the-contentious-disappointments/
  6. Excerpt: "Goldman Sachs believes people are over invested in big cap tech names such as Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix and Google [FAANG] that have minted fat profits and higher stock prices the past decade amid an explosion in tech advances. To get investors thinking beyond FAANG, the investment bank recently launched the Goldman Sachs Future Tech Leaders ETF. As the name implies, it looks to invest in the next big winners in tech that have true global exposure. "We launched the ETF strategy because we noticed there was a growing disconnect between where investors are positioned and where we are seeing the most attractive returns over the next decade or so," said Sung Cho, the portfolio manager of the ETF, on Yahoo Finance Live. "For the last 20 years, it has been focused in the U.S. and in mega cap tech companies. We believe we are at a key inflection point where innovation is expanding beyond the U.S., as well as beyond the market cap spectrum." The actively managed ETF currently has 66 holdings, which were selected by Goldman's fundamental equity team. Top five holdings include (in order of size): Marvell Technology, MercadoLibre, HubSpot, Workday and Kingdee International. Nearly 80% of the sector weight is concentrated in information technology and communication services. Since debuting this month, the ETF has relatively outperformed the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite. Still, the ETF hasn't been immune to the market volatility seen this month — it's down about 1.9% since debuting. Goldman's new ETF puts it in a direct battle with Cathie Wood's Ark Invest's flagship Ark Innovation ETF for forward-thinking tech-minded investors. That worthy competitor isn't lost on Goldman's Cho. " More and related here: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-goldman-sachs-just-launched-this-etf-that-will-rival-faang-stocks-170441527.html
  7. Investors need to know. It's not just Ford. Another dealer disincentive is the fact that they won't make much money in service because there is little maintenance with EVs. I drive a Tesla Model Y and have had it since last year. GM has ginned up battery partnerships and production but with LG whose battery packs and design of the Bolt (LG Built them, they were shipped as modules to the GM Orion plant and assembled there) LG has been developing production of their batteries for GM and after the Bolt/LG debacle I'd be hesitant to invest in their EV efforts as a car buyer or investor. But as we proceed to the next phase of transportation I am seeing mistakes like these. I call them Stealerships and refused to buy new my whole life because of their sales model, poor quality repairs, and high cost of maintenance. Excerpt: "I read an article by Jalopnik which echoes what I’ve been saying for some time now. If Ford, or any legacy automaker for that matter, really wants to compete with Tesla, the dealers need to get out of the way. I’ve written about this extensively. For example, in Connecticut, a local paper, The Day, published an opinion piece basically begging Tesla to play by their rules. By “their,” I mean dealerships’. Don’t lobby to make direct sales to customers legal, don’t force dealerships to compete for their business without lifting a finger. In my interview/podcast with Connecticut State Senator Will Haskell, he said something that kind of led me to the realization of exactly why dealerships don’t want to compete with Tesla. Dealerships have been the only way you could purchase a new car for decades. Tesla is forcing them to change, but instead, they are fighting that. I’ve also touched upon the dealership experience — not my own, but those of others. And this is the focus of the Jalopnik article, which stated, “It’s one thing to have a product that competes with Tesla, it’s another to have the sales experience. And Ford’s old dealership model isn’t helping.” The article explained that Ford is serious about EVs and adding more to its lineup, but that its approach to actually selling them is leaving customers frustrated and looking elsewhere for their EVs. The author pointed out that the first issue is that Ford has moved to what it calls e-invoice pricing, which “means that the invoice price (or dealer cost) and MSRP are identical.” The author explained further: “Usually dealer invoice pricing is lower, allowing dealers to offer deals below MSRP, which just isn’t as clean or simple to a consumer, who may rather want to just pay what the car costs instead of worrying about getting the best deal. Whether Ford will admit it or not, with this ‘e-invoice’ pricing, it seems to be taking a page from Tesla’s playbook where everyone pays the same price for a car. If you buy a Tesla, the price online is what you pay. No games, no dealer nonsense. Except, despite Ford’s ‘e-invoice’ pricing, dealers can play games and markup cars well over the MSRP.” The author even has his own dealer story, kind of. Having assisted with several Mach-E deals for numerous customers in different states, he’s seen upwards of $10,000 over the sticker price. The author shared a screenshot of a tweet from Ford’s Mike Levine quote tweeting Ross Gerber, a friend of mine, who was complaining about poor dealer practices — dealers selling Mach-Es well above MSRP. The author reached out to Mr. Levine but never got a response. However, Emma Berg, the director of Ford’s communications for EVs, said: “If a customer isn’t happy with their dealer, our team can help them find a different dealer that’s a better match. Dealers are independent franchises and ultimately the final price a customer will pay for any vehicle is agreed between themselves and a dealer.” In other words, dealers are presenting a problem that Tesla always assumed they’d present if Tesla had to sell cars through them instead of directly to customers." Much more in the article here: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/19/dealers-are-preventing-ford-from-competing-with-tesla/
  8. Awww, has you got a wittle bitty swingie? 😂🤣😂
  9. https://www.votervoice.net/AFSA/newsletters/41870
  10. I'm done with one post wonders. I'll participate when they do after their first post. I suspect someone within the forums or organization thinks these one off questions are helpful or will increase hits for this forum. I've been here since the first SKP forums (~1999) online and joined Escapees in 1997 or 1998 I forget at the moment, and have never seen so many well written questions, seemingly from the same writer's voice vocabulary, so often here, who does not come back, or comes back once. I'll wait.
