OT. Ford Lightning. Battery F150

[rbowman]

My money is on running out of civilization first. Horses need grass to run, not oil.

[Scott Lurndal]

A few years? Try next year. Production LI-S (Lithium-Sulfer) batteries will be coming off the production line late this year for certain applications (Urban Air Mobility) with 2x the energy density of Li-ion.

Within five, you'll likely see Al-ion batteries with 5x the capacity.

[Scott Lurndal]

Four thousand pounds in the back, four hundred in the frunk and a towing capacity of 10,000 pounds. Suits the vast majority of truck users just fine.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Aluminum is in the works too

Could be something else in 5 or 10 years too. There is incentive to do better.

[krw]

...and when the insurance company downloads the black box his insurance rates triple. Works for me.

[Tekkie©]

On Thu, 20 May 2021 18:59:35 -0400, Ed Pawlowski posted for all of us to digest...

My issue with this is that gov't is forcing us to this. Innovation is not made by force but with customer demand. Let's leave the climate beliefs out of the equation. If these trucks start selling like hotcakes then one will see everyone piling on board. Musk & others have products in the works. Let it shake out. I believe it will have to move away from lithium.

At present the gov't subsidizes electric vehicles. Let's also leave the national debt out of the equation. When prices go up because the subsidies end will they be as popular? They only represent 2% now. IDK.

I would have to upgrade my electrical service for this. That u/g is over $4k now. I don't have a garage so the car sits in the weather will the charging station withstand this? I will probably be dust before my turn comes for one.

Around here it's semi-rural (now) but will the old farms and the like be able to support EV's. IDK. Will farm equipment be EV? In California they want to shutdown gas stations. How will people refuel? I believe all the vehicle owners out there will not be purchasing EV's because of budgetary reasons. Gov't mandates are cruel to ones without the cash.

To go see my BIL was over a 200 mile trip. How would I handle that?

Oh well, the wife is calling dinner so I'll shut up & see ya next time.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Wow, can you come up with more negativity? To see your brother at 200 miles is not a problem and you can charge you car when you get there.

You don't have to upgrade your electric service if you are able to plug in long enough. My daughter had a loaner that was electric and she just used an extension cord. That said, if the old farm has 120 service, yes, you can plug in a car but it takes longer.

Yes, you can do it outside. Nothing new, I plugged in my diesel in winter 35 years ago so I image they have the technology.

Agree with government subsidy. It was OK initially as something has to be done to eventually get away from oil so it was a kick start but has to go away.

As for innovation by customer demand, it is there, it is growing. One big thing is to get away from lithium and it is in the works. Better to tinker with that now than 40 years from now when oil is scarce and very expensive.

Government mandates can be crazy, can be good. Where would we be on seat belts and air bags if not mandated? It has been well proven they save lives. How about cleaner air from unleaded gas?

You want to leave climate beliefs out of the equation but change is real Time to do something about it.

The more ICE cars off the road the longer oil will exist to supply farm equipment that is not electrified. What is the future of air travel if oil is gone? Do we really have to piss away oil on cruise ships? How much fuel does the military need? Once oil is scarce they will get it before you and I.

I'm surprised at how closed minded people are on the subject. EVs do not solve the world problem but we really have to look at the future and do something about it. Clean air, clean water, clean energy are needed.

[Joey]

Doesn?t mean it makes any sense to buy a stupid EV with all its downsides today. Like I said and you ignored, when there is a problem with the price of gas or natural gas THEN is the time to decide if the massive downsides with EVs are worth getting stuck with because fools have been proclaiming that we will have run out of oil for more than half a f****ng century now and the reality is that we arent even close to seeing that with oil and natural gas.

No I didn?t, I rubbed your stupid nose in the fact that if the price of gasoline does become a real problem, natural gas will still be available.

The sun will go out sometime too but not soon enough to matter.

Not if we stop pissing it against the wall in gas peakers which are needed to fix one of the major downsides with stupid wind farms and solar and we have enough of a clue to use nukes instead.

And use nukes to synthesise liquid and gas for ICEs once that makes economic sense and piss off the stupid EVs which cant even do proper climate control for the occupants of the vehicle.

