Jump to content

Tesla releases software update to prevent Car windows from jamming their customers' fingers

AlTech
36 minutes ago, An0maly_76 said:

I love how people arbitrarily pick and choose whether an obviously unretouched photo is real / relevant or not based on whether it fits their narrative.

"Obviously untouched" - there's literally a frame and caption around the picture with no indication of the actual location. What are you even talking about.

36 minutes ago, An0maly_76 said:

I was using the Bolt as an example because it was one that I considered as a replacement vehicle when I was in the market. The point I'm trying to make is universal, that EVs are simply not cost effective and, contrary to popular belief, do not offer any real benefit to the environment. I didn't even touch on the fact that that more pollution is involved in their manufacture than they will save in five lifetimes. The same goes for recycling them.

You raised up three points I bolded. All three of them are untrue that I've addressed before but I'll address it directly one more time

 

EVs are simply not cost effective - Literally take any similar priced EV and gasoline and do cost comparison. EVs save a lot of money of fuel and Maintenace. This is proven time after time again that I thought most people understood this. The only issue pending is that EVs are not cheap enough. But like ICE engines give it a couple of years/decades and batteries will be cheap as well. ICE had 100 years to mature. Dont judge the final state of EVs when they had less than 10 years to mature

 

Do not offer any real benefit to the environment - again wrong. I had attached a video that crunched the numbers that you willfully ignored because quote.

 

The operating life of these battery packs are rated for over a decade. And dead battery packs are extremely valuable and over 90% of the materials can be retrieved. Again, wtf are you talking about.

Quote

based on whether it fits their narrative.

This is again a proven fact because EVs are just plain much more efficient at converting energy into physical force than ICE could ever be (90% vs 40%). And this is assuming the electricity is 100% dirty, which it isn't - while gasoline has no chance of ever being less than 100% dirty.

36 minutes ago, An0maly_76 said:

And even though global warming is the most commonly used justification for EV's, literally no one has responded to a perfectly valid point I made previously regarding the sinkhole / eternally burning gas pit in Turkmenistan being more a contributor to global warming than the internal combustion engine vehicles that  studies show don't pollute nearly as much as manufacturing and the power plants.  that would be more essential and necessary if more or all vehicles were electric. The fact of the matter is that EV's are nothing more than a feel-good project to to try to disguise the act of robbing Peter to pay Paul.

You do not understand progress do you. Let me throw you an analogy.

 

Do you know how to enforce local surrounding cleanliness? It starts with you where you refrain from throwing out plastic bottles, chewing gum, tissue papers onto the street and eventually when everyone at an individual level enforces it, the streets will become cleaner and cleaner forcing big industries to also maintain the same. On the other hand, if you say fuck it - my plastic bottle or tissue paper won't make any difference and if everyone thinks the same - then there is no hope of progress.

 

Every bit of emission counts. According to this article 75% of pollution comes originate from Vehicles in the US. So yes, it will make a significant difference if we all start migrating to EVs. 

 

Honestly, people who detract progress in the name of 'everything is already shit' is not a good mental attitude to have. Even in life. EVs are a clear progress, and they are already better than ICE is basically all ways with so much more room to grow and develop while ICE is at its limit in what efficiency it can acheive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

I never said it was, but it has happened nevertheless.  As far back as 2019 this was being reported, maybe even earlier than that.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/10/11/some-californians-are-buying-gas-powered-generators-to-power-electric-vehicles-during-blackouts/

2019 isn't today is it? Its like taking some news from 1800s and saying we should not really adopt electricity and stick with wood and lanterns for light because powergrids dont really exist. Extreme example, but you get the point

30 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Norway couldn't do any of that if the US wasn't basically funding their defense (and many other countries) through NATO.  Let them fund their own defense for a while, see how much money gets diverted to pet projects.

I see so you want to turn this into "America is best" political. Literally nothing to do with conversation in hand.

30 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

First off, resorting to insults this early is a sign that you have no ground to stand upon, and you know it.  Also, California has nearly gone bankrupt numerous times.  They're definitely not "one of the better states".