  11. We bought an 8" thick Gel foam RV short queen mattress back in 2014 for our Sunnybrook 28' fiver. We also have bought two mattresses for our home a queen and a King now from Amazon. Very good prices back then and in 2018 when we switched to a King. We bought one on Woot and the last one on Amazon because of the reviews and feedback and questions. Here is a result for Gel foam RV queen mattress and you'll see some with 50k reviews! https://www.amazon.com/s?k=mempry+gel+foam+RV+queen+mattress&ref=nb_sb_noss We lived in our 28 foot fiver for a year while our new house was being built in 2015. The 8 inch mattress was great and we slept well but we bought one without cooling gel construction and ended up buying a cooling 4" topper which made it perfect. But for us, an 8" mattress on the plywood bed base was excellent as far as comfort. In summary if you full time 10" might be a good buy but get one rated cool, comfortable, and reviewed well on Amazon. We both have back issues, I had cervical and lumbar surgeries in 2016 and we love our current full king size foam mattress. With cooling 4 inch topper. We like medium softness/firmness. YMMV
  12. Noteven, Ues I saw that. THe working prototype was to have it developed and ready to be offered as an OEM option or be carried in the store I would think. This is my Tesla model Y front end. Why would the truck front end be different, front end compliance wise? I leave compliance to Tesla like I do for our Subaru Forester. If it passes to be allowed to be sold here, it will be. I believe you are in Canada right? Don't cars need to be in compliance there before they can be sold? There are also added top mounted tent campers being designed as well as other folks vying for options and accessories suppliers. Until we see the truck in production the accessory market will be speculative. I liked the idea but it looked smaller than my VW Westphalia pop up campers from the 70s and 80s I used to build/restore as Hot VWs. We'll see.
  13. I'm not sure whether I love it or hate it. I'll have to wait and see one, after I wait and see the truck in production. Interesting? Different? Yeppers! https://cleantechnica.com/2021/09/20/cybertruck-cyberlandr-camper-prototype-video-released-interview/ Here is a video of the latest design, options, camper shells planned by third parties and with working models, prices, and production estimates as of this month. Maybe 2022. We'll see.
