GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

3 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Germany will not get anywhere near 50% of rolling stock into EV, rising input costs will put the brakes on that. I am already enjoying a good laugh at your expense. The EV revolution will be terminated before you, Jay, even get on board and join the movement.

Oh, changing the goal post because you know that Germany will reach 50% new EV very soon.

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

3 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Oh, changing the goal post because you know that Germany will reach 50% new EV very soon.

If it does, it will be short-lived, cost crunches will soon follow, and as a percent of rolling stock, about 2-3% will be a max, nothing but a blip. You won't even buy your first EV before it is all over.

And California is already ramping up oil imports at the expense of rain forests, turning their backs on environmentalist concerns. Some things never change.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

4 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

If it does, it will be short-lived, cost crunches will soon follow, and as a percent of rolling stock, about 2-3% will be a max, nothing but a blip. You won't even buy your first EV before it is all over.

And California is already ramping up oil imports at the expense of rain forests, turning their backs on environmentalist concerns. Some things never change.

Germany will reach 2-3% EV rolling stock a few months after they reach 50% new EV. So that will still be not be far in the future. Meanwhile EV and battery production are about to get turned up to 11! 

What you don't comprehend, because you aren't an economist, is that battery and EV manufacturing costs are still decreasing faster than input costs are rising. Or that higher input costs will lead to more inputs being mined. Worst case is that battery costs hold steady for a couple years. 

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

22 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Germany will reach 2-3% EV rolling stock a few months after they reach 50% new EV. So that will still be not be far in the future. Meanwhile EV and battery production are about to get turned up to 11! 

What you don't comprehend, because you aren't an economist, is that battery and EV manufacturing costs are still decreasing faster than input costs are rising. Or that higher input costs will lead to more inputs being mined. Worst case is that battery costs hold steady for a couple years. 

Nope, there are restricted outputs for basic EV needs, costs will become a barrier to expansion very soon in the product cycle. You won't even get a chance to buy your first EV before it is all over. "Not far in the future" is Never Never Land. Oil has just punched above $70...that is reality. If you were an economist, you would know the difference. And you would know how to evaluate a statistical model.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Nope, there are restricted outputs for basic EV needs, costs will become a barrier to expansion very soon in the product cycle. You won't even get a chance to buy your first EV before it is all over. "Not far in the future" is Never Never Land. Oil has just punched above $70...that is reality. If you were an economist, you would know the difference. And you would know how to evaluate a statistical model.

Higher oil prices also offset any increases in EV costs. But that kind of relative cost comparison seems far beyond you.

But do tell, what are these imaginary "restricted outputs for basic EV needs"?

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

29 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Higher oil prices also offset any increases in EV costs. But that kind of relative cost comparison seems far beyond you.

But do tell, what are these imaginary "restricted outputs for basic EV needs"?

No, the supply constraints for EVs are binding and will become exponential cost increases if anyone is actually serious about mass scale EV production.

You know the constraints but are in denial...cobalt is needed for a worthwhile EV.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 minute ago, Ecocharger said:

No, the supply constraints for EVs are binding and will become exponential cost increases if anyone is actually serious about mass scale EV production.

You still haven't named an actual constraint. Just saying there are constraints without being able to say what they are just shows your ignorance.

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

37 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

No, the supply constraints for EVs are binding and will become exponential cost increases if anyone is actually serious about mass scale EV production.

You know the constraints but are in denial...cobalt is needed for a worthwhile EV.

Rubbish, the standard Tesla and Toyota EVs don't use cobalt and people are lined up to to buy them. Cobalt is being extremely minimized in other batteries. Oh and there is plenty of cobalt in manganese nodules that cover the entire floor of the world ocean, just vacuum them up. https://expronews.com/deepseaminerals/trillions-of-rock-batteries/

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

19 hours ago, turbguy said:

Wait...

Didn't YOU just quote a Consumer Reports report??

Like so?

You think you can have it both ways??

I guess you can...

Tesla ranks almost dead-last on Consumer Reports reliability list

 

ECO RAG...https://thedriven.io/2021/11/15/tesla-dominate-top-10-most-satisfying-cars-in-consumer-reports/

JD Power says Lexus is most dependable auto brand, ranks Tesla 30th out of 33

Tesla, which was profiled for the first time in this year's vehicle dependability study, came in 30th out of 33 automakers. It landed one place behind Chrysler and one ahead of Jaguar.

