Are electric cars a thing of the future or are they just a left wing scam?

Are electric cars a thing of the future or are they just a left wing scam?

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/1981/06/04/business/gm-displays-car-fueled-with-coal-dust.html
news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1893&dat=19281127&id=kPMoAAAAIBAJ&sjid=29MEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5236,3682431&hl=en
youtube.com/watch?v=CcmZ1dof3Qw
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

We've got a ways to go. Problem is no matter how you look at it they're still going to be powered by fossil fuels or nuclear (less likely).

Until we stop using fossil fuel as our main source of energy, it's a useless machine.
All you did was just remove the guilt from you.
Nuclear energy is the future.

Nuclear cars are the future.

Eventually they will be, but likely decades from now. It's just a way for Musk et al. to get government gibs at the moment.

There isn't enough material on this planet to make enough batteries to replace every combustion engine. It will never be more than a meme for smug liberals to virtue signal.

This guy gets me.
Nuclear energy is cleaner, cheaper, and more efficient than coal.

They can be hacked by the government, for various uses. Thats why they are being pushed.

praise him

Hydrogen is the future, it's just got a long way to go. But you'll never run out of it, and its byproduct is water vapor. Roads might be a bit damp in heavy traffic areas all the time.

Decades from now we will probably have started on discovering alt fuel sources, making these cars useless. It would be like having a car made in 1933 in today's world.

Except efficiency of fossil fuel burning is WAY more at a plant than it is in an individual car. Also easier to control emissions at one plant vs a million cars.

Holy trips. Kek approves. Nuclear is the future.

Everything in the future will be a left wing scam. Left wing scam and Shariah.

The free market doesn't care about your ideologies. Such statements make my brain blue screen ffs

Even if global warming is a myth, fossil fuels won't last forever. Electric cars are truly the future unless some new way of powering cars is invented.

Not really, coal plants average around 35%, ICE's are around 30, oil plants are around 37-38ish. Most natural gas plants are in the 40s, but combined-cycle can get into the 50s.

It takes more energy to separate hydrogen from water than you can realistically expect to get back from burning it.

This retarded meme was debunked like a decade ago. Why are people so fucking retarded to bring it up again?

Somebody get the gas chamber ready.

>Doesn't pollute the planet
>Must be a left-wing scam

OP is a pretty dumb guy.

No. The answer is simply no, they are not a waste of time.

I don't understand the hate for Musk either.

>"Government gibs"
What? Do fat retarded virgins genuinely believe that what Musk is trying to do is a bad thing? Are you retarded as well?

>muh fossil fuels are finite.
Antarctica has coal seams that are 10 feet tall and run along the course of entire mountain ranges.

Like it or not coal is the dark sooty dirty future of mankind. Because when the oil runs out, there's enough coal to last for quite a number of generations.

And both diesel and turbine engines can be adapted to run on coal dust.

Cheaper than gas. At least in Ukraine.

do you honestly think that they dont pollute the planet?
the only way to stop pollution is to reduce the population
And can anyone fucking tell me where Jessica Hyde is??

Electric motors are significantly more efficient than thermal combustion engines. A regular gasoline engine has a theoretical maximum efficiency of 25% (amount of energy in the gas vs. energy at the fly wheel). However, realistically, efficiency in gas engines is around 13% and lower at the fly wheel. It's even lower when it reaches the tires.

Electric motor efficiency is 90% to 99%...

The main problem with electric cars right now is a means to store energy and charge batteries quickly. Battery technology hasn't improved in over a hundred years.

Fossil fuels will probably survive in wide use in the developed world until 2050~ They're too easy, the infrastructure is too advanced, no one is going to just throw it away. The rest of the world will likely keep using them for decades after. Natural gas will probably always be used as a reliable back up as well.

We've got solar panels testing over 40%~ under lab conditions, mass produced panels reach mid 20s in practice. They'll be able to take the majority of burden before too long.