  14. noteven, Wow I missed that standardized battery news. Thanks for the heads up! I'll be watching to see if it pans out now too. Honda, Yamaha, KTM, and Piaggio (Vespa) all involved may make this real. . Now we can do the same with motorcycles? Awesome. I hope they do get together on a battery system that all can use with all their bikes. Lithium Ion tech is awesome but even NiMh tech has come a long way. I use nothing but NiMH batteries that have 90% or so of their charge after storing for a year. Unlike the old NiCads which were dead if they sat up for a few days to weeks! The new NiMh, however, are just no good for wall clocks that use one AA. THey are intentionally too big. So I still buy some Alkaline, very few. Gas motors can't do instant torque like battery electrics can power wise to the wheels. Like the Honda CBX in the old days was considered dangerous because it was too much power and could get out from under even experienced riders. Never mind all the mechanical drama, noise, leaks, and poisonous fumes of fossil fuels. Yes when in my 20s I put glass packs on the '66 Mustang and Abarth exhausts on my MG Midget, Triumph Spitfire and some of the performance VWs I restored/customized. It's really different with my Tesla. The instant torque and launch, and just accelerating when safe to the speed limit is way better than the noise. I always liked my motorcycles, even my 1996 Electra Glide Classic, with quiet mufflers and never straight piped them. I liked the Goldwings best, almost silent, and the fastest smooth launch in almost silence I ever rode. My Kawasaki 500 2 stroke was faster but vibration, noise, was too much and it handled like a brick. It would try to pop wheelies unexpectedly on fast takeoffs untilI got used to it. Like the Tesla, with the big Goldwings, they were so quiet and smooth I'd look down and be doing 80 when I thought I had only accelerated to 45! If they do that and I can carry a spare in a carrier I may just have to get one. If the industry did the same to electric bicycles inner city cars would be a lot less necessary. Especially if they make inexpensive three wheeler micro size cars, like the Elio was supposed to be, with 200 mile range and swappable batteries for folks without a house in apartments. The Elio was supposed to be registered as a motorcycle, why not? I know the battery swap guys are looking to swap on trips for vehicles. But we want to stretch our legs, take a break and walk the dog. And grab a bite. Enough time to Supercharge. Bikes never had the range of cars because of gas tank size. Swappable batteries or carrying a spare may make them better in range than the current gas bikes. With scary torque!
  15. noteven, Fusion, when perfected, will be an answer to replace the fossil fueled plants for backup and primary power without the radioactive byproducts that Fission generates I am told. We'll know more in the coming year or two. I did not say if perfected because of the big money being thrown at the technology now. Where Solar shines (pun int.) is micro grids and distributed energy. Solar with Tesla PowerWalls for storage can do it all now for basics when the grid fails. Our local power company is working up plans for something along those lines but won't give details until they have it ready to go. It is the dawn of a new age and tech. Now that the governments around the world admitted UFOs and some creatures in them are real, it would be nice if they would stop by and share some tech, as many claim they have done in the past. If they meant harm with that kind of advanced tech to visit they could have wiped us out thousands of years ago. However until I see it, I remain to be convinced. But something has the tech to fly between planets and/or stars or dimensions/universes. We just don't know who or what at the citizen level. Much aligns with our beginner knowledge of Quantum Physics as far as how we are learning universes/dimensions work. Along with renewables and non polluting. We've already seen what a mind like Musk's/Bezos'/Gates put their money where their mouth is. Gates is backing a fusion effort I've already posted about here in the last few days as they have made another incremental step with low power magnets, much lower power. Just 11 years ago I had 12 volt NiCaD battery power tools that did not hold their charge for a year like now in both my ryoni 18 volt brushkless tools, but also my Li-Ion AA, AAA, AAAA, and 9 volt batteries. Of course I have conditioning chargers and good testers for max life. We live in exciting times for science. If we can just survive the rest.😉
  16. Another good video: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2021/08/19/a-giant-step-toward-the-holy-grail-of-energy-research-scientist-on-fusion-breakthrough.html