No internationally, that how we see the US after last election. I'm sorry but you guys dug your grave there. US could've been the forefront in green tech and EVs, but nope enriching oilmen and billionaires (many of them corrupt) takes more priority.

30 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Please, enlighten me.

I did, didn't I

30 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

I'm sadly all to aware of the issue.  Our gas prices have more than doubled in the past 1 1/2 years, because our sitting Former Vice President killed oil production on his first day in office, both the XL pipeline and any future leases for oil production here in the States.

And somehow you think that one pipeline would've controlled the world's resultant inflation rate. Great conclusion!

And Biden did release you reserve to soften the blow, but US oil consumption rate is a lot higher than any one pipeline could ever handle.

30 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

So-called "renewable energy" is far from reliable.  And even if you can make solar and wind power 100% reliable, there's still the issue of the materials needed to make the solar panels and the wind turbines, not to mention how much oil is needed to run those wind turbines so the motors don't seize up.  We're not getting away from oil anytime soon.  Drilling here for oil would be producing locally.

Combination of renewables would be reliable - at least enough to power 50% of the country at a time. Decentralized approach with all homes being a part of the grid. These are what makes renewable energy reliable than a gas fired plant that causes blackouts as soon as everyone turns on the AC. 

 

And somehow do you think oil is just unlimited and will flow out of the ground forever?

30 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Well, like I said, just look at our sitting Former Vice President.

Honestly the fact that he isn't investigated for crimes and corruption every two days makes him so much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, leadeater said:

I have been driving a Nissan Leaf for quite a while now, the second iteration of what Nissan call Gen 1 but the used market call "Gen 2". I can very, very, very much assure you it costs a fraction to use than my Nissan 370GT. The drive to work per day is around $14 NZD for my Nissan 370GT where as for my Nissan Leaf it's $0. How may you ask is it $0? Well after 9pm I have free power and I have a 32A Evnex fast charger at home on a timer. Additionally I have solar panels anyway.

 

Even if I were to remove everything that makes my energy cost for travel free or offsets it the unit price I pay is 0.259/kwh and I use around 12-14 kwh for my commute to work and back, which makes the non discounted cost $3.626/day worst case vs ~ $14/day. Yea I could have gotten a much cheaper to run petrol vehicle but why? It would be very difficult to get a petrol vehicle below $4/day, likely impossible but there probably is something out there that could that I probably also wouldn't want to own anyway.

 

Also EVs have an environmental benefit no matter how dirty the power is, you should actually be very well aware of this benefit. In city clean air to breath. Every EV could be powered by bunker oil or coal and you would still directly benefit your health if every vehicle were an EV, hell even half. The more vehicles within city limits that are not immuring pollutants the better it is for literally everyone. 

 

But that's not the reality of how EVs will be charged, and that reality will change over time anyway. This doesn't even take in to account factors like battery cell recovery from used vehicles, crashed vehicles or battery replacement/upgrades. Nor does it take in to account the general trend of utility grids getting more environmentally friendly and efficient over time.

 

FYI I kept my Nissan 370GT for long distance travel.

Let's see... A Nissan 370Z starts around $30k, and a sports car, hardly average everyday transportation and a borderline invalid basis for comparison. The comparison I made was to an average, everyday sedan is that is larger than my Bolt example, more comfortable and less expensive to boot. Also, while I'm happy that you have free power after 9 pm and can charge your Leaf for free, that is not reality for most potential buyers, which you have acknowledged.

 

Being an asthmatic who was forced out of a commercial trucking career due to extremely dirty air around truck stops, shippers and receivers, I am very aware of and gratefully acknowledge the fact that EV's do not directly pollute the air in their operation. But there seems to be a whole "out of sight, out of mind" when it comes to generating the necessary power to charge them, and it's ludicrous at best to sweep the increased widespread pollution of power plants under the rug and ignore the elephant in the room. Not to mention the fact that you also acknowledge an EV's impracticality for long-distance travel. All this merely corroborates my previous thoughts that EVs are nothing more than a feel-good project robbing Peter to pay Paul. There are various ways that EVs DO, in fact, impact the environment.

