A Million Tesla Semi Trucks can replace 3 million barrels of oil per day?

[Bharath + 12]

I have seen a video where it says a class 8 diesel truck consumes 3 barrels of oil per day , so a Million Tesla Semi's can replace 3 million barrels easily? Can some one tell me what is average consumption of oil by each vehicle type(Taxi, Bus and regular Car) per year? 

Edited July 17, 2020 by Bharath

[Keith boyd + 178]

Electric semi never going to happen mate. Same reason there wont be electric planes. Weight.  Trucks are weight limit restricted, and if you are hauling around 4000 pounds of batteries in the truck that's 4 less pallats per load. Customers are not going to make up the difference. It's a crippling competitive disadvantage. Even if electric semi could be operated cheaper then a diesel, 20% smaller loads is a lot to overcome. And that doesnt even consider charging complications. How many semi charging stations would be needed to service an electric semi fleet? Truck stops dont have  the physical space for it. And truckers sure as shit don't want to be parked and charging when they could be driving. Ever. 

 

Natural gas semi's have been more fuel cost efficient for over a decade. I worked for bison transport when they had experimental nat gas day cabs. They never went mass fleet with them because of logistical and re fueling complications and limitations, and range limitations. Not cost. 

 

Time is money in the trucking industry. 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

1 hour ago, Keith boyd said:

Electric semi never going to happen mate. Same reason there wont be electric planes. Weight.  Trucks are weight limit restricted, and if you are hauling around 4000 pounds of batteries in the truck that's 4 less pallats per load. Customers are not going to make up the difference. It's a crippling competitive disadvantage. Even if electric semi could be operated cheaper then a diesel, 20% smaller loads is a lot to overcome. And that doesnt even consider charging complications. How many semi charging stations would be needed to service an electric semi fleet? Truck stops dont have  the physical space for it. And truckers sure as shit don't want to be parked and charging when they could be driving. Ever. 

 

Natural gas semi's have been more fuel cost efficient for over a decade. I worked for bison transport when they had experimental nat gas day cabs. They never went mass fleet with them because of logistical and re fueling complications and limitations, and range limitations. Not cost. 

 

Time is money in the trucking industry. 

Try calculating the power in kilowatts for a 450 hp peterbilt. There’s a much larger issue than simply weight here. 

Edit: I’m calculating that 4000 lbs of lithium ion batteries would equate to a couple hours of power at 300 hp steady. 

Compare that to a refuel every 2000 miles for a 300 gallon tank. 

Edited July 17, 2020 by KeyboardWarrior

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

4 hours ago, Bharath said:

I have seen a video where it says a class 8 diesel truck consumes 3 barrels of oil per day , so a Million Tesla Semi's can replace 3 million barrels easily? Can some one tell me what is average consumption of oil by each vehicle type(Taxi, Bus and regular Car) per year? 

Nah. They at least got the fuel figure correct btu for btu or joule to joule. But the power plant making the juice is running at the same efficiency as the engine, minus more for transmission loss. And we know that a solar farm won’t cut it. I love demonstrating the square area for panels required to keep a load of cattle going. It’s asinine. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

7 hours ago, Bharath said:

I have seen a video where it says a class 8 diesel truck consumes 3 barrels of oil per day , so a Million Tesla Semi's can replace 3 million barrels easily? Can some one tell me what is average consumption of oil by each vehicle type(Taxi, Bus and regular Car) per year? 

Diesel usage USA = 40Billion gallons/year  = ~1 Billion Barrels.  USA uses about 3 Billion barrels a year and about 1/3 is diesel usage. 

Now a large portion of this is heavy equipment, farming, construction, trains which 100% will not be converted other than in very tiny percentage in one off rare instances.  Long haul trucking likewise will not be converted as others have pointed out.  Local delivery on the other hand will be converted for the same reason people want electric cars; less maintenance and total GT is not a problem whereas long haul trucking is limited by GT. 

So, what total can be electrified economically instead of ideological reasons?  Probably 25%. 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,554]

7 hours ago, Bharath said:

I have seen a video where it says a class 8 diesel truck consumes 3 barrels of oil per day , so a Million Tesla Semi's can replace 3 million barrels easily? Can some one tell me what is average consumption of oil by each vehicle type(Taxi, Bus and regular Car) per year? 

