• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Status
Not open for further replies.

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
10,612
10,359
the Great Basin
✟400,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hyundai also recalled 82,000 electric vehicles in in 2021 because a defect in the lithium-ion batteries could cause them to spontaneously start burning even when the vehicles were parked.

Last year, owners of nearly 500,000 Kia and Hyundai vehicles were, similarly, warned to park their vehicles away from structures because of a risk of fire.

Look...I'm trying to tell the guy his car is on a recall list. It's a potentially dangerous defect. Hyundai has had this problem with EVs in the past. I don't know if the charging/battery problem in ionics is limited to battery degrading or not....and let's be honest, neither do you.

I'm not telling anyone not to buy EVs just because I don't think they're a good buy. If you do....go nuts. I just don't want this thing burning his home down and hurting anyone....or even just losing all its value before its 2 year warranty is up.

I'm sure that ice cars have a much more significant history of burning. They've been on roads for 100 years after all.

What I've never seen?



FEMA and the US highway association seem pretty reliable.

I suppose that the upside is that the speed of explosion and 5 times the heat means you don't have to worry about replacing your car once it detonates....you'll be dead.


Honestly though...I'm not interested in removing market choice. You want to buy a bomb to drive around....go for it.

Except that isn't his car, his car didn't exist yet. Instead, it was the same issue with the Chevy Bolt, and was not Chevy's, Hyundai's, or Kia's fault. Instead, it was LG (from what I recall) who had a manufacturing defect in a few batteries. And, again, it was because of a total of about 15 fires, out of 82,000 Hyundai (and another dozen from Chevy, out of over a hundred thousand). And again, that 500,000 Hyundai cars that it talks about, from the year before, were all gasoline powered cars, not EVs.

Also, if you look at the statistics again, that is out of 100,000 vehicles built, in a certain time period -- they are doing their best to keep the fact there have been more ICE cars produced from skewing the results. I'll also agree that battery fires accelerate faster and burn hotter but it shouldn't kill people, as there still should be time to exit the vehicle.
 
Upvote 0

weekEd

Active Member
Mar 4, 2024
377
39
Southwest
✟5,372.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Hyundai also recalled 82,000 electric vehicles in in 2021 because a defect in the lithium-ion batteries could cause them to spontaneously start burning even when the vehicles were parked.

Last year, owners of nearly 500,000 Kia and Hyundai vehicles were, similarly, warned to park their vehicles away from structures because of a risk of fire.

Look...I'm trying to tell the guy his car is on a recall list. It's a potentially dangerous defect. Hyundai has had this problem with EVs in the past. I don't know if the charging/battery problem in ionics is limited to battery degrading or not....and let's be honest, neither do you.

I'm not telling anyone not to buy EVs just because I don't think they're a good buy. If you do....go nuts. I just don't want this thing burning his home down and hurting anyone....or even just losing all its value before its 2 year warranty is up.

I'm sure that ice cars have a much more significant history of burning. They've been on roads for 100 years after all.

What I've never seen?



FEMA and the US highway association seem pretty reliable.

I suppose that the upside is that the speed of explosion and 5 times the heat means you don't have to worry about replacing your car once it detonates....you'll be dead.


Honestly though...I'm not interested in removing market choice. You want to buy a bomb to drive around....go for it.
a real car you couldn't afford.
you're the type that would complain if "it were too big".
 
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
10,612
10,359
the Great Basin
✟400,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As far as I know, the EPA rating is without AC, radio, wipers, and all the other electrics that suck power from your battery. 220 is the realistic number.

I can try to find the same site....but it's for charting EV trips on the highway. The 2024 tesla3 can reach a city 120 miles away from where I'm at starting with a full charge and ending with 10-15% according to the site. I think 220 is pretty generous.

Yes, the EPA is without AC, radio, wipers, and most other electronics. Again, particularly radio and wipers, which run off the 12V battery, use very little electricity -- not enough to really affect range. And, AC hurts the range more in a gas car than an electric car.



Sure...but if HP is what you're after buy a Bugatti.

Just using the same pair of cars that you were trying to use, just two cars that actually are more similar (though the Tesla still comes with more features).

I have no idea what model you're looking at....but I looked at a base model civic....and a base model tesla. That's the comparison....base models.

I'm pointing out it isn't comparable. Why not compare a Nissan Versa (the absolute cheapest car in 2024) verses the Bugatti? When you replace your car this year, are you going to buy a Versa because it is the cheapest? Or are there features you are willing to pay extra for, or do you want more interior space, etc? Your base model Civic against a base level Model 3 is not comparing equal cars. All I did was try and make a Tesla Model 3 and Honda Civic comparison that was somewhat more, but still not, equal.