 

First, the manufacture of the batteries and various other electrical components, etc. depend on mining, which involves dump trucks and other equipment with engines the size of a semi tractor and literally burn gallons per hour of non-emission formulated diesel fuel and directly pollute more than any EV will save in five lifetimes.

Additionally, this mining equipment is massive and moving it as sources tap out often requires extreme heavy-haul semis that are often also non-emission-controlled diesels. Being a former trucker, I know from experience that this is because emission-controlled commercial diesels are quite unreliable after five years or so, a major reason shipping costs have gone up. It's not just fuel costs, it's the increased costs of repairs and maintenance on those models.

 

When an EV runs out of juice and needs a tow to a charging station, a tow truck (often diesel and usually also non-emission controlled) must move it to a suitable place for charging. According to my friend, this is becoming a trend.

 

When an EV or hybrid catches fire or is involved in an accident, HazMat crews must be dispatched in addition to first responders because the batteries contain toxic materials and must be sounded for integrity and damage to assess potential environment impact to the area in question. The fires pollute as well, not to mention property damage if they catch fire while parked / charging and ignite anything around them. Additionally, there is a lot more involved in processing fire-damaged or otherwise total-lossed EVs for salvage and recycling, and damaged batteries complicate that process further. There's a fair bit of pollution involved in this process as well.

 

Battery range and long-term life has always been and still is a problem, and I don't see that changing drastically in the immediate future. While I've watched the Gemini battery project with great interest and recognize these will increase range if they're ever marketed, I feel testing is unrealistic at best and does not reflect real-world use, and therefore cannot be used as a standard to go by.

 

Also, if there is some sort of problem with a hybrid or EV's various systems, these are specialized and often require dealer service and parts. Not just anyone can work on them, and I dare say dealers are not stocking many parts for them. Nissan especially has their hands full already with their infamous CVT issues. Additionally, a friend has shown me numerous posts of unhappy Leaf owners with problems on mynissanleaf.com, the reason he went with a Sentra GT-R Spec V. So while it's great that your ownership experience has been good thus far, I've been given more than sufficient reason to believe that is not the norm.

 

Come to think of it, a previous poster insists that highway and city EV range differences cannot be compared to those of ICE vehicles, and I wondered what your experience might be on that. Because without an engine driving power steering pumps and air-conditioning compressors and heating coolant for warmth when needed, obviously electric systems must be in place for this, which will in turn affect battery life. So even if you're not wasting fuel idling, HVAC and other accessory needs still affect battery range.

 

I point all this out not as an attack, but merely pointing out what most people tend to ignore because there's a whole "out of sight, out of mind mentality" with many EV owners.

Edited by An0maly_76
Revised, more info

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  

 

54 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

The operating life of these battery packs are rated for over a decade. And dead battery packs are extremely valuable and over 90% of the materials can be retrieved. Again, wtf are you talking about.

 

Show me one that has actually lasted ten years, with actual valid proof with dates. I'll wait. I'm pretty sure you can't. Reason being I saw a nice low-mileage 2009 Ford Fusion Hybrid in the boneyard quite a bit before that ten-year mark because the owner realized the fuel savings hardly justified the $9,000 battery replacement that they could not afford anyway. And who hasn't heard about the FInnish fellow who blew his Tesla up after being told he had to shoulder full battery replacement cost when it failed well before that ten-year rating?

  

38 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

2019 isn't today is it?

 

It's not exactly ten years ago either. Please, enlighten us with real facts on what has really changed, since you are so insistent that 2019 is drastically eons ago. The Gemini battery project is the only thing I'm aware of, and it has yet to hit the market and testing quite frankly does not reflect real-world use for most people.

 

38 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

And somehow you think that one pipeline would've controlled the world's resultant inflation rate. Great conclusion!

And Biden did release you reserve to soften the blow, but US oil consumption rate is a lot higher than any one pipeline could ever handle.

 

Smoke and mirrors. He had to address a problem HE created. And it didn't just drive fuel prices up, it drove the prices up of everything, because Canada started charging more for EVERYTHING, and that's where much of retail lumber in the US come from, for starters. And that ONE pipeline was, in fact, a major source for the US. US-Russia relations in the wake of the Ukraine conflict are a factor as well, but the Keystone pipeline gets oil to the US far more quickly than Russian oil tankers could ever hope to.