Electric cars push the technology for green energy. Green energy is a huge market for both employment and revenue. Who doesn't want a pollution free environment? Oh yeah. Conservatives don't give a shit about the environment.

I will now go and contradict myself a little..... nuclear power plants could fuel the electric cars.

I swear, Sup Forums has more dumb asses the smart ones.

Except that no one is allowed to profit from Antarctica and it's a pain in the ass to have people there to mine coal and then transport it. Nuclear energy is several times more viable and that's without counting fusion reactors, which are a thing now.

Also
>engines running on solid particles
Are you retarded user?

electric motors beat combustion in everything but atmosphere and practicality, and only practicality matters in a daily driver.

libcucks don't want you to have nuclear energy.

ICE's are 25-30, and plants are 40-45. That's more efficient. Not to mention that power CAN be supplied by other means, solar/wind/nuclear.

currently its a scam
bad ratio, drive a few miles, opps gotta load my car
>"muh green energy, its not a scam"
yeah you idiot, the energy still comes from sources which pollute our earth

if we produce 100% clean energy, its good, but currently its just a scam

with the new solid state batteries they are less of a meme than ever

>Green energy
>Billions of cars on the road with lithium ion batteries that cause birth defects when they enter the water supply.

Lol fucking pleb

nytimes.com/1981/06/04/business/gm-displays-car-fueled-with-coal-dust.html
T. Mexican education.

Because with the correct kind of plant, you can refract solar and separate hydrogen from water. Also, it's the most abundant element in space, so if we start harvesting up there, we're golden.

If battery improve significantly within the next decade, yes. I'm talking about not charging your cell phone for weeks type improvement.

>Electric motor efficiency is 90% to 99%...
But you're ignoring the inefficiency of generating the electricity at the power station and then transferring/storing it in a battery..

Geothermal

Then they dont understand fusion, which is truly the only way we will have a sustainable future

>thing of the future

yea about that

Energy storage is actually pretty good in lithium ion cells. The problem is they charge incredibly fucking slowly. And having millions of them out on the road is a biohazard waiting to happen.

If we start tossing outdated electric cars into the scrap heap like we do with conventional gasoline powered cars, the entirety of Georgia will be even less habitable than it is now.

fusion is a meme.
also
news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1893&dat=19281127&id=kPMoAAAAIBAJ&sjid=29MEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5236,3682431&hl=en
More solid fuel internal combustion for sanchez.

You don't have to believe in global warming to want a Tesla. Cars are pretty awesome desu plus isn't Elon red pilled?

>Nuclear cars become a thing
>Golden age of America
>Next president after Trump is some libcuck
>Wants to play nice with everyone
>This gives (((them))) the opportunity to move nuclear car manufacturing to China to cut costs and make more money
>End of the fucking world caused by China quality nuclear vehicles zooming around

Then we have to bring up the overall inefficiency in drilling for oil, shipping process, and gasoline refinement process.

Again, the yields for electricity are significant higher.

Electric motor efficiency is an argument for the electric transmission of a hybrid vehicle, not for a full-blown electric vehicle. The inferiority of batteries versus hydrocarbon fuels is just basic physics.

All this stuff was designed back in the early days of internal combustion research.

A modern direct injection turbodiesel type setup could run fairly clean and efficiently.

Seems like a wonky idea... but if there's not enough lithium to go around, and we're almost out of oil, makes a whole lot more sense to use the remaining oil as a combustion catalyst for solid fuel rather than as standalone fuel.

They can't stop it, nuclear fusion is too safe to not use it. Just give it 10-20 years for France to test the shit out of it.
>36 years ago
>The G.M. coal turbine requires a very fine powder, averaging three microns (thousandths of a millimeter) in diameter, a product that is not yet commercially available.
So you need a retardedly expensive process to make coal usable because anything else would break the engines? Yeah, just what I expected. This shit is too expensive to be viable, plus according to the article it's noisy as fuck too.

