There going to need a faster charging battery before an electric car is useable on a log trip ! right now its ok in town if you have a charger at home to keep it charged up. but on a long trip out of town that runs the battery down take's a motel or hotel nights stay to recharge and it isn't free and you have to check ahead of time to be sure they have a charging station.
Hotel? For 1/2 hour to an hour's charge? It's more like a lunch/dinner, nothing like an overnight stay. Just uniformed "urban myth" nonsense, sorry...
The time of recharge depends on the type of battery used AND the type of station provided. The 'myth' is still true if you have only the chance to use an ordinary wall socket with its 2 phase current of only 110V (230V). While the charging time is mostly no issue anymore, the availability of fast charging stations that also provide your type of plug is still a big issue here. When you find one that would match, it's already occupied by another vehicle! Since you mostly do not know how long it's always uncertain when you can arrive at your next destination. If schedule and longer distances play a role better still don't use e-vehicles. That's at least the recent situation here. And we here have the most expensive electricity all over the world! Once being an electricity exporter for decades Germany has to import now. What a mismanagement
Every EV comes with an app and planning is easy - before you start a journey. If one doesn't have that much brain - sorry, EVs are not for you... Public charging stations with home charging speeds? Really? All I can find is this: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/new...-infrastructure-growing-quicker-demand-e-cars Besides... https://www.plugshare.com/map/germany https://blog.wallbox.com/en/the-ultimate-guide-to-ev-incentives-in-germany/ https://www.electrive.com/2023/01/27/just-out-germanys-master-plan-charging-infrastructure-ii/ P.S. Interesting: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1181013/charging-time-electric-cars-germany/
Reminding @lobo11 to keep shis electric trikey in the house until it dries out from the HurryCane floodwaters https://dailycaller.com/2023/09/03/electric-vehicle-tesla-fire-hurricane-idalia-flooding/
Another "EV's are not for you" argument. IMHO current battery tech is still not mature enough to become a mainstream product at vehicles. The reason for it: They contain materials which are not available at the needed amount and / or are too expensive... You can see now they go for systems which already ditch Cobalt....but with Lithium it's actually the same. Also the fuel cell and therefore hydrogen suffers from the same issue. Platinum / Iridium are too rare for mainstream use. Solution: We need tech based on materials which are available in large amounts also which can be easily recycled, else it has no real future to become a real mainstream product. Dunno AlS battery or Sodium? Replace Iridium at fuel cells with hmm Gold /Palladium?!
This depends on the mindset of the players and here I have my doubts. Humanity should be first, making money a byproduct. I know that new tech always has a hard start and firstly starts being expensive. So there are always pioneers first before something can become mainstream. But we know that from corona and also from anything related what protects the environment / resources.... Capital is first and 'humanity' is used to guise. I hope there are are enough sane minds left investing in that instead of mobilizing all their energies into fights about resources which are rare only to make their temporary profits out of them. And also the 'science' and 'politics' behind are affected. Imagine there would be a new battery tech announced which is very promising. Using widely available materials....guess what those would do who have already invested a lot into a tech which suddenly becomes obsolete then (too expensive) because of that? At battery tech development I don't see the problem that much, there is still a sort of real competition, getting rid of cobalt is a good first step... But we have / had it extremely at corona (vaccines / conventional off label drugs) and to some extent at 'global warming'.... science and politics there are already mobbed-up. A good new tech will establish IF it is affordable, available to the mainstream AND if there is a reasonable need for it. It should not be established / enforced only because there is some money to make, and that by creating fears and manipulating science. I don't need to overdo 'global warming' only because to push people into a new tech. I don't need to diminish alternatives only to push people to a new experimental vaccine. Reason is enough. Clear facts, scientific discourse. There are enough valid arguments pro EV's and the concept of re- No need to play foul in the interests of capital. I am missing honesty and transparency. At battery tech you still might find 'real' science, because this is straightforward. But not at complex matters such as 'global warming' and 'corona'. Well, using drugs off label is actually also a straightforward thing...but we all know what happened when capital overcomes interests of humanity.
Sometimes finding a charging station is a problem even for The Secretary of Entergy No NOT her https://www.foxnews.com/media/irate...m-blocking-charging-station-spot-electric-car
If they can manufacture synthetic oil. Example Castrol R. Vegetable based. They should be able to make synthetic fuel. thereby avoiding fossil based fuel.?????
