Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
most do.Why don't EV's have a battery recharging component to them? If they could recharge some % of the battery when braking and gliding it would have to add to the range and help in the cold.
I think it goes both ways. When you have folks with "that agenda" spewing EVs out of all holes, it's fairly easy to understand why something that should not be political, is.Just watching this thread, it seems that some of you really don't like the thought of EV's. For some I think it is purely a political thing. EV simply means Liberal agenda so it is obviouly a no go. That is a very short sited view. I personally hope they figure out a way to make it work out efficiently. It has a lot of benefit.
Wish I had your optimism DH. And maybe I would if all this EV stuff were happening without tax money supplying the gap between what they lose as compared to what they create. Its not close to profitable. Even still, no one has answered the simple question of where all this electricity will come from/be created by? Then larger question is storage - it has to be used- can't be stored ( in scale). No technology for that yet either.If you look at things rationally, the charging time is of minimal significance. The average person drives 13,5000 miles a year. So, 259 miles a week. That is basically the typical range of an EV. The average person will never even need to use a roadside charger. They plug in their car overnight one evening and they're good to go for the week.
I drive about 50k miles a year due to work. Cover all of New England. Unless I'm going to Ft Kent, Caribou Presque Isle or Calais, I could make it to basically every hospital I do business with one overnight charge. I bet even with my heavy mileage habits, there are less than ten days a year I exceed 250 miles travel in a day. Those ten days aren't enough to turn me off to the car type. Time the charge at lunch. No big deal.
Increased adoption will occur with increased variety and affordability first and foremost. Once you start seeing several mid sized SUV options with 300 mile ranges and sale prices around 40k, the adoption rate will start to take off. And that price point will happen. EV cars are easier and faster to build than ICE. Economics of scale will make them cheaper to produce than ICE vehicles eventually because of what goes into them.
I'll go back to the point I've made already. ICE vehicles are about 25% efficient vs 75% for EVs. EVs are cheaper to build for the manufacturer and cheaper to maintain for the consumer. Hell the amount of time I waste getting tune ups in a year easily eclipses whatever time I'd waste at a roadside charger. It's pretty obvious where this story is heading because of these realities.
The only reason why I don't have an EV already is because I get a van provided to use for my work and my wife's car is a manual, which we both prefer to automatic transmissions. More fun to drive and it's not available with an EV. Once that car dies, there are no AWD wagons left being made with an MT, so we will get an EV. I'd estimate around 2027 and I fully expect a lot of choices with vastly improved ranges by then.
I think it goes both ways. When you have folks with "that agenda" spewing EVs out of all holes, it's fairly easy to understand why something that should not be political, is.
All EVs have regenerative braking, it's one of the reasons they're much more efficient in city driving than ICE vehicles. On some EVs the regen is blended in with the regular brakes, and on others it kicks in when you lift off the accelerator, so you can drive with one pedal most of the time.Why don't EV's have a battery recharging component to them? If they could recharge some % of the battery when braking and gliding it would have to add to the range and help in the cold.
This goes for hybrids also.All EVs have regenerative braking, it's one of the reasons they're much more efficient in city driving than ICE vehicles. On some EVs the regen is blended in with the regular brakes, and on others it kicks in when you lift off the accelerator, so you can drive with one pedal most of the time.
If you look at things rationally, the charging time is of minimal significance. The average person drives 13,5000 miles a year. So, 259 miles a week. That is basically the typical range of an EV. The average person will never even need to use a roadside charger. They plug in their car overnight one evening and they're good to go for the week.
I drive about 50k miles a year due to work. Cover all of New England. Unless I'm going to Ft Kent, Caribou Presque Isle or Calais, I could make it to basically every hospital I do business with one overnight charge. I bet even with my heavy mileage habits, there are less than ten days a year I exceed 250 miles travel in a day. Those ten days aren't enough to turn me off to the car type. Time the charge at lunch. No big deal.
Increased adoption will occur with increased variety and affordability first and foremost. Once you start seeing several mid sized SUV options with 300 mile ranges and sale prices around 40k, the adoption rate will start to take off. And that price point will happen. EV cars are easier and faster to build than ICE. Economics of scale will make them cheaper to produce than ICE vehicles eventually because of what goes into them.
I'll go back to the point I've made already. ICE vehicles are about 25% efficient vs 75% for EVs. EVs are cheaper to build for the manufacturer and cheaper to maintain for the consumer. Hell the amount of time I waste getting tune ups in a year easily eclipses whatever time I'd waste at a roadside charger. It's pretty obvious where this story is heading because of these realities.
The only reason why I don't have an EV already is because I get a van provided to use for my work and my wife's car is a manual, which we both prefer to automatic transmissions. More fun to drive and it's not available with an EV. Once that car dies, there are no AWD wagons left being made with an MT, so we will get an EV. I'd estimate around 2027 and I fully expect a lot of choices with vastly improved ranges by then.
I don't disagree with you on the efficiency of EV's, other than to point out your efficiency argument gets weaker the colder it gets, but you are really pushing your personal motives if you don't think charge time or access to reasonable charging facilities doesn't matter for the average person. That is a huge detriment to EV's and not workable at the vast majority of home or workplaces.
Again, the numbers you're using are not the right ones to use. The number of homes with a garage is NOT the same as the number of cars that have access to said garages overnight.Vast majority? Not at all. A minority of people would have issues.
Again, the majority of people in this country have access to electricity where they park overnight already. The average American drives 259 miles a week. While I don't disagree that more and faster charging will be a benefit, range is already not an issue for the majority of drivers today.
I guess we are going to disagree on the numbers. The department of energy is providing the figures I'm stating. 63% of all housing units in this country have a garage or carport with electricity already or the capability of having it installed.
Given current realities, more people would be just fine with an electric car than those who would have a problem. That is only going to grow and yes, more roadside chargers are obviously going to help. I just don't think it's the problem you all do
I had a good laugh when I read this earlier today.So the government while promoting EV uses an ICE car to reserve a charging spot...nice...
Beta was better- VHS won, not sure why, but its gotta be a money thing.I've never been an early adopter of new tech.
Never got past the Beta/VHF debate.
That's true of all vehicles now. Less weight == better mileage, all else being equal, and particularly for vehicles with large sales numbers, even a 0.1 MPG difference has a significant impact on fleet averages.We can all agree EVs do every thing they can to save on weight. What you end up with a lot of plastic and air bags. Air bags are great for the first hit. Once the bags are inflated, then what hope for the best. Much of this is generation driven. The over 50 crowd doen't want the baggage which come with them. I can live without self driving cars, being tracked and the radiation that goes with 5G.
the radiation that goes with 5G.
In another couple of decades if 1 out of 100 kids has 3 arms will it be worth it?![]()
![]()