I hope they will replace >90% of fossil fuel cars.

City air would be much cleaner. - no more smog.

I already got me a Corvega!

>Again, the yields for electricity are significant higher.
This is true.

>Then we have to bring up the overall inefficiency in drilling for oil, shipping process, and gasoline refinement process.
I mean you also have to mine the coal and whatnot, but those are both irrelevant. You're skipping the burning fuel part of the calculation for electricity in the first post I quoted but not for the combustion engine. It's retarded.

It was a prototype engine. So of course it wasn't perfect. You fucking retard. I hope Donald Trump nukes your pathetic country.

Having a lot of potential energy in gasoline does you no good if 87% of it is wasted in the form of heat.

>Having a lot of potential energy in gasoline does you no good if 87% of it is wasted in the form of heat.
And yet they still get more range than electric vehicles...

Gasoline and natural gas engines used for generators is actually quite efficient when compared to cars. Again it's only around 20% or less, but it's still significantly better than gasoline powered cars.

Enerdel MP320-049 22 kWh Battery Pack

Cell Configuration: 30S-12P
Modules per System: 15
Cells per Module: 24
Total Cell Quantity: 360
Max Voltage: 126 V
Min Voltage: 90 V
Rated Capacity: Ah
Rated Energy: 22 kWh
Max Cont. Discharge:
Max Pulse Discharge: 1200-1500 A (30 seconds)
Max Cont. Charge:
Max Regen. Current:
Dimensions:
Mass: 170 kg (375 Pounds)
Heating/Cooling Passive or Forced Air Thermal Management

Yes but you can't just ignore it in the efficiency calculation if you're going to include the inefficiency of combustion for a petrol car.

>coal
Coal stopped being as widely used as fuel around the time London suffered pollution levels which killed thousands and were worse than in Beijing.

Of course. And an electric hybrid captures that heat with additional engine cycles to drive the generator.

tesla (white) cars are the future.

ford (jewish) cars are the past.

that smog is the product of manufacturing

where is Jessica Hyde

Battery tech is complete shit. You won't find any disagreement with me on that. I'm just saying that of the energy petroleum is capable of delivering, we waste a lot of it. We'd be still dealing with a gas surplus and Saudi Arabia would be 2 dudes fucking a camel if we even had 45% efficiency in gasoline engines.

>smog is the product of manufacturing

Riiiiiigt.
That's why you aren't allowed to drive when there is heavy smog.


Unless you live in the 3rd world the vast majority of manufacturing is powered electrically.

I'm not saying coal is good. or clean, or safe. Because it's not. I'm just saying when people talk about fossil fuels running out they seem to forget that there's a shitload of coal left.

And when we reach that do-or-die moment when the oil jew says "oy vey, we ran out goyim" it's going to look very tempting in comparison to some of the other options.

I don't think hybrids use PETs. Those are also wildly inefficient. I think they have like 5% yield. And you need a temperature differential for them to work.

The heat in gasoline engines is wasted.. if you don't use the heater I guess.

>Battery tech
we need this better

Sounds like we mostly agree. Electric cars would be great but batteries suck cocks so they're not terribly viable.

they've got potential, but gasoline has consistency. that being said I welcome competition into the car market so electric cars are a good thing

>Electric motors are significantly more efficient than thermal combustion engines.
Electric cars have to store their entire traction energy inside their battery.
Internal combustion cars literally run on free air. They only need fuel to ignite shit. That's why a tank of gas gets you hundreds of miles.

Thermodynamics + conservation of energy = batteries can only get so good.

Chemical fuel benefits from the ability to store it in a chemically stable environment for an indefinite period of time allowing you to apply economy of scale to production

Just the simple natural flux in ambient temperature will gradually de-energize a charged battery. Exponential diminishing returns on excessive energy production.

