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

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

On 7/20/2020 at 12:21 PM, dgowin said:

Its easier to have your fuel provider add DME to your Natural Gas. DME has a cetane rating of 110. Its the perfect fuel for the diesel engine. It will also make the EPA happy. The EPA and DOE intentially have no regulations on DME. A 30% DME to 70% NG will work fine.

This is what I had in mind, but I had no idea it existed. Awesome. 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

10 hours ago, Kandace Pierce said:

I love the comments about how truckers won't want to sit around and charge electric semis, as if the Tesla Semi doesn't *drive itself* and those guys will still have jobs in 30 years.   The semis might haul smaller loads, but they'll make up for that with never needing sleep or lunch breaks, and a fleet of charged semis will be sitting at the ready with an automated system that swaps the load from one to the other  or with very little human intervention.  

If you don't believe me lets talk about it.  I'll lend you a dime for a payphone.  I think there is one outside of Blockbuster.  Or maybe we can meet at the soda counter at the five and dime for a malt.  I'll print this article on the electric John Deere because I'm betting a lot of people in this thread still have rotary dial phones.  

*eye roll* 

https://www.futurefarming.com/Machinery/Articles/2020/3/John-Deere-We-believe-in-electric-tractors-100-552869E/

This is either the most pretentious or the most satirical post I’ve ever read. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,192]

4 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

This is either the most pretentious or the most satirical post I’ve ever read. 

Actually, its not.  What he misses is that this should be true of the Rail Roads currently.  The fact there is so much long haul truck traffic is beyond pathetic from an economics/engineering perspective.  Only reason this exists?  Because the Railroad union companies in the USA are so corrupt they will not FIRE assholes who do not get to destination on time and REFUSE to change regulations to allow non union traffic on their monopoly.  So, a perfectly amazing network of railroads in the USA is disgustingly under utilized as it is 5X-->10X faster to ship via truck than to put said trailer on a railroad car.  It SHOULD be faster to put it on a railroad and cost less, it doesn't. 

PS: Yes, the railroads could easily be 100% roboticized.  True, still need human maintenance crews for downed trees etc, but... that is not hard to accomplish. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

https://willrobotstakemyjob.com/53-3032-heavy-and-tractor-trailer-truck-drivers

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

2 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Actually, its not.  What he misses is that this should be true of the Rail Roads currently.  The fact there is so much long haul truck traffic is beyond pathetic from an economics/engineering perspective.  Only reason this exists?  Because the Railroad union companies in the USA are so corrupt they will not FIRE assholes who do not get to destination on time and REFUSE to change regulations to allow non union traffic on their monopoly.  So, a perfectly amazing network of railroads in the USA is disgustingly under utilized as it is 5X-->10X faster to ship via truck than to put said trailer on a railroad car.  It SHOULD be faster to put it on a railroad and cost less, it doesn't. 

PS: Yes, the railroads could easily be 100% roboticized.  True, still need human maintenance crews for downed trees etc, but... that is not hard to accomplish. 

There are also semi-autonomous systems in development.  One human driver controls a "train" of vehicles behind them that mostly drive themselves.

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

CNH industrial came out with an autonomous tractor a while back. Shouldn’t be hard for people to figure out why they haven’t taken off. 

@Kandace Pierce doesn’t seem to understand opportunity cost or effective solutions either. Why would we bother with all this nonsense about transferring loads and recharging trucks when we can simply produce synthetic fuels from renewables? Honestly that’s a ridiculous idea. 

As I demonstrated, 4000 lbs of batteries lasts 2 hours at 300 hp. You’re not getting anywhere with this. 

Edited July 22, 2020 by KeyboardWarrior

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 7/20/2020 at 9:16 AM, Rob Kramer said:

Along the lines of different power sources for machines.... trains around here (Ontario) are diesel generators with electric motors (I'm pretty sure) and I saw a bill board saying that each box is 2L/100km (pretty amazing considering a volt or Prius is around 4L/100) . But my question is why not use natgas theres unlimited fuel storage engine size and weight capacity.  Also with any ammount of fuel tanks can have refuel at any point. Or worth lng trailer drop at rural refuel location. 

The technology is there already. The railroads are able to do it. The only think stopping it is the immediate cost benefit is not. Diesel prices are so low the savings is long term while the initial investment for conversions and fueling arrangements are probably too high. 