Meaningless numbers in the grand scheme of things, bunker oil pollution pollutes more than 4000 times the pollution of all the autos of the world combined each year. 

Actually EV's are the fancy of the few and have such a miniscule effect on the environment it would be a exercise in math skills just to find a meaningful % of impact.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1229857/How-16-ships-create-pollution-cars-world.html

https://govbanknotes.wordpress.com/2017/09/21/the-16-biggest-ships-produce-more-pollution-than-all-the-cars-in-the-world/

https://www.thesun.ie/news/2336408/did-you-know-worlds-15-largest-ships-emit-more-pollutants-than-all-of-the-worlds-cars-combined/

https://www.thedrive.com/news/28469/carnival-cruise-ship-fleet-pollutes-almost-10-times-more-than-all-cars-in-europe-study

Have a look...

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-83.6/centery:-0.4/zoom:3

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

9 hours ago, Bharath said:

I have seen a video where it says a class 8 diesel truck consumes 3 barrels of oil per day , so a Million Tesla Semi's can replace 3 million barrels easily? Can some one tell me what is average consumption of oil by each vehicle type(Taxi, Bus and regular Car) per year? 

A city (urban) bus figure on 3 mpg, and they usually have a duty cycle of 14 hours, average speed of 12 mph.  For the tour buses, figure on 8 mpg and 500 miles per day, figure on 1500 miles a week for the fleet, but the fleet is not that large so it does not really have a draw on the total.  Equally, taxis consume about 4 gal/hour, but again not enough of them on the plant to make a significant difference.  What you are picking out has a cost factor for the operators but is not large enough for the overall use pattern to be concerned about.  If you really want to drop fuel consumption across the board then the better choice, aside from natural gas or hydrogen or flywheels or some other approach, is to install either a flywheel transmission or a hybrid drivetrain in the typical sedan and light truck  (pick-up types).  Your fuel use is mostly in acceleration and hill climbing, you would be surprised how little is consumed in running on the highway.  If society really wanted to cut down of transport fuels it would invest in road tunnels.  Climbing uphill is the huge fuel drain. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

This one is for You Ron

@ronwagn

[ronwagn + 6,290]

Large electric trucks are not going to be a big deal at all. They would only be good for same day local routes. That niche is already used by natural gas vehicles and some propane vehicles. Large cities have been using CNG compressed natural gas, for many years. The worldwide fleet of ICE vehicles could all be converted to CNG if need be. Modern CNG tanks are light and made of reinforced synthetic materials. They have less bulk and weight so can be more easily added and have longer range. Truckers are happy with diesel as long as prices stay low so it is unlikely that growth will be rapid unless countries mandate or support natural gas for cleaner air. It is the best choice but not acceptable for Green Extremists who do not consider realities except as an afterthought. There are far more natural gas vehicles in the world than there are electric ones. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas_vehicle

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

1 hour ago, ronwagn said:

The worldwide fleet of ICE vehicles could all be converted to CNG if need be

While I'm all for natural gas vehicles, I don't believe diesels can be replaced with gas. You can''t force LNG into the 16:1 diesel compression ratio without a massive knock, and that ratio is needed for the torque in heavy applications. If there were a way to boost its cetane rating, however, we'd have a solution on our hands. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

17 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

While I'm all for natural gas vehicles, I don't believe diesels can be replaced with gas. You can''t force LNG into the 16:1 diesel compression ratio without a massive knock, and that ratio is needed for the torque in heavy applications. If there were a way to boost its cetane rating, however, we'd have a solution on our hands. 

Diesel is going nowhere.  I still have a 70 year old grader I use and I am not alone.  My tractor is 55 years old.  Heavy equipment is one of the best investments one can ever make.  Anything over ~20 years old sells for the same cost you buy it for.  They are ALL diesel and the reason?  They never die.  Brakes might die, but everything else?  Nope. 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

10 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Diesel is going nowhere.  I still have a 70 year old grader I use and I am not alone.  My tractor is 55 years old.  Heavy equipment is one of the best investments one can ever make.  Anything over ~20 years old sells for the same cost you buy it for.  They are ALL diesel and the reason?  They never die.  Brakes might die, but everything else?  Nope. 