Tesla's ranking in the 32-year-old annual study this year is considered unofficial, said Dave Sargent, J.D. Power's vice president of automotive quality. That's because Elon Musk's electric vehicle venture doesn't grant J.D. Power permission to survey its owners in 15 states that require this.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/18/tesla-ranks-30th-in-unofficial-debut-on-jd-power-dependability-study.html

Edited December 7, 2021 by Eyes Wide Open

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

What is the hottest commodity in the United States of America? Would you believe COAL? Yup.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/US-Coal-Stockpiles-In-September-Lowest-Since-At-Least-2001.html

"High natural gas prices have been driving increased use of coal for power generation at utilities in recent months, while the supply response has been muted due to closures of coal mines in recent years.  

So in September, total U.S. coal stockpiles saw a month-over-month decrease of 4.8 percent, reaching 80 million tons, the EIA said.

“This is now the lowest level of total monthly U.S. coal stockpiles recorded since these data were collected using the power plant operations report beginning in 2001,” the administration notes.

Coal stocks with the U.S. electric power sector were down by 37.7 percent in September compared to the same month last year, while consumption rose by 14.5 percent from September 2020 to September 2021, according to EIA data.

Rising demand for coal and muted supply response have depleted U.S. coal stocks to their lowest levels since the early 1970s. As utilities scrambled to secure supply ahead of the winter, coal prices in the United States were estimated to have hit last month the highest level since 2009.

Annual U.S. coal-fired electricity generation is set to rise this year for the first time since 2014, and the share of coal in America’s power generation mix is set to rise to 23 percent in 2021 from 20 percent in 2020 as electricity demand rebounds and the delivered natural gas price for electricity generators more than doubles, according to EIA estimates."

Edited December 7, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

17 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Rubbish, the standard Tesla and Toyota EVs don't use cobalt and people are lined up to to buy them. Cobalt is being extremely minimized in other batteries. Oh and there is plenty of cobalt in manganese nodules that cover the entire floor of the world ocean, just vacuum them up. https://expronews.com/deepseaminerals/trillions-of-rock-batteries/

Simple...just vacuum up the ocean floor....ha ha ha!

Any high performance EV requires cobalt to keep the battery from exploding in flames. I know a battery engineer who develops batteries for a giant company, that is his opinion. Which I rate more highly than yours, Jay, seeing as how you are reluctant to actually purchase an EV.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

15 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Simple...just vacuum up the ocean floor....ha ha ha!

Any high performance EV requires cobalt to keep the battery from exploding in flames. I know a battery engineer who develops batteries for a giant company, that is his opinion. Which I rate more highly than yours, Jay, seeing as how you are reluctant to actually purchase an EV.

I agree that high performance EVs require cobalt, I said that before. However the majority of the market doesn't drive high performance cars. An economist would know that.

Cobalt free LFP batteries are well known to be far less fire prone than cobalt batteries. That is called reality.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

3 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I agree that high performance EVs require cobalt, I said that before. However the majority of the market doesn't drive high performance cars. An economist would know that.

If that were true, that medium performance EVs do not require cobalt, you would be driving one yourself, Jay. Without fear of getting a hot seat for a ride.

A ride increasingly fueled by coal (see above).

Edited December 7, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Just now, Ecocharger said:

If that were true, that medium performance EVs do not require cobalt, you would be driving one yourself, Jay. Without fear of getting a hot seat for a ride.

Oh it is very true. Once again I will cite the US gov't test, but you will likely keep ignoring it:

"In general, of all of the lithium-ion cells that were tested, LiFePO4 (LFP) would be considered the safest cathode material because of the relatively low temperature rise and the resulting low likelihood for thermal runaway to propagate"

https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/TC-16-17.pdf

I suppose I have to explain to you that that "thermal runaway" means fire.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

31 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

I agree that high performance EVs require cobalt, I said that before. However the majority of the market doesn't drive high performance cars. An economist would know that.

Cobalt free LFP batteries are well known to be far less fire prone than cobalt batteries. That is called reality.

A question if i may. Would the Chevy Bolt be considered a High Performance EV? Which leads me to next peice of this puzzle...Just who mfgs a low performance EV?

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

17 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

A question if i may. Would the Chevy Bolt be considered a High Performance EV? Which leads me to next peice of this puzzle...Just who mfgs a low performance EV?