 

38 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Combination of renewables would be reliable - at least enough to power 50% of the country at a time. Decentralized approach with all homes being a part of the grid. These are what makes renewable energy reliable than a gas fired plant that causes blackouts as soon as everyone turns on the AC.

 

How in the lunacy of your mind are EVs and electricity renewable? Wattage used does not regenerate by itself, otherwise batteries would recharge themselves without intervention. I've seen enough idle, burning and toppled windmills to know they're anything but reliable, and solar is extremely hyped-up pie-in-the-sky, Bill-Nye-The-Science-Guy BS that many people are now discovering the truth about only after taking the plunge to put solar on their home and realized too late that system shortcomings and variations in sun exposure / solar output will take much longer to recoup that investment than they were told. If you can't count on it, it's hardly valid.

 

38 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

And somehow do you think oil is just unlimited and will flow out of the ground forever?

 

Three words, Darvaza gas crater. Created in a drilling accident and intentionally ignited to prevent toxic gas dispersal in 1971 and still burning 51 years later. Natural gas is equally plentiful but the green crowd rail against most valid methods to access and distribute one of the cleanest forms of energy there is.

 

38 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Honestly the fact that he isn't investigated for crimes and corruption every two days makes him so much better.

 

That's not exactly because there's no reason to. But we're drifting here.

Edited by An0maly_76
Revised, more info

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

2019 isn't today is it? Its like taking some news from 1800s and saying we should not really adopt electricity and stick with wood and lanterns for light because powergrids dont really exist. Extreme example, but you get the point

3 years is not so long, and I also saw stories from 2020 and 2021, I just chose to go with one of the earlier ones.  But I do get your point, your mind is made up and nothing I say will every change it.

20 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

I see so you want to turn this into "America is best" political. Literally nothing to do with conversation in hand.

You are the one who first brought up America (in an insulting and disparaging way, might I add).  I was appending to that conversation.

21 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

And somehow you think that one pipeline would've controlled the world's resultant inflation rate. Great conclusion!

No, but it would have helped increase the flow of oil, which would have served to at least help keep gas prices in check, which in turn would have an effect on the rest of the economy.  You also ignored where I mentioned him killing any future leases for oil drilling in the States.  Both of those combined would have generated a lot of much needed oil in the world.

22 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

And Biden did release you reserve to soften the blow, but US oil consumption rate is a lot higher than any one pipeline could ever handle.

The oil reserves release was a political stunt.  The oil he's releasing doesn't even come close to covering the US daily oil consumption, much less any other parts of the world.

24 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Combination of renewables would be reliable - at least enough to power 50% of the country at a time

You know what would be more reliable?  Nuclear.  We would still need oil (for gas, and other derivatives), but I'd be fine with moving from coal to nuclear for most of our power generation.

25 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

And somehow do you think oil is just unlimited and will flow out of the ground forever?

Forever?  That's a very long time.  However, we do keep finding more and more oil that we can drill for; and oil refinement keeps getting better and better, so we're getting more out of each barrel of crude that's extracted.  And I would note that you completely glossed over where wind turbines are reliant on oil to operate (one article mentioned 80 gallons per year, per turbine).

 

Anyway, I think this conversation has just about run its course.  Also, it's 1:30 in the morning, and I have to get up for work in about 6 hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

You know what would be more reliable?  Nuclear.  We would still need oil (for gas, and other derivatives), but I'd be fine with moving from coal to nuclear for most of our power generation.

 

Nuclear has its problems too. It's not the clean energy most think. Mostly spent fuel rod storage and disposal. They are extremely hot and extremely toxic and dangerous for a very long time. I think the cons far outweigh the pros, unfortunately. Though I've not found much to thoroughly research it, I've heard of some new battery technology that somehow involves nuclear material of some sort, but I'm not enthused about the idea of an EV's battery making me glow in the dark.

 

Truthfully, I think hydro-power generation is the best scenario, but sadly it's just not viable everywhere.