Couldn't agree with you more. I raked hay for my neighbor a week ago using his JD 4240. Our tractors are post 2010 so it's not often that I get to enjoy driving an old one. As I was working I thought to myself "why would anybody want to replace this?". Older ones are especially valuable since they're not outfitted with emissions control. The 40 series is now nearing 50 years old and the ones in use are still invincible. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

19 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Older ones are especially valuable since they're not outfitted with emissions control.

All true, but that is only part of the story.  The old machines are valuable because anybody can fix them.  Farmers tend to be resourceful, and have the skill set to fix their machinery.  Plus, lots of parts are available locally, either from after-market manufacturers or from cannibalized tractors.  The problem with the new stuff is that John Deere Corp. has savagely attacked their own customers.  The company has put these computer controls inside the machines, then buried the software code and refused to release the code to the buyers. So if your tractor conks out all you get is a "fault code" and then the entire machine has to be loaded onto a low-bed trailer and carefully hauled off to the Dealer, where it sits until one of their mechanics find the time to go repair it.  Mow if your machine has no spare machine, such as a big combine costing several hundred thousand dollars, then your harvesting  (which is done in a very narrow window) just stalls, and you risk losing some part of your crops to rotting in the field.  That infuriates the farmers.

Right now there are farmers (and their tech-savvy kids) developing hacking software that they can use to get inside the computer units inside those John Deere machines, so that they can do fixes pout in the field.  The Company move was a crass effort to force more service work to their dealers, thus taking income from farmers and handing that to the dealers.  It is just appalling that a name brand such as JD would stoop to such tactics, but they did.   I would have to assume that there has been a change of management internally, that seeks to be in the favor of Wall Street  (and the Street's emphasis on quarterly earnings) that would push JD to go to war with their own best customers.  Just unbelievable, and I can assure you that the Company has totally infuriated the farmers. 

Now, in my mind that leads to the development of an entirely new market.  The tractors that are built in the vast grain belts of Eastern Europe are likely not computer controlled.  There are very basic, sturdy tractors built in Russia, but Russia is out of favor these days for stupid political moves.  There is at least one manufacturer in Belarus, and as long as you can see past the near-communist government, those would be a good bet.  And I have to think that Ukraine and Poland would have their own tractor manufacturers.  Now, given the current exchange rates, those tractors could be sourced cheaply enough, and sold to American farmers who want to boycott John Deere.  It defeats the ideal of putting Americans back to work, but what else can you do when management is so utterly crass, so unctuous, so self-absorbed as to deny the right to go repair your own machines?  Unreal. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

23 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

All true, but that is only part of the story.  The old machines are valuable because anybody can fix them.  Farmers tend to be resourceful, and have the skill set to fix their machinery.  Plus, lots of parts are available locally, either from after-market manufacturers or from cannibalized tractors.  The problem with the new stuff is that John Deere Corp. has savagely attacked their own customers.  The company has put these computer controls inside the machines, then buried the software code and refused to release the code to the buyers. So if your tractor conks out all you get is a "fault code" and then the entire machine has to be loaded onto a low-bed trailer and carefully hauled off to the Dealer, where it sits until one of their mechanics find the time to go repair it.  Mow if your machine has no spare machine, such as a big combine costing several hundred thousand dollars, then your harvesting  (which is done in a very narrow window) just stalls, and you risk losing some part of your crops to rotting in the field.  That infuriates the farmers.

Right now there are farmers (and their tech-savvy kids) developing hacking software that they can use to get inside the computer units inside those John Deere machines, so that they can do fixes pout in the field.  The Company move was a crass effort to force more service work to their dealers, thus taking income from farmers and handing that to the dealers.  It is just appalling that a name brand such as JD would stoop to such tactics, but they did.   I would have to assume that there has been a change of management internally, that seeks to be in the favor of Wall Street  (and the Street's emphasis on quarterly earnings) that would push JD to go to war with their own best customers.  Just unbelievable, and I can assure you that the Company has totally infuriated the farmers. 

Now, in my mind that leads to the development of an entirely new market.  The tractors that are built in the vast grain belts of Eastern Europe are likely not computer controlled.  There are very basic, sturdy tractors built in Russia, but Russia is out of favor these days for stupid political moves.  There is at least one manufacturer in Belarus, and as long as you can see past the near-communist government, those would be a good bet.  And I have to think that Ukraine and Poland would have their own tractor manufacturers.  Now, given the current exchange rates, those tractors could be sourced cheaply enough, and sold to American farmers who want to boycott John Deere.  It defeats the ideal of putting Americans back to work, but what else can you do when management is so utterly crass, so unctuous, so self-absorbed as to deny the right to go repair your own machines?  Unreal. 