Absolutely. That and no one in the green earth movement mentions how toxic lithium ion cells are, or that they're heavy metals that cause birth defects and easily leech into ground water.

Tesla building that new lithium ion battery factory is going to backfire huge. If it doesn't eventually explode, it'll be shut down for environmental contamination.

Maybe every combustion engine doesn't need replacing.

That's not how it works.

The air doesn't contain energy.
In fact, pumping around air is a major source of inefficiency in internal combustion engines.

>yeah you idiot, the energy still comes from sources which pollute our earth
However it doesn't pollute the walled communities of Tesla owners. Only poorfags who happen to live next to the coal power plant, where rents are cheap.

Is it true in Scandinavia everyone drives a Tesla?

Random articles keep teasing me with something like OMG THIS NEW BATTERY TECHNOLOGY COULD CHARGE 10 TIMES AS FAST! but then 5 years later nothing has come out of it. Every time.

that may be true if you're using lithium but there are newer and better battery chemistries out there that use more ubiquitous materials

I think what he means is that a major component of the chemical reaction is just floating around everywhere the vehicle goes. like typical stoichiometric ratio for car engine is 14.5:1 air to fuel ratio.

Meaning that you only need to really carry around about 6.67% of the mass of your energy source. 1 lb of gasoline = 16 lbs of go juice, concentrated.

They're going to be a waste until the energy capacity versus weight ratio is better than that of gasoline. At that point in time, they're going to become the better mode of transportation. If you look at it in terms of energy capacity of liquid fuel versus electric storage, the chemical potential of gas far surpasses that of a lithium ion system, thus meaning it's more efficient at the vehicle level to store the potential energy in that form.

Once that occurs, we'll still use fossil fuels to convert the chemical potential into electric and the default transacted energy "system" will switch from pumps to charging stations.

electric won't need subsidies to outcompete once battery technology has reached this level. Until then, it's gas.

The biggest limiters on electric cars is currently:
>1. Batteries (especially concerning recharge time)
>2. Lack of fueling stations

Technology will inevitably improve, which means electric cars will become cheaper, more practical, and more efficient.

At the same time, the inevitable rising costs of gasoline and other petroleum based fuels, due to the fact that they're a finite resource, will make conventional cars less practical in comparison as time goes by. This will prompt a rise in charging stations outside of major metro areas.

I'm not saying you should go out and pour all your money into Tesla stocks, but electric cars are almost definitely the future. It's a matter of when, not if.

New manufacturing processes cost a lot of money. There's already a lot of investment in lithium, it's probably not going anywhere for 20 years or so.

test

All cars are a Jewish plot.
Pay tax, pay insurance, pay huge fuel bills, pay maintenance. Account for depreciation, crashes, etc.

The white man's way is horse and cart. And trains.

>Car industry is ran by lefties

If you commute to work, electric cars make economic sense. It is cheaper to operate and maintain.
I agree that the range is not good, but again it is very useful as a commuter car.
The new cheaper Tesla coming out this year will have a 200 mile range, and the Bolt is already available
It is true some of the energy ultimately came from fossil fuel, but the economics is what I am primarily interested in
Electricity will never go away though, and gasoline can be used up at some point

>trains
London-Edinburgh by train is more expensive than most European flights.

Yup. Look up the "sodium battery".

youtube.com/watch?v=CcmZ1dof3Qw

There's also the option of using hydrocarbon chains as hydrogen donors for the formation of NH3 molecules, which are breddy gud at exploding.

>Technology will inevitably improve

why is this always assumed with battery technology? isn't one of the limiting factors in cost the availability of rare earth materials and the costs involved with their mining? we've had batteries for a long time and the fact that electric cars have never truly become mainstream even with heavy subsidies implies to me that they're an allover inefficient technology.
>inb4 gasoline industry conspiracy theories

>Are electric cars a thing of the future or are they just a left wing scam?

We need to refine the technology more, and also move towards nuclear and solar power.

>Hydrogen is the future

Yes and no.