Here is a snippet of "how things really are"... And it makes me think that the widely held approximation of $1.9 trillion worldwide fossil fuel subsidies is actually a considerably larger number!!! Now, imagine what we could do with that kinda investment into renewables... https://euobserver.com/green-economy/157450?utm_source=euobs&utm_medium=email Documents presented by Dutch climate minister Rob Jetten this week revealed that the Netherlands provides significantly more tax incentives to companies engaged in oil, gas, and coal industries than previously believed. According to the government's assessment, these "fossil subsidies" amount to an annual sum ranging from €39.7bn to €46.4bn — a stark contrast to earlier figures. Just two weeks ago, three environmental organisations — Somo, Oil Change International, and Milieudefensie — calculated total subsidies at €37.5bn. A 2020 evaluation by the previous Dutch administration as a response to an earlier report by Somo had pegged fossil subsidies at a mere €4.5bn, but was widely criticised for its omission of tax benefits. The report presented this week could signal a newfound commitment by the Dutch government to address the issue of fossil subsidies. "Fossil subsidies have no place in a clean Netherlands, so they simply must end," Jetten said at a climate demonstration organised by climate group Extinction Rebellion on Saturday. But he also cautioned that it "cannot happen overnight." "We need to formulate a clear phased reduction plan in the coming period," he said. The debate has been going on for years, and the latest revelations have raised significant questions about the government's commitment to reduce fossil-support schemes. Critics have pointed out that Jetten has reneged on earlier promises to write a phase-out plan. "It's good that the government is now providing transparency, but I am deeply concerned that there is still no phase-out plan," Boris Schellekens, one of the authors of the Somo report, told Dutch news agency NOS. "The commitment was made to phase out by 2025, but we are far behind. In 2009, the government already stated that subsidies should be terminated," he said. Pushback also came from academia, by 300 economists and other university staff who recently signed a letter calling for a rapid end to fossil-fuel subsidies. Earlier this month, 10,000 members of the general public blockaded the A12 motorway. Climate group Extinction Rebellion, the protest organisers, has pledged to continue the blockade until the government stops subsidising fossil fuels. Dutch police detained 2,400 activists on the first day. Since then, hundreds more have been arrested, although most were set free soon after. Jetten, in response, has said that the government has already begun efforts to phase out fossil benefits. According to the budgetary notes, a total of €6.2bn in reductions has been initiated, including a power reimbursement for energy-intensive industries worth €5bn cancelled at the start of this year. Fossil subsidies? The term "fossil subsidies" encompasses a range of financial advantages for corporations, including tax breaks, price support, and direct government investments. This is consistent with the definition maintained by international organisations, such as the International Monetary Fund and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The government document shows that Dutch tax reductions and exemptions primarily benefit heavy fossil energy users, but not all fiscal advantages can be abolished easily, Jetten has said, as many are enshrined in and protected by international treaties. Exemptions for kerosene used by airlines (€2.2bn) and similar arrangements for heavy fuels used in maritime shipping (€429m) are based on European tax agreements. A €14bn subsidy for hydrocarbons such as naphtha, used in the production of plastics, is also subject to EU rules, making it difficult for the Netherlands to unilaterally revoke, as EU tax reforms require unanimous approval from all members. Further signalling the complexity of the undertaking, Jetten also indicated that an exemption for 'red diesel' used for inland shipping — based on a treaty signed in 1868 — is currently under review for cancellation. Elections Jetten has denied that the blockade of the motorway has in any way influenced his commitment to phase out fossil fuels. But the years of work by Somo and other environmental organisations, along with the recent "marathon blockade" of the motorway, have undeniably thrust fossil fuel subsidies into the centre of the Dutch election campaign, forcing climate sceptics and proponents of more ambitious climate policies to adopt a position. Pieter Omtzigt, a longtime member of the Dutch centre-right Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) who has recently created a new party, said that "it's useless to remove the subsidies" because companies would simply leave. Meanwhile, former EU Green Deal chief Frans Timmermans, deemed a frontrunner for the prime minister's post, has publicly endorsed the campaigners, saying that "European climate policy was only made possible thanks to protesters."