It's not just tractors. All modern vehicles are designed to be impossible to repair. Dealerships have morphed from making their money on sales, to making their money on service. Unfortunately you'll end up oh the situation as I did that even if you exclusively have your brand new vehicle serviced by the dealer, there will come a day when they simply can't figure out what's wrong and have no clue how to fix it. I literally gave away an Audi A8 that had about 45k miles on it but wouldn't run. The dealer was clueless as to what was wrong and everything getting replaced (out of warranty) did nothing to fix the problem. They offered to sell me anything in their lot at cost and I said I wouldn't take another Audi if it was free. The Germans are at war with their own customers also. It's too bad, because Audi used to be a great car. Mercedes, BMW and Porsche are no better. 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Ward Smith

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

14 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

All true, but that is only part of the story.  The old machines are valuable because anybody can fix them.  Farmers tend to be resourceful, and have the skill set to fix their machinery.  Plus, lots of parts are available locally, either from after-market manufacturers or from cannibalized tractors.  The problem with the new stuff is that John Deere Corp. has savagely attacked their own customers.  The company has put these computer controls inside the machines, then buried the software code and refused to release the code to the buyers. So if your tractor conks out all you get is a "fault code" and then the entire machine has to be loaded onto a low-bed trailer and carefully hauled off to the Dealer, where it sits until one of their mechanics find the time to go repair it.  Mow if your machine has no spare machine, such as a big combine costing several hundred thousand dollars, then your harvesting  (which is done in a very narrow window) just stalls, and you risk losing some part of your crops to rotting in the field.  That infuriates the farmers.

Right now there are farmers (and their tech-savvy kids) developing hacking software that they can use to get inside the computer units inside those John Deere machines, so that they can do fixes pout in the field.  The Company move was a crass effort to force more service work to their dealers, thus taking income from farmers and handing that to the dealers.  It is just appalling that a name brand such as JD would stoop to such tactics, but they did.   I would have to assume that there has been a change of management internally, that seeks to be in the favor of Wall Street  (and the Street's emphasis on quarterly earnings) that would push JD to go to war with their own best customers.  Just unbelievable, and I can assure you that the Company has totally infuriated the farmers. 

Now, in my mind that leads to the development of an entirely new market.  The tractors that are built in the vast grain belts of Eastern Europe are likely not computer controlled.  There are very basic, sturdy tractors built in Russia, but Russia is out of favor these days for stupid political moves.  There is at least one manufacturer in Belarus, and as long as you can see past the near-communist government, those would be a good bet.  And I have to think that Ukraine and Poland would have their own tractor manufacturers.  Now, given the current exchange rates, those tractors could be sourced cheaply enough, and sold to American farmers who want to boycott John Deere.  It defeats the ideal of putting Americans back to work, but what else can you do when management is so utterly crass, so unctuous, so self-absorbed as to deny the right to go repair your own machines?  Unreal. 

Absolutely right, @Jan van Eck.  And guess who led the way, in this case in 2018?  Why, California don't you know.

John Deere Just Swindled Farmers out of Their Right to Repair; The California Farm Bureau has given away the right of farmers to fix their equipment without going through a dealer.

And even today, this unbelievable saga continues.  Everything's backwards in this country these days.

Farmers Fight John Deere Over Who Gets to Fix an $800,000 Tractor

Where are all those that screamed about Tariffs fighting the Chinese over IP theft, currency manipulation and dumping?  Oh, that's right, they're Left.  So let's see, the Left screams that we shouldn't fight with China because it hurts farmers, and the left implements policies and enforces the very real lockout of farmers to do their own repairs in the field.  Hmm.  Pocahontas speaks with forked tongue!

[ronwagn + 6,290]

12 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

While I'm all for natural gas vehicles, I don't believe diesels can be replaced with gas. You can''t force LNG into the 16:1 diesel compression ratio without a massive knock, and that ratio is needed for the torque in heavy applications. If there were a way to boost its cetane rating, however, we'd have a solution on our hands. 

