mrken30

The reason you saw so many up Wendover woods

Owen778

That probably belongs in the thread about gas prices on the main USA forum, but can you provide a reliable link that says 7 years?

CelticRover

Russia is planning on 7 years.


Russia plans $40 a barrel oil for next seven years as Saudi showdown intensifies - Telegraph

Owen778

I just went a on a quick search, and the only thing I found was this Telegraph article, which conversely says that Russia has challenged the Saudis by saying that they (Russia) can cope with low oil prices for 7 years. As the article says, I suspect that is a negotiating bluff.

Russia plans $40 a barrel oil for next seven years as Saudi showdown intensifies - Telegraph

Owen778

We cross-posted. That's significantly different to what your previous post says.

The Saudis have repeatedly claimed that production will drop quickly, and so to expect oil price to recover fairly soon. They are clearly wrong on that, though.

CelticRover

Are you referring to uk_grenada?

Steerpike

Why does a car that uses an electric motor and simple transmission have a 'true cost' that is very high (compared to an ICE)? And why would you not expect that 'true cost' to go down when economies of scale kick in? ICE's have the benefit of a hundred years of experience in widespread use.

Fundamentally, using a rechargeable battery and an electric motor makes more sense in many ways than carrying and burning volatile fuel. The only question is 'when' - when will electric vehicles outsell ICE vehicles.

Owen778

Oh yes, apologies.

Gozit

Yep, nature of the beast I guess, its said a bit downthread because there's no real tranny to speak of, its just a direct input... It seems with everything going "forward" , first with the electric cars, then later on (probably not within my lifetime before this becomes mainstream) driverless cars, all these new innovations leave behind those who have a passion for driving...

Pulaski

Volatile hydrocarbon fuel has a far higher energy density than a battery, and that is always likely to be true, so electric vehicles carry around a slab of metal that is heavier than a tank of petrol/diesel, and yet in most cases has a range that is a fraction of that of a similar petrol/diesel vehicle. "Recharging" a petrol/diesel takes 3-4 minutes and little or no planning ahead. Imagine how many pumps you'd need if it took hours.

We can argue about this at great length, but looking from a global perspective, the most likely and logical solution is that countries with rapidly increasing number of cars that need NEW infrastructure are better suited to new technology, rather than the mature economies of North America and Western Europe, where there is already good infrastructure, but for different technology.

A similar situation developed in Brazil for ethanol powered vehicles, because they are able to produce substantial quantities of cheap ethanol. Despite all the ballyhoo about ethanol production in the US about ten years ago, the only reason that ethanol is added at the rate of 10% to petrol is because the federal government says so. Ethanol is not cheap or plentiful in the US. One solution isn't going to work for every country - it doesn't for ethanol and it probably won't for electric vehicles either.

It's funny that a petrol or diesel powered car is likely to last longer than a washing machine, despite washing machines being "just a direct connection from the electric motor to the drivetrain. No hot engine, no oil to burn, no sophisticated emissions controls, no timing belts, etc."

Steerpike

But already, today, the Tesla has a range close to a conventional car, and does so in a package that is attractive and, apparently, very fast. So while the energy density of gasoline may be higher, it does not seem to be an insurmountable problem. I presume the lower engine/transmission weight of an electric car somewhat offsets the weight of the battery?

But more fundamentally, at some point I suspect the entire approach to batteries will change. What if you could drive your car into a 'recharge station' and slide out the existing battery, and slide in a fully charged replacement? If batteries were to become standardized, this is not beyond comprehension. Batteries could become like propane tanks; you 'swap out' the entire item and no longer 'own' the container, just rent it (I'm using the analogy of the propane tank replacement system that exists everywhere now; instead of taking your own tank in and getting someone to fill it, you hand in the empty tank and get a full one in return). There are many ideas out there to solve this part of the problem and I don't know which one will prevail, but again - the Tesla already demonstrates that it's feasible to get 300 miles so it can only get better.


Not a valid comparison, but I'm sure you know that. Washing machines are cheaply produced using cheap materials to deliver a cheap solution. If the same amount of engineering design and quality of materials went in to a washing machine, it could easily outlive a car. In fact the evidence is before us - poorly designed, cheap cars do exist and don't last longer than washing machines.

Pulaski

Yeah I knew it wasn't a fully valid comparison, but thinking about it, the irony is that to make electric cars palatably cheap they are going to made (almost) as cheaply as washing machines. The parallel already exists in phones - they are made with a two year anticipated life, to be bought, used, and thrown away.

And another thing I mentioned recently but I don't believe has been responded to, is the fact that states are already planning road pricing for cars because they are starting to lose significant tax revenue from not only fully electric vehicles but also high efficiency petrol cars. The love for electric vehicles is going to tarnish just a little when people start getting billed several cents for every mile they drive each month.

Steerpike

So we have one set of govt. departments subsidizing/encouraging high-efficiency vehicles, and another set of departments trying to implement schemes that will counter those subsidies; amusing indeed.

Ultimately, I would expect the forces that want to encourage / subsidize the ownership of high-fuel-efficiency vehicles to simply make a further adjustment to counter the negative effect of the usage taxes. Nothing is cast in stone. If the adoption rate is sufficient, they won't need to do it. It all comes down to targets and whether they are being met or not, I suspect. Someone somewhere has set a goal of 'x' electric vehicles on the road, and they have a budget to achieve that.

And on top of that, you have Tesla (and others) who want to see adoption, and who can make business decisions based on that. "We will pay your mileage tax for the next 5 years" could be a simple sales pitch.

Ultimately, it comes down to long-term viability. You seem to have a fundamental belief that it's not feasible (and thus, all these schemes and programs are exercises in futility), while I believe it's just a matter of time before EVs are the norm. I think you may be allowing your love of ICE vehicles to color your opinion.

Boomhauer

Porsche has been utilizing flywheels on 1 or 2 of their models.

Oshkosh corp and a garbage truck manufacturer have installed reservoirs that store the captured braking energy in a pressurised fluid, which is then released when needed.
The Wiki page says this type of hybrid captures 70-80% of the braking energey compared with 25% for electric hybrids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_hybrid

uk_grenada

The actual saudi quote was 8 years, but it was last year. My saudi friends said the comment was placed in several places in their press which is the same as a government statement - according to them. Saudi Arabia can last eight years on low oil prices, says former adviser | World news | The Guardian