Buffet just made a huge investment in natural gas companies so I am hoping he plans to use natural gas in some of his locomotives. He has gone long on natural gas. 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/warren-buffett-sees-natural-gas-100015857.html

Edited July 22, 2020 by ronwagn
reference

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

2 hours ago, ronwagn said:

The technology is there already. The railroads are able to do it. The only think stopping it is the immediate cost benefit is not. Diesel prices are so low the savings is long term while the initial investment for conversions and fueling arrangements are probably too high. 

Buffet just made a huge investment in natural gas companies so I am hoping he plans to use natural gas in some of his locomotives. He has gone long on natural gas. 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/warren-buffett-sees-natural-gas-100015857.html

When you consider that Berkshire Hathaway is still sitting on $127 Billion it doesn't look so large. I agree though, he has confidence in Dominion's infrastructure to deliver profits. 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

Funny that the U-Boat was the first vehicle to make use of electrical transmission. The first land vehicle was the Tiger II. Oh those Germans... I'm very proud of 1/4 of my ancestry (minus the regime that made use of the Tiger, of course). 

I also feel less pride seeing what they are now. 

[EDIT 2] Shit this is wrong. The first part at least. I need to find out if the Tiger II was the first land vehicle. 

Edited July 22, 2020 by KeyboardWarrior

[ronwagn + 6,290]

2 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

When you consider that Berkshire Hathaway is still sitting on $127 Billion it doesn't look so large. I agree though, he has confidence in Dominion's infrastructure to deliver profits. 

Where is he hiding it? 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

8 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Where is he hiding it? 

A grain silo, probably. 

[Rob Kramer + 696]

6 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Where is he hiding it? 

Pretty sure hes literally sitting on it. Screwge mc duck style lol

[Richard D + 86]

When I was last in America,I saw a sign on the back of a truck; WITHOUT TRUCKERS THERE WOULD BE NO AMERICA. What I would reply is that some of the worst aspects of America would be reduced. Factory food farming in the Central Valley of California would be less intense without nation-wide rapid distribution. Drawdown and pollution of the aquifer would be reduced. Drawdown causes collapse of the strata and ever-increasing pumping costs and must,in a small way,lead to a rise in sea level. Give farmers elsewhere a chance and reduce reliance on migrant labour living in wretched conditions.

With regard to gas engines I would like to mention the Humphrey gas engine which pumped water at a reservoir in the town where I was born-Enfield(UK). This was remarkably efficient (c 20%) for its day. It used the water itself as a piston. With little chance of fouling,I suggest that any sort of dirty bio-gas could be used in it.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

7 minutes ago, Richard D said:

When I was last in America,I saw a sign on the back of a truck; WITHOUT TRUCKERS THERE WOULD BE NO AMERICA. What I would reply is that some of the worst aspects of America would be reduced. Factory food farming in the Central Valley of California would be less intense without nation-wide rapid distribution. Drawdown and pollution of the aquifer would be reduced. Drawdown causes collapse of the strata and ever-increasing pumping costs and must,in a small way,lead to a rise in sea level. Give farmers elsewhere a chance and reduce reliance on migrant labour living in wretched conditions.

With regard to gas engines I would like to mention the Humphrey gas engine which pumped water at a reservoir in the town where I was born-Enfield(UK). This was remarkably efficient (c 20%) for its day. It used the water itself as a piston. With little chance of fouling,I suggest that any sort of dirty bio-gas could be used in it.

Don't know why you went with all bold. 

Interesting fact about trucks. If you look at employment statistics, for every state in the union the number one profession by numbers is trucking. Not necessarily semi truck trailers but all forms, down to that UPS driver making deliveries. Making things in quantity is the most efficient method known, not piecemeal. Farms are simply unsustainable below a certain threshold, crop dependent. California has/had the best farmland in the world, coupled with the best weather. There's a good reason they feed the rest of the country the things the country wants to eat. Crops that could only grow in the north for a single season are grown year round in California. The attacks on farms in kalifornistan aren't based on science, they're based on the two things the elites want more of. Water and land. 

First the farmers are trapped in low density zoning where they can't sell the land for development, then their water supplies are cut off, from the very canals they themselves built because of "snail darters" and other imaginary critters. The goal of course is bankruptcy, so millions of acres can be picked up on the cheap, then developers step in, the land is "magically" rezoned (snail darters, what snail darters?) and new millionaires and billionaires are created, who will naturally continue to lecture you on your evil ways. 😈

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

Don't know why you went with all bold. 