  17. Nope. Just answering for the folks who read the thread.
  18. Noteven, Like Germany which does get less sun than the US, Canada does get less sun year round than the US but still plenty. However you guys have lots of coastline and wind too. The wind turbines you do have are hardened and survived the extreme cold just fine. Energy storage is still behind renewables energy generation. I am hoping that the Gates backed fusion I mention in another thread comes in earlier than predicted. (Yep that happens too sometimes)
  19. Wow! Thanks noteven and Kirk for some great data and links! Renewables are increasing more by the year. I would like to see more targeted infrastructure increases here in renewables like they did in Germany. Those go in my saved links too. Kirk if I may post more from yours as you left out the share of total by percent: U.S. utility-scale electricity generation by source, amount, and share of total in 20201 Preliminary data as of February 2021 Energy source Billion kWh Share of total Total - all sources 4,009 Fossil fuels (total) 2,419 60.3% Natural Gas 1,617 40.3% Coal 774 19.3% Petroleum (total) 17 0.4% Petroleum liquids 10 0.2% Petroleum coke 8 0.2% Other gases 11 0.3% Nuclear 790 19.7% Renewables (total) 792 19.8% Wind 338 8.4% Hydropower 291 7.3% Solar (total) 91 2.3% Photovoltaic 88 2.2% Solar thermal 3 0.1% Biomass (total) 56 1.4% Wood 37 0.9% Landfill gas 10 0.3% Municipal solid waste (biogenic) 6 0.2% Other biomass waste 2 0.1% Geothermal 17 0.4% Pumped storage hydropower3 -5 -0.1% Other sources4 13 0.3% 1Utility-scale electricity generation is electricity generation from power plants with at least one megawatt (or 1,000 kilowatts) of total electricity generating capacity. Data are for net electricity generation. 2 Small-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) systems are electricity generators with less than one megawatt (MW) of electricity generating capacity, which are not connected at a power plant that has a combined capacity of one MW or larger. Most small-scale PV systems are at or near the location where the electricity is consumed and many are net metered systems. The smaller ones are usually installed on building rooftops. 3Pumped storage hydroelectricity generation is negative because most pumped storage electricity generation facilities use more electricity than they produce on an annual basis. Most pumped storage systems use fossil fuels or nuclear energy for pumping water to the storage component of the system. 4 Other sources includes non-biogenic municipal solid waste, batteries, hydrogen, purchased steam, sulfur, tire-derived fuel, and other miscellaneous energy sources.
  20. Joel your 1-2% market share graph seems to not be accurate. The idea is to move forward and eliminate fossil fuel pollution from ICE age cars. You said you were in favor of that. In vehicles we have hybrid EVs and plug in hybrid EVs I think we all agree are transitional electric vehicles that reduce pollution a lot, and full battery EVs that eliminate tailpipe emissions 100%. Factory vehicle emissions can be scrubbed and recycling of batteries is being done very well this year. Other sources: Hybrids are getting enough battery range to keep sales up as of this year that I include all plugins when I say EVs. Why? Because they rely less and less on their fossil engines every year with battery prices and charging tech getting better every year. And because folks don’t read lines of statistics for context and trend analysis. Or hide it when it disagrees with their preconceived notions. I and most consider hybrids transitional and once folks find they can, in some places with some brands, like Tesla in the US now, and soon most places and brands, charge at half remaining range as quickly as fueling a car at half tank. The energy for that can be supplied by new energy infrastructure that can’t even support the pre-EV loads as they increased the demand just by population. Read the debacle of the Texas grid failures of 1989, then the massive one in 2011 which caused the formation of ERCOT to winter-harden their gas and electric production facilities that froze. They apparently did little to nothing from 2011 to 2021's freeze, and we had the loss of lives and millions in property damage from it. Their little private, unregulated, grid failure to harden, was blamed on the renewables which was disproven immediately, then blamed on the private suppliers saying they did not want to spend the money with threats of increased prices. Then on ERCOT for not doing their job? I hope we don't, but if we have another big freeze, I hope we do not find that little has changed and they are betting lives and millions in citizen property damage versus energy suppliers saving money from spending on much needed infrastructure hardening for extreme cold. Did they harden or are they betting it won’t happen two years in a row? We’ll see right? Whenever it happens again I hope they are ready and their grid doesn’t fail again. Without bad weather this past summer they had blackouts and grid strain from not growing and investing with demand. My point is that blaming old infrastructure already not meeting demand on EVs or renewables is disingenuous, but popular in some circles. "In July, gasoline-powered vehicles accounted for a 34.9% market share to 39.4% market share to 93,176 units, Hybrid vehicles had a 29.5% to 69,795 units. Diesel vehicles had a 19.7% market share to 46,660 units and EV had a 10.8% market share to 25,464 units. Sales of 23,777 trucks in July represented a decrease of 10.8% over the previous year, while sales of 569 buses were a 6.9% decrease. The VDA announced that monthly passenger car exports of 