Edited by An0maly_76
Revised

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jito463 said:

I checked the math, and $14 NZD is just under $8 USD.  My Plymouth Neon can go an entire week on that much, though admittedly I'm basing it on my travel distance and I don't know how far you're driving each day to work.  I actually just drove back to my home state on the 17th (around 240 miles one way), and ended up putting in less than 8 gallons of gas just before I headed back home again.  I haven't even filled my tank back up since I got back, and my car only has a 10 gallon tank in it.

Between cities, so mix of highway and city. The 370GT is just bloody awful for city driving which is a significant portion of that commute lol.

 

Also please use liters, US gallons means absolutely nothing to anyone except North Americans. Could have told me you filled it up with 76 Fluid Chickens worth, means the same to me haha 🙃

 

But it doesn't really matter how far, I gave the cost of both and both figures are accurate all be it the Leaf more accurate as it's actually far easier to be more accurate with an EV about this sort of thing. I can connect my OBDII reader and get the exact kwh used etc.

 

For your ease of comparison I'd be lucky to get more than 19 MPG, looks like you should be getting like 25-28 MPG. I can actually go about 1200km (745 miles) on a single tank if I only go on the highway, city driving really is that bad in that car but also lets just say I'm not an eco driver 😉

 

My Nissan Leaf has MPGe 92-106 EPA, so my reality matches up quite well. My actual reading in the Leaf is avg 6.4 km/kWh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Also please use liters, US gallons means absolutely nothing to anyone except North Americans. Could have told me you filled it up with 76 Fluid Chickens worth, means the same to me haha 🙃

One US gallon = 3.785 liters. Easy conversion.

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, An0maly_76 said:

One US gallon = 3.785 liters. Easy conversion.

All conversions are easy when you know the conversion 😉

 

That's not the point, nobody else uses that bloody unit of measurement so may as well be speaking in chicken units. Yes I'm just jesting lol. But seriously know your audience, I always take the effort to use the units I know the other daily uses, just a courtesy thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Combination of renewables would be reliable - at least enough to power 50% of the country at a time. Decentralized approach with all homes being a part of the grid. These are what makes renewable energy reliable than a gas fired plant that causes blackouts as soon as everyone turns on the AC. 

 

And somehow do you think oil is just unlimited and will flow out of the ground forever?

Actually, to add to a point you made.  EV's as they become more common, and as renewables start to become a thing, they will be able to help stabalize the grid.  You can have the concept of LiFePo battery walls and such, so the duck curve becomes just a flat line...which actually means the polluting power plants are spun up less often to meet the immediate demand.  Tesla has their own VPP (virtual power plant) linked with powerwalls.

 

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Also EVs have an environmental benefit no matter how dirty the power is, you should actually be very well aware of this benefit. In city clean air to breath. Every EV could be powered by bunker oil or coal and you would still directly benefit your health if every vehicle were an EV, hell even half. The more vehicles within city limits that are not emitting pollutants the better it is for literally everyone. 

Actually it should be noted as well, since the power plants have such a high concentration of greenhouse gases the newer ones have carbon capture system (they also are able to benefit from the scale and burn the fuel more cleanly so the efficiency is higher).

 

Ultimately though, if it's purely run on coal, you might start tipping the emissions in favor of ICE...but realistically that's not happening with the modern investments in renewable power.

 

  

5 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Also please use liters, US gallons means absolutely nothing to anyone except North Americans

I would say Americans instead of North Americans, we use litres/metric in Canada (unless we are talking with Americans, then we try remembering to convert).

 

 

 

To bring this back a bit on topic.  I do wonder how much out of tolerance it was...and on how many of the vehicles it actually occurred...because by the looks of things they have been periodically testing it, and it took this long to find the anomalies.  Still not really convinced this is really tech though, the only thing tech about it is that it's an OTA update fixing an issue...lots of things get changed in the OTA updates in a Tesla.

3735928559 - Beware of the dead beef

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

I would say Americans instead of North Americans, we use litres/metric in Canada (unless we are talking with Americans, then we try remembering to convert).