It is easy enough to have a switch to dual fuel diesel. I will try to get you some information on new engines and technology. 

https://freightliner.com/trucks/cascadia-natural-gas/specifications/

Edited July 18, 2020 by ronwagn
reference

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

42 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

I literally gave away an Audi A8 that had about 45k miles on it but wouldn't run.

That A-8 likely set you back six figures.   I would have sued them. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

13 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

While I'm all for natural gas vehicles, I don't believe diesels can be replaced with gas. You can''t force LNG into the 16:1 diesel compression ratio without a massive knock, and that ratio is needed for the torque in heavy applications. If there were a way to boost its cetane rating, however, we'd have a solution on our hands. 

https://freightliner.com/trucks/cascadia-natural-gas/specifications/

https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/how-do-natural-gas-class-8-trucks-work

https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/natural_gas.html

Edited July 18, 2020 by ronwagn
added reference

[ronwagn + 6,290]

It looks like China is doing fine with natural gas trucks. It is not rocket science. 

http://www.chinatrucks.com/statistics/2020/0622/article_9335.html

http://www.chinatrucks.com/statistics/2020/0622/article_9335.html

Edited July 18, 2020 by ronwagn
added reference

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

1 hour ago, ronwagn said:

https://freightliner.com/trucks/cascadia-natural-gas/specifications/

https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/how-do-natural-gas-class-8-trucks-work

https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/natural_gas.html

I don't see anything about a 16:1 compression ratio. I know these trucks exist, but they're not meant for heavy hauling. These are the light freightliners carrying vegetables. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

2 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

 And guess who led the way, in this case in 2018?  Why, California don't you know.

John Deere Just Swindled Farmers out of Their Right to Repair; The California Farm Bureau has given away the right of farmers to fix their equipment without going through a dealer.

And even today, this unbelievable saga continues.  Everything's backwards in this country these days.

If they ruled otherwise, TESLA would be the biggest loser.  You are not allowed to work on your car from TESLA... full 100% stop, no.  Welcome to the new slaving Left in the USA...

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

The links are citing the gas trucks as heavy duty but I'm not finding any trucks with rated HP of over 400. 400 is the bottom end for heavy hauling, with most being at least 450. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

1 hour ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

I don't see anything about a 16:1 compression ratio. I know these trucks exist, but they're not meant for heavy hauling. These are the light freightliners carrying vegetables. 

https://im-mining.com/2020/06/13/cat-continues-see-lng-interest-large-mining-trucks/ As I said, dual fuel is an option for much heavier trucks. These trucks are a lot heavier than 18 wheelers. 

https://www.cat.com/en_US/news/machine-press-releases/caterpillar-to-offer-dual-fuel-retrofit-kit-for-785c-mining-truck.html

Edited July 18, 2020 by ronwagn
added reference

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

The links are citing the gas trucks as heavy duty but I'm not finding any trucks with rated HP of over 400. 400 is the bottom end for heavy hauling, with most being at least 450. 

For the same displacement, a nat-gas engine will produce considerably less horsepower.  To increase the power output, the builder would have to go with a larger displacement engine.  The typical line truck today runs about 13 liters  (the most popular engine, until Daimler bought the company and scrapped the motor, was the Detroit Diesel Series 60, 12.7 liter, with various ratings up to 600 hp). 

If you went with say a 16-liter engine, it should get you 450 hp.  But then you likely could not run an automatic transmission.  There are limits to what the input shafts can handle, so typically engines are down-rated to 400 hp to ensure long life of the transmission. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

12 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

For the same displacement, a nat-gas engine will produce considerably less horsepower.  To increase the power output, the builder would have to go with a larger displacement engine.  The typical line truck today runs about 13 liters  (the most popular engine, until Daimler bought the company and scrapped the motor, was the Detroit Diesel Series 60, 12.7 liter, with various ratings up to 600 hp). 

If you went with say a 16-liter engine, it should get you 450 hp.  But then you likely could not run an automatic transmission.  There are limits to what the input shafts can handle, so typically engines are down-rated to 400 hp to ensure long life of the transmission. 

Thanks for the information Jan. Caterpillar's dual fuel mining trucks are 1500 hp. 

They also manufacture an electric mining truck, but it runs with a power line like a trolley. Some of these trucks are made here in Decatur, Illinois. It is amazing to see the tires hauled to them. They must be about nine feet tall. 

Edited July 18, 2020 by ronwagn