172,200 units had decreased 27%and domestic production of 246,600 units had decreased 25% year over year. (Scroll down to) Flash report, June 2021/July 6 2021 . . . In June gasoline-powered vehicles accounted for a 39.5% market share, Hybrid vehicles had a 27.9%. Diesel vehicles had a 19.9% market share and EV had a 12.2% market share." Source: https://www.marklines.com/en/statistics/flash_sales/automotive-sales-in-germany-by-month “In 2020, Germany remained by far the largest European market for electrically chargeable vehicles with sales up 263%. France also tripled sales to move up from fifth to second place. The United Kingdom was again the third-largest market for electrified cars in Europe. Norway and the Netherlands were the worst performing markets with sales up by only a third, as both countries already enjoyed deeper market penetration by electrified cars than other European markets. Both slipped two places. New electric passenger vehicle registrations in Germany in 2020 increased by 207% to 194,163 battery-electric cars. This increased electric cars’ share of the German new car market from 1.75% in 2019 to 6.65% in 2020. The total German new car market contracted by 19.1% in 2020 to 2,917,678 — the smallest market since 2010. Petrol remained by far the largest component of new cars but the market share slipped to 46.7% in 2020, while the share for diesel was down to 28.1%. Hybrid cars took a market share of 18.1% (6.6% in 2019) with 527,864 (+120%) hybrid car registrations in Germany for the first time in 2020. This number included 200,469 (+342%) plug-in hybrids for a market share of 6.9%” Source: https://www.best-selling-cars.com/germany/2020-full-year-germany-best-selling-electric-cars-by-brand-and-model/ Let’s do the market share math: Hybrids 18.1%, plug in hybrids 6.9%, and full EVs12.2% = 37.2% Market share for electric vehicles. That takes the carbon out or mostly eliminated from all those EVs. Germany leads but all Europe? From NASDAQ.com: “The European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA) reported that nearly one in six-passenger cars registered in the European Union in the fourth quarter of 2020 was an electrically-chargeable vehicle, 16.5 percent, with 1.3 million units registered in Europe in 2020. “ Source: https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/europe-is-subsidizing-its-way-into-electric-vehicle-leadership-2021-09-09 The numbers are much higher for 2021, and we will have those figures in a few months at the beginning of 2022. Safe travels!
  21. I don't infer Joel, I just read what you post rebutting my energy posts, several times without even reading the link/s provided. Then when pointed out you change the subject or try to find another approach. No inference there. "What I have objected to is some of the excessive, nearly messianic, hype that some of their supporters exude." And who are some of their supporters in this thread? Who is implying and inferring couched in second person that my posts of facts are excessive nearly messianic hype? Presenting facts and disagreeing with some folks without the name calling, attempts to trigger you or others seems to trigger bias confirmation responses in some. The full set of graphs above is broken down for Electric vehicles of all types. How did you miss those in your search for your anti-messianic rebuttal this time? And a paywall?? This reminds me of several times here when a quote was given without the quote link. The last time that happened it turned out to be a debate between scientists that presented both sides but only the opening paragraph that agreed with what the SKP wanted reality to be was posted with the next paragraph not saying what the poster wanted it to say so it was left out and the paywall link was accidentally left out because it showed both sides. It just was not so. The actual article was also behind a paywall in that case too, and that was not you. I found the article and it actually said the opposite and agreed with me. So Joel, please don't take the victim role when you say my facts are wrong then use a paywall to be the poor person getting all inferred upon because of what you wrote. So here we are again. You see a big argument and try to rebut with paywall and partial facts from several years back? Please break the pattern and we will be fine OK? I post a breakthrough increment that is promising and later is proven as a good incremental step, you call it click-bait and hype which in itself is unsupported hype posting incomplete sources or behind a paywall, then I post full factual content from good cross checked worldwide open sources, without calling your and your post names like click-bait and messianic hype then you claim foul! He posted provable facts. I am happy to post facts back to you when you try to name call my posts, please don't pretend a rebuttal of confirmation bias is an attack. Will rogers once paraphrased that: "It ain't what a man knows that gets him in trouble, it's what he thinks he knows that just ain't so." I learned a long time ago that when it counts, to always check my premise. I was told "no electric car will ever sell and the guy Musk is talking going to Mars, what a nutjob! It is all just a pump and dump . . . " that and more circa 2003-2008. Today I drive a Tesla, an actual electric car, a fact if you will, and NASA has Musk finishing up R&D on another bold disruption of man's exploration of our solar system with a Mars manned mission planned for 2025. Facts. What everyone thought they knew just a few years back, just wasn't so. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts." - Senator Patrick Moynihan. The best revenge is living well. Safe Travels Joel.