EV TRUCK History 1960 Not Tesla Cybertruk Not Ford 150 Lightning Djuro Djacovic Croatia WOW "U tvornici Đuro Đaković u Slavonskom Brodu se tokom šezdesetih godina prošlog veka serijski proizvodio ELEKTRIČNI AUTOMOBIL i to kiper . radna mašina velike snage i vrlo malog utroška energije. Potpuno tih, akumulatorskih baterija dovoljnih za deset sati neprekidnog rada i deset sati ponovnog punjenja. Razvijao je brzinu od 80 km na čas. Izrađen je na bazi agregata električne lokomotive - umanjena verzija! Hiljade ovih automobila proizvedeno je i prodato uglavnom na istočno tržište i na tržišta trećeg sveta zemalja u razvoju. Najviše za Indiju. Uočljivo je da je zapadno tržište činilo sve da spreči prodaju ovih kipera na zapadno tržište i to su pravdali uglavnom izgovorom da nisu dovoljno ispitani i da nisu "pouzdani"" ENG ONLINE TRANSLATION: "In the Đuro Đaković factory (Slavonski Brod, the then Yugoslavia, now Croatia) during the sixties of the last century, electric car was produced as standard/serially, and a tipper. a high-powered working machine and very little energy expenditure. Completely silent, battery packs sufficient for ten hours of continuous operation and ten hours of recharging. It was developing a speed of 50 miles per hour. It was made on the basis of an electric locomotive generator - a scaled-down version! Thousands of these cars have been produced and sold mainly to the eastern market and third world markets of developing countries. Mostly for India. It is noticeable that the Western market did everything to prevent the sale of these tippers to the Western market, and they justified this mainly with the excuse that they were not sufficiently tested and that they were not "reliable"...
https://news.nus.edu.sg/ca2dm-and-cbmm-develop-advanced-niobium-graphene-batteries/ - 30 years lifetime, 10 minutes to charge... if only... With applications in medical devices, electric vehicles, aerospace equipment, and more, the batteries are being tested in a new USD3.8 million (S$5 million) high-tech laboratory launched by NUS and CBMM Benefits of niobium-graphene batteries include: Long life cycle: Performance duration is 10 times longer (estimated to be around 30 years) than traditional lithium-ion batteries, making them more durable and reliable. Safety: Operate at a safe voltage window and safely discharge without overheating in case of accidental damage. Fast charging: Fully charged in less than 10 minutes, which increases convenience. Improved performance: Niobium enhances conductivity and stabilises the host structure, leading to improved battery rate performance and long cycling stability. Sustainability: Niobium is a relatively abundant and environmentally friendly material, making the batteries a more sustainable alternative to traditional lithium-ion batteries. https://graphene.nus.edu.sg/
it was said it was going to be good for the environment and clean air (due to not using gas emissions) but now it has other environmental impacts. Mainly mining cobalt and lithium. Getting those materials out of the earth has catastrophic consequences, and disposing of said materials is also environmentally costly. This is a good video about EV cars
Exhaust pipes. EVs don't have them. So no immediate pollution. Cleaner air. Fewer diseases, esp. respiratory, cancers etc. Not only to children and kids but to all of us!!! For sources of power, we need to stop subsidies to the fossil fuel industry ASAP and that money must go into renewables, R&D, EV infrastructure etc. We are creative, we shall overcome the technical difficulties! Even if we don't take such a strategic direction, the right road to the future right now - those fossil fuel resources are limited, so what's the point?!? Strategically we must change!!! A bit of thinking wouldn't hurt here...
One way of pushing the technological R&D is this: https://www.rimac-automobili.com/me...ac-nevera-takes-the-hypercar-market-by-storm/ Look at this pearl: "Four bespoke surface-mounted permanent magnet motors drive the Nevera’s four wheels individually. Together, they enable 1914hp and 2360Nm of torque, which is triple the output of a ‘conventional–engined’ supercar. The front and rear wheels are each connected to a pair of single-speed gearboxes. Capable of instantly summoning maximum torque from the first moment, the Nevera’s electric motors are 97 per cent efficient – compared with 40 per cent for the most effective internal combustion engines – and completely maintenance-free throughout their operating life." Or: "The Nevera is also equipped with cutting-edge braking technology. A complex electro-hyrdaulic brake booster with brake pedal feel simulator distributes the braking force between the friction brakes and electric powertrain, depending on the battery, powertrain and brake state. For instance – it dissipates kinetic energy through the friction brakes if the battery is close to its thermal limits, or activates more regenerative braking in case the friction brakes are hot. All those transitions should remain in the background, not noticeable to the driver. This enables the Nevera to make the highest use of regenerative braking of any other car on the market now. In addition to a maximum range-enhancing regenerative braking of 300 kW provided by the electric motors, substantial stopping power comes from 390 mm Brembo CCMR carbon-ceramic brake discs and six-piston callipers. Combined they provide consistent, fade-free and exceptionally powerful braking, even when the car is subjected to extreme forces on the track."