Oh? I thought you still used gallons, interesting. Well done 😀

 

What's your vehicle speed unit though, still mph?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

All conversions are easy when you know the conversion 😉

 

That's not the point, nobody else uses that bloody unit of measurement so may as well be speaking in chicken units. Yes I'm just jesting lol. But seriously know your audience, I always take the effort to use the units I know the other daily uses, just a courtesy thing.

While I get that your reference is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, one valid reason the US continues to use such measurements is that, at least in my experience, some SAE to metric conversions result in measurements far more complicated to remember, as evidenced in my previous post. So I would venture a guess that this is the major (and likely deciding factor). I also rather think changing over would take years of confusion due to this country's vast size and population. Unfortunately, many people tend to be rinse, lather repeat and it will take a miracle for most of them to change what they know.

 

Truthfully, I rather like the idea of simply being able to eyeball 6mm, 9mm, 12mm nuts and bolts and such. I do find SAE sizes a bit cumbersome at times, especially when, if memory serves, every other one is basically a metric anyway. But that works the other way too, that metrics are an 'in-between' that those used to SAE would find equally cumbersome. Tomato, tom-mah-to. *shrugs* But again, we're drifting here.

Edited by An0maly_76
Revised, more info

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Oh? I thought you still used gallons, interesting. Well done 😀

 

What's your vehicle speed unit though, still mph?

It's interesting you mention this. I owned a mid-90s Camry a few years ago that came with quite the enigma.

 

The car seemed to be delivering phenomenal fuel economy, 34 when it was rated at 26, and while I wouldn't complain about such things, I could not figure out why at first. After racking my brain for a few weeks, it occurred to me the odometer might be metric, and it was. 1.6 km to 1 mile. Mystery solved. Interesting thing, though, it had the standard US speedometer layout of the larger outside lettering being the MPH with the smaller inner lettering for km/h, as opposed to a primarily metric units usually being the other way around. Only one I've ever seen this way.

 

Canada-spec cars are not technically legal for US import without a lot of red tape, something I hardly think anyone would have gone to the trouble for the purpose of keeping a run-of-the-mill Camry, so I never have found a valid explanation for this.

Edited by An0maly_76
Revised, more info

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Almost all of the data used is a per capita basis.

 

e.g.

https://insideevs.com/news/561549/study-evs-smallest-fire-risk/

 

Of course this one doesn't necessarily mean it's 100% true the numbers they present, but if what is presented is true it's 100x more likely to occur.

 

 

This line from the article doesn't fill me with much confidence:

Quote

As always, take studies like this one and their findings with a grain of salt, since this is only one source for this information and it therefore can't be confirmed.

EDIT: I just looked up the figures, the conservative number is about 1000 times more Gas powered cars than EV's in total (1.2B gas cars to 11M EV's).   So it looks like on a grander a scale the debate is far from conclusive.

 

15 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

"That may or may not eventuate". We literally have a lab demo of most of these things working. It just takes time to figure out a way to mass produce or get machines that are able to mass produce it.

Until it's in consumers hands it is nothing.  Plenty of things work on the test bench but don't scale or translate well into actual usage.  

 

15 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

And honestly, by your logic we should just throw our hands up in the air and give up. In Mr. Moose's universe, we'd still all be cavemens. I guess it would be nice for you because no iPhones to complain about 🤣

troll much?

 

15 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Also, know the difference between a physics problem and engineering/manufacturing problem. Battery tech is clearly the latter. Things like Quantum tunnelling through gates and going faster than light are physics problem whose technological advance remains uncertain.

 

Be glad that there are much more smarter people than you are working on these things

What the fuck? Do you think people who make these studies are like 10 year olds counting the number of fires? They'll always take a metric of per thousand or per million.

 

 

One day you will actually say something that addresses my posts rather than jumping on an opinion you don't like with a barrage of information that fails to address anything I said.