No...you're missing the point. The comparison of a modern electric printer and a mimeograph machine was ridiculous. The EVs aren't some great leap forward in efficiency or quality. Calling them an improvement is even a stretch.

I'd say that you missed the point, since he was talking about cars 50 years from now. We know that gasoline cars have been build -- with lots of money going into trying to improve those ICE cars and their efficiency -- for well over 100 years. Even if you buy into the conspiracy theories about how efficiency improvements were "buried" by automakers and the oil companies, and so only give them credit for about 50 years where they've been working to improve ICE engines -- that is still a long time. There are some inefficiencies that limit gasoline engines from being more than about 40% efficient (though it can be improved by making them hybrids and adding a battery by maybe another 5%). Maybe I'm wrong, maybe someone will come along and find a way to convert the lost heat from gasoline engines into power -- but that seems highly unlikely.

By contrast, there are many areas it looks like EVs will improve over the next couple of decades, not to even bother including the next 50 years. Even ignoring solid state batteries, there is a lot of work being done on new battery compositions that will provide greater electrical density (giving an EV more range) while improving on the chemistry of the battery (lighter batteries with fewer rare and hard to refine minerals/metals). Then, to go back to solid state batteries, several companies are believe they will be ready to mass produce those batteries within the next decade.

The current evidence suggests that EVs in 50 years will have much better range, will be much lighter, and cost less than they do today. By contrast, gasoline motors will have a similar efficiency at a similar weight -- though the features on the car will improve and, possibly, people will find ways to further reduce emissions by some percentage. It isn't a stretch to think EVs in 50 years will be a vast improvement.
 
Upvote 0

MotoToTheMax

Active Member
Nov 3, 2022
375
421
40
United States
✟123,150.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Private
You know about the Ioniq recall....right?

Don't know if it applies to your car...but apparently they are prone to exploding and potentially burning down
Yeah we know about it. No, we're not affected by it. Even if we did a full recall we'd almost certainly get another EV. Probably not a Kia or Hyundai in that case, but we wouldn't get another ICE car.
 
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
10,612
10,359
the Great Basin
✟400,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If you think China, Europe, or any of that noise will do anything....you're kidding yourself.

China is doing something. Europe could probably make an argument that China isn't doing enough but, at this point, China seems to be doing more towards climate change than we are, so I'm not sure we are the ones that can criticize them. It also seems ironic how some here will criticize how Europe has been working to clean up their grid, but then simultaneously argue in one thread how their renewables aren't giving them enough electricity, that it can't replace hydrocarbons, while at the same time arguing they aren't doing anything.

Maybe you haven't noticed the war in Ukraine...those tanks aren't running off solar panels lol.

Wars have a history of being very environmentally unfriendly, even when comparing against the environmental standards of their day. Another reason we need to push back against Putin continually trying to start wars with his neighbors.

Maybe you haven't noticed those giant shipping barges that knock down bridges? Those aren't running on lithium batteries guy....

From what I've seen, pretty much everyone here agrees that long distance transportation (whether trucks or boats) are unlikely to move to Battery Electric Vehicles anytime soon, the technology does not support it. At the same time, trains can be electrified and should be (much how most are in Europe). And while these vehicles currently pollute more than cars, the sheer numbers of cars around the world means that cars do far more environmental damage than these transport vehicles.

EVs are the equivalent of "recycling" back in the 80s-90s. It's just a platitude for the foolish.

Except they aren't. They run far cleaner than ICE vehicles. Yes, they are "dirtier" to make initially but almost all studies show that, since they run far cleaner, that by 30,000 miles it is gasoline cars that have become "dirtier." I'll agree EVs aren't perfect and hopefully they will improve, as believed, over the next decade (with more improvements beyond).

OTOH, I think you'd dislike the "cleaner" alternatives even more, since that would likely involve doing away with most personal vehicles and moving to public transportation, along with making our towns and cities denser, with residential buildings (typically multi-family units) replacing all the parking lots we currently need for all the cars.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
China is doing something.

China is building more coal plants and lying to you.


Wars have a history of being very environmentally unfriendly

No kidding.

You know how we secure peace? Lots of weapons of war.

And they don't run on hopes and dreams.

From what I've seen, pretty much everyone here agrees that long distance transportation (whether trucks or boats) are unlikely to move to Battery Electric Vehicles anytime soon, the technology does not support it.

Don't forget commercial flights.

Combined....those types of transportation are bigger emitters of CO2 than all but the 5 or 6th biggest nations.



At the same time, trains can be electrified and should be (much how most are in Europe).

Trains aren't traveling that far in Europe.

You don't really understand the scope of this problem. You don't understand that we require food delivered from across the nation, and globe, and it won't happen by electric train or sailboat. Consider how many trains have been in disasters just in this administration and now consider starvation as a result.