  22. This is only for 2020, electric vehicle's (Hybrids/plug in hybrids/battery EVs) market share has risen much more so far in 2021. CleanTechnica Cars German EV Market Reaches Escape Velocity — Record 27% Share In December Germany, Europe’s largest auto market and the 4th largest in the world, achieved 26.6% plugin electric vehicle share in December. This is a stunning ascent from the 4.0% share seen in December 2019. By Dr. Maximilian Holland Published January 8, 2021 214 Comments Germany, Europe’s largest auto market and the 4th largest in the world, achieved 26.6% plugin electric vehicle share in December. This is a stunning ascent from the 4.0% share seen in December 2019. The Volkswagen brand dominated Germany’s full battery electric sales in 2020, taking almost 24% of the market, with Renault runner-up at 16%. December’s 26.6% combined plugin share was led by full battery electric vehicles (BEVs) at 14.0% of the market, with plugin hybrids (PHEVs) close behind at 12.6% share. The full year 2020 shares were remarkably even at almost 6.7% BEV and almost 6.9% PHEV, for a combined annual plugin share of just over 13.5%. That’s a huge jump up from 2019’s overall share of 3.0%. In terms of volumes, Germany’s overall auto market was down 19.1% in 2020, to 2.9175 million. The annual decline was softened by a strong recovery in December, which was up 9.9% year-on-year, at over 311,000 sales. 2020’s plugin vehicle sales grew over 2019 by a huge 263% to 394,632 units. We can see the growth in plugin electric vehicles over the course of 2020 by observing the evolution of powertrain shares month-by-month: We don’t yet have the full details of BEV model sales for December, but we do have some information on the top 5 best selling BEV brands for the year as a whole. Volkswagen (with the e-Golf, ID.3, e-Up!, and perhaps a few ID.4) strongly led Germany’s full year sales of BEVs, with almost 24% share of the market: However, the year’s single best selling BEV model (by far) was the Renault ZOE, with over 31,000 sales. We can deduce that the runner up was a close race between the Volkswagen e-Golf, and the VW ID.3, with the Tesla Model 3, and Hyundai Kona, not too far behind. Volkswagen’s BEV delivery total rose by a massive ~13,800 units in December alone. Unless the VW ID.4 started delivering in the home market (which is possible), this huge number implies that the ID.3 delivered a flood of vehicles (perhaps around 9,000 units) in the month. If so, the ID.3 would have ended 2020 with a total of around 17,000 sales in Germany, amazing considering the September delivery commencement. Either way, it looks like the soon-to-retire VW e-Golf may have put in a late rally, and ended with close to 18,000 sales, and so probably took the #2 spot behind the ZOE. But we won’t know the #2 and lower spots for sure until a week or two from now, so keep an eye out for Jose’s model sales report later this month. Tesla took #3 brand position thanks to the Model 3, which saw around ~15,000 sales, up 66% over 2019’s result. Smart took #4 position, thanks to the Smart Fortwo, helped by the fact that that around 60% of Smart’s European BEV volume is sold into Germany. Hyundai’s ever popular Kona helped the brand attain the #5 spot. Renault ZOE. Image courtesy of Renault. After an amazing 2020, what does 2021 hold in store for Germany’s plugin electric vehicle market? In past years in Germany, January has usually started close to the average of Q4 of the previous year (around 22% in 2020), which would obviously lay a strong foundation for 2021. But it’s hard to say whether this historical pattern will hold again this time, as we move from the disrupted 2020 into an uncertain 2021. I expect Germany will see a 2021 average plugin electric vehicle share of at least 25%, with December climbing well into the 30s, perhaps even breeching 40% share. But 2021 in Germany will probably produce more surprises. What do you think? Please join in the comments section to share your thoughts. Source: https://cleantechnica.com/2021/01/08/german-ev-market-reaches-escape-velocity-record-27-share-in-december/#:~:text=Germany%2C Europe’s largest auto market and the 4th,from the 4.0% share seen in December 2019. (without paywall like your link Joel, for no confirmation bias and context.) Nice try. Your hyperbole at least is consistent rallying the common folk around fears and resistance to change with pitchforks around the monster's castle. 😁
  23. They weren't very big this time. No issues with any of my machines. Microsoft’s September 2021 Patch Tuesday Addresses 60 CVEs (CVE-2021-40444) https://www.tenable.com/blog/microsoft-s-september-2021-patch-tuesday-addresses-60-cves-cve-2021-40444
×
×
  • Create New...