Interesting fact about trucks. If you look at employment statistics, for every state in the union the number one profession by numbers is trucking. Not necessarily semi truck trailers but all forms, down to that UPS driver making deliveries. Making things in quantity is the most efficient method known, not piecemeal. Farms are simply unsustainable below a certain threshold, crop dependent. California has/had the best farmland in the world, coupled with the best weather. There's a good reason they feed the rest of the country the things the country wants to eat. Crops that could only grow in the north for a single season are grown year round in California. The attacks on farms in kalifornistan aren't based on science, they're based on the two things the elites want more of. Water and land. 

First the farmers are trapped in low density zoning where they can't sell the land for development, then their water supplies are cut off, from the very canals they themselves built because of "snail darters" and other imaginary critters. The goal of course is bankruptcy, so millions of acres can be picked up on the cheap, then developers step in, the land is "magically" rezoned (snail darters, what snail darters?) and new millionaires and billionaires are created, who will naturally continue to lecture you on your evil ways. 😈

As someone who grew up in the Central Valley I  can tell you have never been there. The low density zoning is to protect farmland from development and no it isn't suddenly rezoned. The farmers know whether their property has potential development value and charge accordingly. The farmers may have paid for the canals but they didn't pay for the river they get their water from. The water belongs to all of us, they can't just go steal it. Though they sure think they can. 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

On 7/22/2020 at 3:52 PM, KeyboardWarrior said:

Funny that the U-Boat was the first vehicle to make use of electrical transmission. The first land vehicle was the Tiger II. Oh those Germans... I'm very proud of 1/4 of my ancestry (minus the regime that made use of the Tiger, of course). 

I also feel less pride seeing what they are now. 

[EDIT 2] Shit this is wrong. The first part at least. I need to find out if the Tiger II was the first land vehicle. 

There were one-off prototype electric cars before 1850.

There were companies making money selling electric cars with lead-acid batteries in 1895.

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

 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

22 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

There were one-off prototype electric cars before 1850.

There were companies making money selling electric cars with lead-acid batteries in 1895.

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

 

We’re talking about diesel electric transmission. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,192]

7 hours ago, Richard D said:

When I was..... Drawdown and pollution of the aquifer would be reduced. Drawdown causes collapse of the strata a

They get ALL of their water from the Sierra mountains and a small portion from Colorado River. 

5 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

The farmers may have paid for the canals but they didn't pay for the river they get their water from. The water belongs to all of us, they can't just go steal it. Though they sure think they can. 

Partially False/True.  Farmers OWN water rights of guaranteed flow, just as cities do.  No one is stealing anything.  Based on 100+ year old agreements.  Cities burgeoning population is THEIR problem, not the farmers problem.  The farmers were there first. 

The biggest issue is that vast majority of the water you are whining about for the cities of California DOES NOT come from the Sierra Mountains where vast majority of water is used for irrigated farming.  Comes from the COASTAL mountains with a helping hand in LA's case from the Colorado river and Eastern Sierra. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

7 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

As someone who grew up in the Central Valley I  can tell you have never been there. The low density zoning is to protect farmland from development and no it isn't suddenly rezoned. The farmers know whether their property has potential development value and charge accordingly. The farmers may have paid for the canals but they didn't pay for the river they get their water from. The water belongs to all of us, they can't just go steal it. Though they sure think they can. 

Nonsense. I'm pretty sure you're not there now, and I'm guessing you grew up a long time ago. I've personally witnessed what I described, which happened to a good friend who owned the farm in the first place and everything I described happened. As for "owning" the water, look it up. Farmers have first rights and the formulas are so many acre feet of water per acre of farmland. But the developers who sold you your over priced real estate want that water so you and all your neighbors can fill your swimming pools and water your lawns while kvetching about the farmers putting food on your table. Los Angeles among other cities has purchased numerous farms just for the water rights, which they send to pools and toilets while they let productive farmland wither and die and grow fuel for the next fire. Ecological disaster, but yeah, you're pretending on these pages to be an enlightened ecologist to lecture all us rotten oil and gas folks. Carry on

[Richard D + 86]

Wind turbines are unreliable suppliers of electricity put have a long history of being useful pumps. Los Angeles could use them to generate the pressure needed for the reverse osmosis of seawater. When the wind is not blowing,river water could supply the city. The Spanish city of Alicante gets its water by reverse osmosis from seawater. The slight taste of salt is OK. 

[NickW + 2,714]

1 hour ago, Richard D said:

Wind turbines are unreliable suppliers of electricity put have a long history of being useful pumps. Los Angeles could use them to generate the pressure needed for the reverse osmosis of seawater. When the wind is not blowing,river water could supply the city. The Spanish city of Alicante gets its water by reverse osmosis from seawater. The slight taste of salt is OK. 