 

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, An0maly_76 said:

  Show me one that has actually lasted ten years, with actual valid proof with dates. I'll wait. I'm pretty sure you can't. Reason being I saw a nice low-mileage 2009 Ford Fusion Hybrid in the boneyard quite a bit before that ten-year mark because the owner realized the fuel savings hardly justified the $9,000 battery replacement that they could not afford anyway. And who hasn't heard about the FInnish fellow who blew his Tesla up after being told he had to shoulder full battery replacement cost when it failed well before that ten-year rating?

  

Literally Tesla's running on the road from 2013. You should check out the used market. And this was with older battery tech compared to the today's which are vastly different and better in almost all ways

And also, pretty much all manufacturers give a 8 year battery warranty. 

7 hours ago, An0maly_76 said:

It's not exactly ten years ago either. Please, enlighten us with real facts on what has really changed, since you are so insistent that 2019 is drastically eons ago. The Gemini battery project is the only thing I'm aware of, and it has yet to hit the market and testing quite frankly does not reflect real-world use for most people.

3 years is something significant when it comes to tech advancements.

7 hours ago, An0maly_76 said:

Smoke and mirrors. He had to address a problem HE created. And it didn't just drive fuel prices up, it drove the prices up of everything, because Canada started charging more for EVERYTHING, and that's where much of retail lumber in the US come from, for starters. And that ONE pipeline was, in fact, a major source for the US. US-Russia relations in the wake of the Ukraine conflict are a factor as well, but the Keystone pipeline gets oil to the US far more quickly than Russian oil tankers could ever hope to.

 

I like how you actually think one pipeline could've solved all of world's problems. The rebound from Pandemic + war is what caused the global shortage and tightening of the supply.

7 hours ago, An0maly_76 said:

How in the lunacy of your mind are EVs and electricity renewable? Wattage used does not regenerate by itself, otherwise batteries would recharge themselves without intervention. I've seen enough idle, burning and toppled windmills to know they're anything but reliable, and solar is extremely hyped-up pie-in-the-sky, Bill-Nye-The-Science-Guy BS that many people are now discovering the truth about only after taking the plunge to put solar on their home and realized too late that system shortcomings and variations in sun exposure / solar output will take much longer to recoup that investment than they were told. If you can't count on it, it's hardly valid.

Okay, at this point you basically proven yourself to me a science denier. You have absolutely no clue how much solar and wind contribute in terms of energy to most places. Solar is becoming a thing in households. Heck my house has solar and im pretty much grid independent.

 

And guess what EVs can also charge from clean energy unlike you know petrol.

7 hours ago, An0maly_76 said:

Three words, Darvaza gas crater. Created in a drilling accident and intentionally ignited to prevent toxic gas dispersal in 1971 and still burning 51 years later. Natural gas is equally plentiful but the green crowd rail against most valid methods to access and distribute one of the cleanest forms of energy there is.

Oh so suddenly Natural gas is enough to replace all fossil fuel industry. And natural gas is safer than battery? You're proving yourself to be less and less objective.

7 hours ago, An0maly_76 said:

That's not exactly because there's no reason to. But we're drifting here.

Sure, environmental denier, fan of previous admin, somehow thinking burning metric tonnes of fossil fuel everyday is somehow more 'environmentally friendly'. You do fit exactly the bill of the groups of people I was talking about casually. I'm sorry, there's literally nothing I can say if you just keep yapping on some random nonsense and fail to see the evidence and math I provided to you in earlier comments. What a colossal waste of my time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RedRound2 said:

Literally Tesla's running on the road from 2013. You should check out the used market. And this was with older battery tech compared to the today's which are vastly different and better in almost all ways

With proof the battery has not been replaced? Not likely.

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

Until it's in consumers hands it is nothing.  Plenty of things work on the test bench but don't scale or translate well into actual usage.  

No, it means its possible. It doesnt mean 'nothing'. 

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

troll much?

With that mentality I wish I was just trolling, but it seemed quite possible given you absolutely have no interest.

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

One day you will actually say something that addresses my posts rather than jumping on an opinion you don't like with a barrage of information that fails to address anything I said.

