EV Ford vs. Chevy V8

[Slayer]

8 minutes ago, Tsumi said:

Yes, existing refineries have expanded, but how many have shut down/been repurposed at the same time? Overall capacity increased a small amount, but will be declining in the future since no oil company plans to build new oil refineries in the US.

And yes, it is considerably shortsighted to use diesel fuel of transportation as the argument against producing batteries. Far more valid arguments would be the sustainability of the materials used in manufacturing batteries, especially the ones that have to be mined and isn't easily recycled.

 

Thank you for clarifying your statement.  Overall production of crude oil has increased significantly in the last 20 years.  Refining capacity has changed.  However it's not as drastic as is suggested by your statements. 

In the last 5 years, the number of operable refineries in the US has decreased approximately 10%.  However, the production of gasoline from these refineries has actually increased albeit nominally so, over the same time period.  Yet kerosene, diesel, heavy gas oil, and residential fuel oil have all decreased.  

All I can say, without the risk of getting the thread shutdown, is that the reason for the lack of refinery development is rooted in political games that have nothing to do with the best interest of the US at large.  Regulatory constraints have increased and the forecasted demand for fuel has decreased but II believe the motivation for that forecast to be questionable and rooted not necessarily in what the consumer demands, but more so what the overly obese Federal Government wants in their question for total control over the citizens.

 

 

 

[UWSkier]

Solar is even worse.  The cost of disposal of solar panels is considerably higher, and more environmentally-damaging, than the solar proponents would suggest.  It's unfortunate too.  Solar is something I really would love to see every home here in AZ using, but only if the costs make sense and the long-term environmental damage isn't worse than standard power generation.  Currently, neither of those are true. 

 

[BlindSquirrel]

58 minutes ago, Tsumi said:

And yes, it is considerably shortsighted to use diesel fuel of transportation as the argument against producing batteries. Far more valid arguments would be the sustainability of the materials used in manufacturing batteries, especially the ones that have to be mined and isn't easily recycled.

You're right, there are several things that don't make sense about our zero emission quest. 

[granddaddy55]

23 hours ago, Tsumi said:

Oil companies have not invested in expanding refinery capacity in the US for at least the last 20 years in anticipation of gas demand going down. What you think is happening is already happening.

Also, stop believing false science. Otherwise, no one can help out of your delusions.

That's incredibly shortsighted. How are you going to convert to EV transportation without building the ability to build it in the first place? Transportation of materials will always be required; that's the nature of a global economy.

they couldn't get permitted to build one if they wanted to, same for nuclear, local valero dumped a billion (or close)  into two new crackers in our area to an existing refinery, now tell me about that false science, exactly which part?🤔

[Sparky450]

22 hours ago, UWSkier said:

Solar is even worse.  The cost of disposal of solar panels is considerably higher, and more environmentally-damaging, than the solar proponents would suggest.  It's unfortunate too.  Solar is something I really would love to see every home here in AZ using, but only if the costs make sense and the long-term environmental damage isn't worse than standard power generation.  Currently, neither of those are true. 

 

And out here every new home built is required to have solar. 

[UWSkier]

38 minutes ago, Sparky450 said:

And out here every new home built is required to have solar. 

That's OK.  They don't get recycled in California.  They end up poisoning poor folks in third world countries.  The greenies don't care about that as long as they can appear virtuous in their peer group of similarly-minded folks.

[PrestigeLakeWide]

38 minutes ago, Sparky450 said:

And out here every new home built is required to have solar. 

Yep, finally got my new build in January. Pretty happy with the situation overall, bought the system outright and got the 26% tax credit already in addition to negative energy bills. I think both sides of the spectrum got their bias\issues but not complaining having the AC cranking with no cares.

 

[Stevo]

Love my Solar and we crank that AC (gonna be 100+ this weekend) , if our EV ever shows up Rivian Suv, I’ll be happy to dump our current SUV. No towing with the EV but nice to know we could for a short time if needed.

no love lost with PG&E out here , they’ve sat on their thumbs for decades raking cash and it’s starting to catch up with them. Unfortunately any money they spend on grid infrastructure upgrades will be paid for by those who cannot afford to buy their solar out right. 
 