No the Bolt is not a high performance EV, I'd call it medium performance.

The standard Tesla Model 3 uses cobalt free LFP batteries so anything from that performance level down can be cobalt free. 

Low performance EVs are mainly in China. The closest in the US is probably the Nissan Leaf. 

 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Ecocharger + 1,374]

3 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Oh it is very true. Once again I will cite the US gov't test, but you will likely keep ignoring it:

"In general, of all of the lithium-ion cells that were tested, LiFePO4 (LFP) would be considered the safest cathode material because of the relatively low temperature rise and the resulting low likelihood for thermal runaway to propagate"

https://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/pdf/TC-16-17.pdf

I suppose I have to explain to you that that "thermal runaway" means fire.

Who would want one of those low performance vehicles? Not me, and not you. Probably no one.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

12 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Who would want one of those low performance vehicles? Not me, and not you. Probably no one.

You mean a car like the LFP Tesla Model 3 that is selling like crazy? 

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

85% of the developed worlds population and roughly 50% of the developing world lives in a city.  They drive a short distance daily.  Almost ANYTHING would be good enough for the majority if their ego/vanity were not in the way. 

Does electric ownership cost less if one ignores initial purchase price?  Yes.  = it will win eventually for those who do not care about their cars as an ego item or something to be heavily used. 

Of course it also means it will have at most 50% market share as people will own 2 cars and given the choice the 2nd car will be closer to a Van/Truck with range/load/cost requirements where batteries fail currently.  So, we are looking at a peak of 50% market baring a massive increase in energy density of the batteries.  My bet is still on lithium sulfur eventually or... something with 500Wh/kg or thereabouts.  Until then... 

Likewise anyone who can only afford 1 car will buy the cheapest and most versatile option and electric for vast majority of the world this is a non starter as an option.  In high dense urban countries?  Sure.  Everywhere else which is the vast majority of the world?  No.  Tanzania, an up and coming country with ~100Million population doesn't even have an electric grid to 80% of its population and we are going to play make believe they are going to buy EV's?  🤣  And WHERE would Tanzania get the power?  Coal? 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,129]

25 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

You mean a car like the LFP Tesla Model 3 that is selling like crazy? 

 

 

 

Because they are stupid and short sighted.  High current drain and small battery capacity do NOT mix well at all. Not even in the superior LFP chemistry even when you put active HVAC on said battery for cold/hot conditions and like sitting around waiting for the sucker to charge forever if you do not have at home charging.  Now maybe LFP batteries will become dirt cheap, making a midlife complete replacement OK financially, but for everyone who rents without charge stations/parking?  You are screwed.  Of course that pretty much only happens in giant dense cities so...

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

9 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Because they are stupid and short sighted.  High current drain and small battery capacity do NOT mix well at all. Not even in the superior LFP chemistry even when you put active HVAC on said battery for cold/hot conditions and like sitting around waiting for the sucker to charge forever if you do not have at home charging.  Now maybe LFP batteries will become dirt cheap, making a midlife complete replacement OK financially, but for everyone who rents without charge stations/parking?  You are screwed.  Of course that pretty much only happens in giant dense cities so...

What are you babbling about now? A full paragraph of word salad.

LFP batteries under these conditions last for a million miles and high speed charging does not degrade them. 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

 

Degradation of Commercial Lithium-Ion Cells: Test Results

According to a 2020 paper from the Journal of the Electrochemical Society (Degradation of Commercial Lithium-Ion Cells as a Function of Chemistry and Cycling Conditions), LFP batteries have a longer lifespan than NMCs. This data contradicts the wide-spread notion that NMC cells are more durable and have a longer life span.
…

According to the paper, “The LFP cells exhibit substantially longer cycle life spans under the examined conditions.” The tests were performed at the Sandia National Laboratories as “part of a broader effort to determine and characterize the safety and reliability of commercial Li-ion cells.” The study examined the influence of temperature, depth of discharge (DOD), and discharge current on the long-term degradation of the commercial cells. All cells were charged and discharged at a 0.5 C rate or the amount of discharge that will deplete the full capacity of a battery in two hours. In the graphical representation shown (taken from the Journal’s 2020 technical paper), you can easily see that the discharge capacity retention for the LFP lithium battery (blue data points) far exceeded the NMC battery retention (indicated by the black data points) for each round of charge/discharge cycling. The graph indicates that the NMC degrades almost twice as quickly as the LFP, showing the superior overall performance of the LFP cells.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Table 1: Literature on the influence of charging rate on battery degradation