And somehow you tunnel vision into one sentence in between when it was sandwiched by actual information relevant to your comment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Sure, environmental denier, fan of previous admin, somehow thinking burning metric tonnes of fossil fuel everyday is somehow more 'environmentally friendly'. You do fit exactly the bill of the groups of people I was talking about casually. I'm sorry, there's literally nothing I can say if you just keep yapping on some random nonsense and fail to see the evidence and math I provided to you in earlier comments. What a colossal waste of my time.

And yet you still choose to sit here and resort to arguing with me using baseless, prejudicial and inflammatory remarks.

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Okay, at this point you basically proven yourself to me a science denier. You have absolutely no clue how much solar and wind contribute in terms of energy to most places. Solar is becoming a thing in households. Heck my house has solar and im pretty much grid independent.

And you've proven yourself to be an instigator that would argue with a freight train. I never said the 'renewable' sources didn't contribute. I did say they are not as reliable as most would think. You'd understand if you'd seen as many idle, burning and toppled windmills as I have in my cross-country trucking career. That's great that you're lucky enough to actually benefit from your solar setup. Many do not.

Edited by An0maly_76
Revised, more info

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  

7 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

And guess what EVs can also charge from clean energy unlike you know petrol.

Again, clean energy is not always actually clean energy. And not all clean energy is reliable, either.

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Bjørn Nyland Checks Old 2013 Tesla Model S Battery Degradation (insideevs.com)

 

Data of a 7 year old battery pack. Please prove me otherwise - instead of throwing around claims

 

I'm not saying they can't. But not many do. And considering this guy is not the only one who dealt with this issue in the manner he did, something tells me that is a unicorn, best-case scenario.

 

 

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, An0maly_76 said:

And yet you still choose to sit here and resort to arguing with me using baseless, prejudicial and inflammatory remarks.

yeah. Inflammatory remarks, says the person who started just denying facts and started trolling

3 minutes ago, An0maly_76 said:

And you've proven yourself to be an instigator that would argue with a freight train. I never said the 'renewable' sources didn't contribute. I did say they are not as reliable as most would think. You'd understand if you'd seen as many idle, burning and topped windmills as I have in my cross-country trucking career. That's great that you're lucky enough to actually benefit from your solar setup. Many do not.

What is this 'not reliable as most think'.

 

Do you have literally any data to back this up?

What you see and conclude within yourself is not a fact

1 minute ago, An0maly_76 said:

  

Again, clean energy is not always actually clean energy. And not all clean energy is reliable, either.

Can you not think. EVs are much more efficient. It doesnt matter if energy is derived from dirty sources or clean when it consumes net much lower energy. That is a fact. Prove me otherwise or shut up.

 

And in this day and age, it is quite unlikely that your entire grid is dirty. And grids will become cleaner over time. Fuel will still come from ground and requires refinement. Again, these are well established facts. I feel like arguing with someone who thinks the sun rises from the west.

 

Literally back up any of your claims with data, or please just move on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, An0maly_76 said:

 

I'm not saying they can't. But not many do. And considering this guy is not the only one who dealt with this issue in the manner he did, something tells me that is a unicorn, best-case scenario.

 

 

Oh so you're changing what you stated. 

 

Lets state the facts here,

Most batteries have 8 year warranty - 10 years is not a stretch to think of. And most old battery tech have lasted for about 8-10 years now, with few manufacturing defect exceptions

Batteries available today are much more advanced than batteries 5 years ago

Battery recycling is actually a thing and we can recover about 90% of materials from it - to you know create new batteries

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Oh so suddenly Natural gas is enough to replace all fossil fuel industry. And natural gas is safer than battery? You're proving yourself to be less and less objective.

I've been a proponent of natural gas for quite some time, as well as LPG. But then, you wouldn't know that, because you're too busy making baseless attacks from your perception of my political preference. And yes, natural gas is safe with the proper precautions. But like electric, it's not so practical. In CNG / LPG's case, lack of effort in marketplace setup.

Edited by An0maly_76
Revised, more info

I don't badmouth others' input, I'd appreciate others not badmouthing mine. *** More below ***

 

MODERATE TO SEVERE AUTISTIC, COMPLICATED WITH COVID FOG

 

Due to the above, I've likely revised posts <30 min old, and do not think as you do.

THINK BEFORE YOU REPLY!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×