Edited July 15, 2022 by Stevo

[UWSkier]

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not anti-green-tech.  I think an EV is the perfect vehicle for 95% of our driving, and if AZ offered the same kind of tax credits for solar, I'd probably have it too.  The tech is great.  I just have a problem with the type of folks who get all high and mighty about how they're saving the planet with this stuff. 

 

[Stevo]

Mine was motivated by the credit, and not sending PG&E $400+ per month in the summer. ROI on our purchase was 8yrs, and if we sell before, I figured the appreciation in real estate financed it for me

[Tsumi]

On 7/14/2022 at 11:45 AM, BlindSquirrel said:

You're right, there are several things that don't make sense about our zero emission quest. 

While true, it's also a chicken and egg problem. How do you get investment for research into better materials and processes for green tech if you don't create the demand for it? The problems with lithium batteries have spurred research into more environmentally friendly batteries like flow batteries. I also recently read about a solar panel using environmentally friendly materials achieving similar performance as current panels in a lab (working on scaleup now). That wouldn't happen if the demand for batteries and solar panels didn't exist.

5 hours ago, granddaddy55 said:

they couldn't get permitted to build one if they wanted to, same for nuclear, local valero dumped a billion (or close)  into two new crackers in our area to an existing refinery, now tell me about that false science, exactly which part?🤔

That oil is being made by the earth every day. While technically true, the rate of production is far slower than the rate of consumption. If the rate of production matched consumption, carbon dioxide levels wouldn't be rising like they are.

In addition, you don't need mega charging centers in urban areas. Unlike gas stations, you can put charging stations in just about any parking lot. You only need large charging stations in rural areas where land will be cheap anyways.

[granddaddy55]

On 7/15/2022 at 3:12 PM, Tsumi said:

While true, it's also a chicken and egg problem. How do you get investment for research into better materials and processes for green tech if you don't create the demand for it? The problems with lithium batteries have spurred research into more environmentally friendly batteries like flow batteries. I also recently read about a solar panel using environmentally friendly materials achieving similar performance as current panels in a lab (working on scaleup now). That wouldn't happen if the demand for batteries and solar panels didn't exist.

That oil is being made by the earth every day. While technically true, the rate of production is far slower than the rate of consumption. If the rate of production matched consumption, carbon dioxide levels wouldn't be rising like they are.

In addition, you don't need mega charging centers in urban areas. Unlike gas stations, you can put charging stations in just about any parking lot. You only need large charging stations in rural areas where land will be cheap anyways.

co2 is an out right lie, my father was the original climate scientist in the 50’s as a meteorologist at south pole station to study what influences the weather/atmosphere the most,  they used ice cores to prove its all sun spot driven 

[Tsumi]

1 hour ago, granddaddy55 said:

co2 is an out right lie, my father was the original climate scientist in the 50’s as a meteorologist at south pole station to study what influences the weather/atmosphere the most,  they used ice cores to prove its all sun spot driven 

I wish the ignore function was easier to use.

[ahopkins22LSV]

Don’t let this thread death spiral out of control. 

[Slayer]

On 7/15/2022 at 1:47 PM, Stevo said:

Love my Solar and we crank that AC (gonna be 100+ this weekend) , if our EV ever shows up Rivian Suv, I’ll be happy to dump our current SUV. No towing with the EV but nice to know we could for a short time if needed.

no love lost with PG&E out here , they’ve sat on their thumbs for decades raking cash and it’s starting to catch up with them. Unfortunately any money they spend on grid infrastructure upgrades will be paid for by those who cannot afford to buy their solar out right. 
 

That's an awesome car.  Congrats!

[Nitrousbird]

Another article showing how poor the Lightning's range really is:

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/ford-f150-lightning-electric-truck-towing-test/

[oldjeep]

16 minutes ago, Nitrousbird said:

Another article showing how poor the Lightning's range really is:

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/ford-f150-lightning-electric-truck-towing-test/

[teamerickson]

It probably needs a different prop!

 

"If you're towing something smaller and sleeker, such as a boat, an open car hauler, or a utility trailer, you'll likely be able to push farther than we did on a single charge."

Edited August 2, 2022 by teamerickson