Hydrogen is our interim future that will provide us a transition from the current transport energy mix of petrol, diesel, LPG and biofuels.

I believe that we will get to a replacement level through new sources and government mandate by about 2030 or so, at which point the burning of hydrocarbons for transport will be at an end, it is simply too wasteful of limited resources and too damaging in terms of emissions and pollution.

Hydrogen will be provided through electrolysis from mainly solar power plants and these will spring up around the Arabian peninsula and across the equatorial belt where land is plentiful and unoccupied.

Instead of shipping hydrocarbons to the west, they will ship liquid hydrogen.

The primary problem we have at the moment with hydrogen is that storage takes up too much space and is limited. Once we solve this problem then the hydrogen economy will be upon us.

However, even hydrogen will only be a stop gap. Once we have fussion fully deployed and miniaturization begins in earnest we will see fusion reactors replace hydrogen engines in cars, buses, trains and lorries.

However, I suspect that generator sized fusion won't be generally available until the 2050's and miniaturization to the level required for personal transport will not be available until the 2100's.

Thus hydrogen is the fuel of the 2030's and fusion is the fuel of the future (2100's and beyond).

We might get anti-matter working at some point, but this is so theoretical as to be science fiction.

electric cars are bretty neeet only needs 3 things batteries computer a motor don't even really need transmission

you can /diy/ a car for under 8k with almost the same range as a 30-50k new electric car
repairs and tune ups are almost nonexistent
cons because of the 100-150km range charging is a tad of a hassle even tho some 220v can charge a car in 3-5 hours

reasons why we still rarely see them barbaric prices oil judes own a lot of battery patents and its "new" tech thats been out since the 70's

I'm gonna be taking a 2 year electromechanics (kinda a millwright but not "legally" because of the unions in quebec) program in the fall gonna try and get me some grant money to build one for as cheap as possible with at least 120km range and try and get local media to do a story on
>SEE THIS SHIT IS SIMPLE AND SHOULD NOT COST MORE THEN A DOWN PAYMENT TO A HOUSE also electisty is cheap as fuck in quebec while gas is not

Truth.

My province has zero EV subsidies.
Starting price on a Chevy Bolt here, completely bare bones, is about 45 grand before tax for absolute base model.

So even after you factor in the maintenance savings that you get with an EV, and the cheapness of electricity here, (I've worked it out to about 8 grand saved over the small crossover I drive over a 5 year period)
It's still absurdly expensive for what is essentially a chevy sonic.

If I'm going to spend that kind of bones on a subcompact I'd just get a Ford Fiesta ST and my 5 year ownership cost would still be cheaper.

In two years there should be batteries based on fluorine and polymers that outcompetes lithium ion systems.

>source: I work with the scientist who is pursuing the patent

Even if it's not his exact system, that's one of the routes that is being heavily investigated. If that does in fact become the case, then batteries will likely become significantly lighter.

Dirty Hydrogen will probably take off before batteries can charge in minuets without degrading rapidly/catching on fire.

Liquid H2 has a potential output advantage over gasoline and if major industrial companies are talking up hydrogen fuel cells or hydrogen combustion engines, they are seeking that advantage.

The first rule of good gold mining is "Go where the gold has already been found." Same principle with power output. If H2 has the potential to out do gasoline in power output, figure out a way to access the higher power.

you can buy second hand
if you look up the prices of second hand Leafs you will notice that it is a bloodbath

I would bet my schlong that in two years I won't see this technology on the market, nor in four years, or even eight. EV is a scam that keeps pushing off the date of having a viable product.

it would be neat to see if hydrogen or other types of reactions work but I kind of doubt it

>Hydrogen
Shiggy diggy

Leftwing scam, they run off coal and nuclear energy.Just like the "green bathrooms" with electric hand dryers instead of paper towels. Paper is a renewable resource and recyclable, electric dryers use nuclear and coal power.