Heat and cook with electricity from nukes.

I do that already, but not from nukes.

Synthetic fuel produced using the energy from nukes.

Another bare faced lie. I already rubbed your stupid nose in using nukes in future.

Irrelevant to whether it makes any sense to be buy an EV now.

When that is possible. then will be the time to buy one if that happens.

See above, nukes and ICEs,

[invalid unparseable]

He essentially has given my arguments.

If we had listened to others 50 years ago we would not have any oil today. Besides we have the chemistry to convert coal to petroleum.

You want clean air, clean water and clean energy you go nuclear. Those opposed to burning gas, oil or coal also oppose nuclear. Isn't that odd.

Sure climate is changing. It was changing before man came and has been changing since. What we do may affect it slightly but is squat compared to Mother Nature.

Let science and the market decide - not the big government control freaks.

[Joey]

So it makes no sense at all to be charging lots of EVs at night.

Bullshit it will.

Its never too late to do that.

Nukes.

Synthesise that fuel with the energy from nukes if it has run out by then. It wont, you watch.

Use electricity from nukes and avoid all that CO2 added to the atmosphere. Much more viable than stupid EVs.

[rbowman]

Did you miss the primary cell part?

[Ed Pawlowski]

EV is not the best answer for most people right now but this is the time to start development and building infrastructure for the future. It took about 100 years to get where we are now and much needs to be done. Foolish to wait to last minute.

Bullshit, it is finite too. If we convert ICE cars to NG it will run out faster and leave power plant,m home heating, cooking with none.

Nukes will help but are not the answer to everything Meantime, you are just showing your ignorance with your snide remarks. Sad you have to resort to personal attacks to make your points.

That's a laugh.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Wow. Just wow.

>

[krw]

He has a point. There is no solar at night and less wind. Having everyone charging at the same time isn't a good idea either. If we replace ICEs with electrics we'll need a lot more generating capacity. Everyone doing it at the same time will make things even worse.

[Joey]

No one that matters is suggesting anything of the sort.

It is stupid to do it that way.

Bet it doesn?t.

I'd let them install and pay for them myself if they want that.

Only stupid prices for the long ranges and fast charging f****ng the life of the already stupidly expensive battery.

But will still be a lot worse than an ICE.

But will still be a stupid price for the sort of range any ICE can do. In spades with refuel time.

That remains to be seen.

Much more likely that countries will get a clue and use nukes to heat houses etc without any of the downsides that stupid EVs have.

Doesn?t mean that EVs will do anything like that given that all but batteries are well evolved now.

[Joey]

Wrong, the plastics will continue and come from coal when the oil is too expensive to be used for that.

Yes.

We have had those for more than half a century now, nukes.

[Joey]

Not a chance.

Nukes don?t.

[Joey]

They claimed that 40 years ago and it didn?t happen.

Yep, stop pissing natural gas against the wall heating houses and use nukes to do that with electricity.

That doesn?t have any of the massive downsides that EVs have.

Much better to change the way we heat houses.

It wont ever be gone, at worst we synthesise it using power from nukes.

Nope, nukes for ships work fine.

Unlikely that the USA will keep pissing all that money against the wall on the military at the current rate.

You are just as closed minded yourself.

Yep, buy building more nukes.

And the best way to do that is with nukes, not stupid EVs.

[Joey]

And wont ever be.

Makes a lot more sense to build nukes and heat houses that way.

Not with nukes it didn?t.

Nope, we know how to do viable nukes and have known that for a long time now.

Yes, with building new nukes.

Not when you can synthesise it with the energy from nukes.

If the electricity from nukes is used to for home heating and cooking and we no longer piss natural gas against the wall using it to generate electricity, it will last much longer than changing to stupid EVs

In fact help far more than stupid EVs can ever to without the massive downsides that EVs have.

No one ever said they were. Having fun thrashing that straw man ?

EVs arent either.

You havent demonstrated any ignorance.

Corse you never ever do anything like that yourself, eh ?

You always have been that, a laughing stock.

[Joey]

What a stunning line in rational argument you have there.