Perth (western Australia) does exactly the same. Infact Desal plants can be used as a demand response to help balance intermittent flows from renewables. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

7 hours ago, Richard D said:

Wind turbines are unreliable suppliers of electricity put have a long history of being useful pumps. Los Angeles could use them to generate the pressure needed for the reverse osmosis of seawater. When the wind is not blowing,river water could supply the city. The Spanish city of Alicante gets its water by reverse osmosis from seawater. The slight taste of salt is OK. 

I like this. How much pressure is required? 

Now I want to go to Alicante. Is it nice there? I love Barcelona, best food I've ever had and the women are, shall we say, easy on the eyes.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

18 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

They get ALL of their water from the Sierra mountains and a small portion from Colorado River. 

Partially False/True.  Farmers OWN water rights of guaranteed flow, just as cities do.  No one is stealing anything.  Based on 100+ year old agreements.  Cities burgeoning population is THEIR problem, not the farmers problem.  The farmers were there first. 

The biggest issue is that vast majority of the water you are whining about for the cities of California DOES NOT come from the Sierra Mountains where vast majority of water is used for irrigated farming.  Comes from the COASTAL mountains with a helping hand in LA's case from the Colorado river and Eastern Sierra. 

Water rights are a lot more complicated than than you suggest.

Clearly you don't know CA. Extremely little of our water for the cities comes from coastal mts. It almost all comes from the Sierra Mts., Cascade Mts. ,Colorado River and ground water. SF water comes notoriously from Yosemite in the Sierra and LA water comes from eastern Sierra, and Shasta in the Cascades. San Luis reservoir in the coastal range is very large but it is a holding reservoir filled with water from Shasta on its way to LA. Cities are fed by the aqueducts:

 

[Mark Potochnik + 8]

On 7/17/2020 at 3:31 PM, KeyboardWarrior said:

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. 

 

On 7/17/2020 at 1:35 PM, 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. 

Ok... Rip out big engine. Rip out transaxle. Rip out exhaust. No 300 gallons of fuel. So much useless weight.

Take your 4oo mile break. Plug it in takes seconds to do that. 30 minutes later after ready to go. Diesel gone!

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,192]

3 hours ago, Mark Potochnik said:

Ok... Rip out big engine. Rip out transaxle. Rip out exhaust. No 300 gallons of fuel. So much useless weight.

Take your 4oo mile break. Plug it in takes seconds to do that. 30 minutes later after ready to go. Diesel gone!

Can you math bro?  Drive train is still required 100%, especially in a truck.  It does not disappear.  E motor/gear train will be at minimum 1000lbs if not 2000lbs along with cooling systems etc.  You do not get to get rid of those systems.

How much weight?  Detroit Diesel(old obsolete and heavy engine is ~3000lbs.) 300gallons fuel = 2000lbs. 

5000lbs -2000lbs ~3000lbs(1.5t)

Great, now have 1.5 tons...   Battery energy density at pack level is ~200Wh/kg(assuming increases in future as I like round numbers currently is much lower than this so I am giving you a GIANT bonus here).  Great, you can now add a battery ~300kWh brand spanking new.  Trucks running 60mph(100kmh) are going to consume 100kWh on the flat if not much more when adding everything up.  Great, for free, you have a 2-->3 hour battery when BRAND NEW and that range drops over time at about 2% per year.  Note, you still have to have reserve in case of temperature change(colder you lose range), hotter, you lose range, have to have reserve just for locomotion reasons getting to destination.   So, one needs to drive 12 hours a day and you have a 2--3 hour battery.  That is ok, Only need another 3--5 tons of battery instead of payload, assuming one breaks up that 12 hour day into two chunks.  Yea yea, I know, officially drivers are only allowed upwards of 10 hours averaging 8 a day... and we all know how those hours actually work out.

Lets assume TESLA 3 charge times..... 30 minutes gets you ~50%....  Full Charge?  Hour.  How long is a typical truck stop currently?  15 minutes or less.  Not bad, only 4X slower... Of course if you wanted a FAST truck stop, we are talking 10minutes or less ... 6X slower. 

And last I checked, no Flying J has a giant transformer farm right off their back corner. 

Great, your long haul truck is "only" hauling 5 tons less cargo, out of a  ~25 tons, so a tidy 20% reduction in cargo... and requires 6X longer to "fuel". 

Brilliant!

Short haul trucking?  Giant percentage of all trucking?  Yes.  Works.  Long haul trucking needs a battery energy density increase of at minimum 2X.