Reference	Type of battery	Number of batteries tested	Charging rate of tests	Conclusion
Gao et al. (2017)	18650-type NMC	21	0.5C, 0.8C, 1C, 1.2C, 1.5C	NMC battery degrades significantly on C-rates higher than 1. Battery degrades by 10% and 23% at 1.2C and 1.5C respectively at the end of 300 cycles as against degradation by 7% at 1C.
Somerville et al. (2016)	18650-type NMC	12	0.7C, 2C, 4C, 6C	Increased charging rates negatively affect the lifetime. Charging at rates higher than 4C alters the chemical composition resulting in significant damage and reduction of life.
Anseán et al. (2016)	LFP	3	1C, 4C	Capacity degradation is 15% at 1C and 17% at 4C after 4,000 cycles. Up to 1000 cycles, the degradation from both charging rates are similar.
Wang et al. (2011)	LFP	200	0.5C, 2C, 6C, 10C	Experimental results indicated that the capacity loss was strongly affected by time and temperature, but minimally by charging rates.

https://findingspress.org/article/21459-impact-of-charging-rates-on-electric-vehicle-battery-life

 

Initial supercharging results suggest that the new lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery powered Tesla Model 3 can supercharge even faster than the version with the nickel battery. the original nickel-based battery Tesla Model 3 took ~62 minutes to go from 40% to 99% state of charge (SOC), whilst the LFP variant took just ~42 minutes to get from 41% to 99%. Although these SOCs at best represent approximately the “second half” of a typical charging session, the LFP nevertheless would seem to demonstrate a time saving of around 32% or approximately a third. https://cleantechnica.com/2020/11/01/tesla-model-3-with-new-lfp-battery-now-supercharges-even-faster/

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

Ford is preparing to follow up the 2022 F-150 Lightning with another full-size electric pickup truck designed from the start for "incredibly high volume," Ford CEO Jim Farley said in an interview with Automotive News (subscription required).

The new full-size truck, which likely won't arrive for a few years, will have a new platform, and will be built at one of the massive new factories Ford recently announced, Farley said.

 

Ford in September announced two massive complexes in Kentucky and Tennessee, with the Tennessee facility slated to build a next-generation truck on a dedicated EV platform. That differs from the already-revealed F-150 Lightning, which is based on the existing gasoline F-150.

Farley also said Lightning demand is about two to three times higher than what Ford anticipated.

Ford now has "160,000 units of demand" for the Lightning, Farley said. The automaker originally planned for manufacturing capacity "far north" of 20,000 units per year, but nowhere near that amount, he said. Ford already earlier this year doubled Lightning production to 80,000 units per year.

That was likely a response to initial customer interest. Reservations for the Lightning are nearing 200,000, and Ford is working to convert those reservations to actual orders, Farley said.

 

2022 Ford F-150 Lightning Pro

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1134374_ford-plans-a-full-size-electric-truck-with-incredibly-high-volume

[QuarterCenturyVet + 312]

22 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Ford is preparing to follow up the 2022 F-150 Lightning with another full-size electric pickup truck designed from the start for "incredibly high volume," Ford CEO Jim Farley said in an interview with Automotive News (subscription required).

The new full-size truck, which likely won't arrive for a few years, will have a new platform, and will be built at one of the massive new factories Ford recently announced, Farley said.

 

Ford in September announced two massive complexes in Kentucky and Tennessee, with the Tennessee facility slated to build a next-generation truck on a dedicated EV platform. That differs from the already-revealed F-150 Lightning, which is based on the existing gasoline F-150.

Farley also said Lightning demand is about two to three times higher than what Ford anticipated.

Ford now has "160,000 units of demand" for the Lightning, Farley said. The automaker originally planned for manufacturing capacity "far north" of 20,000 units per year, but nowhere near that amount, he said. Ford already earlier this year doubled Lightning production to 80,000 units per year.

That was likely a response to initial customer interest. Reservations for the Lightning are nearing 200,000, and Ford is working to convert those reservations to actual orders, Farley said.

 

2022 Ford F-150 Lightning Pro

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1134374_ford-plans-a-full-size-electric-truck-with-incredibly-high-volume

Lmao. The range on that must be about 50mi. Foolish to tow a bobcat around with a half ton anyway.