This doesn't even touch on plastics....which are used in....oh yeah, everything. Nearly every single consumer product uses plastics. Do you know how plastics are made?

I can tell you exactly when we'll stop burning/refining petrochemicals.

When they run out.


 
  • Like
Reactions: Treewolf
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Yeah we know about it. No, we're not affected by it. Even if we did a full recall we'd almost certainly get another EV. Probably not a Kia or Hyundai in that case, but we wouldn't get another ICE car.

Just wanted to check buddy. Saw that article, saw your post, and it clicked. Glad you aren't affected.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Just using the same pair of cars that you were trying to use, just two cars that actually are more similar (though the Tesla still comes with more features).

More similar how? I'm talking about efficiency...not optimal performance (which always means less efficiency).


I'm pointing out it isn't comparable.

I agree. The civic wins pretty easily.



Why not compare a Nissan Versa (the absolute cheapest car in 2024) verses the Bugatti?

Is the versa an EV?



When you replace your car this year, are you going to buy a Versa because it is the cheapest?

No. I am buying a cheap car though....it's a depreciating asset.


I'd say that you missed the point, since he was talking about cars 50 years from now.

If he's talking about 50 years from now....then let's talk in 50 years.

It's a concession that the new technology isn't an upgrade.
 
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
10,612
10,359
the Great Basin
✟400,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
China is building more coal plants and lying to you.

Lying to me? Don't think so as they don't talk to me. Yes, they are building some coal plants, but also installing solar and other renewable energy production, building a lot of EVs (both for domestic use and export), etc. I imagine if we had been something closer to a third world nation and was still in the process of modernizing, just getting our grid built up, we'd be building coal plants, too -- not just keeping some online while we get cleaner plants online.

No kidding.

You know how we secure peace? Lots of weapons of war.

And they don't run on hopes and dreams.

Never claimed they did. At the same time, I think you'll find I support Ukraine and get frustrated at Republicans who keep blocking sending them weapons, despite a majority of Republicans supporting Ukraine.

Don't forget commercial flights.

Combined....those types of transportation are bigger emitters of CO2 than all but the 5 or 6th biggest nations.

What, you think we should ban commercial flights (both passenger and cargo)? I never claimed to support such things. At the same time, it is part of the reason we should do things like EVs, to lower the "cost" of the transportation modes that aren't easily made more "green."

The point is to do what we can to lower pollution, to include carbon emissions, while not destroying society. Yes, not everything can be fixed yet but that shouldn't stop us from doing what we can do.

Trains aren't traveling that far in Europe.

They aren't? While you can argue that there aren't a lot of long distance trains (over 1000 miles), there aren't really many in the US, either. Of course, in Europe some of that is political, as countries give priority to their own trains rather than those from other nations. At the same time, there are plenty of international trains in Europe (I can think of maybe one in the US, between New York and Toronto).

As for Europe, it makes a certain amount of sense that there are few cross-continent trains, as most people aren't traveling more than a day on the train -- typically the trips they need to take are much shorter. They do have longer trips for vacationers, such as trains that go directly between major European cities and ski resorts, beaches, etc. that are seasonal.

You don't really understand the scope of this problem. You don't understand that we require food delivered from across the nation, and globe, and it won't happen by electric train or sailboat. Consider how many trains have been in disasters just in this administration and now consider starvation as a result.

You claim to know what I know and understand? You appear to be clueless -- at least on that topic. I didn't say we should change 18-wheelers that are a major part of our shipping network to be electric, or that we need to electrify ships. As for trains, I'm not seeing how "train disasters" are any worse under this administration than under Trump. Maybe I'm missing something but there have been 2 "train disasters" under Biden and there were three under Trump; those accidents included 5 dead and 281 injured under Trump, 4 dead and 150 injured under Biden.

I also seem to recall the Biden administration pushing for more safeguards to improve train safety, safeguards that Congress has blocked. Though I fail to see how electrifying our train lines would have anything but a positive effect on train safety.

This doesn't even touch on plastics....which are used in....oh yeah, everything. Nearly every single consumer product uses plastics. Do you know how plastics are made?

I'm not sure what your point is here, at least how it has anything to do with what I've ever stated. Encouraging EVs over ICE cars does not stop all oil production, particularly since I agreed that long-haul trucks and boats, at least under current technology, need to keep using gasoline/oil. Last I knew, no one is burning plastic to fuel any type of vehicle, despite plastics being made from oil.

I do think something like hydrogen might be a good replacement for boat fuel -- the "waste" left over after the production of power could be safely dropped into the sea. But that will require better ways to isolate hydrogen before it is practical. And, possibly, if we do a good enough development of hydrogen, perhaps someday EVs will be hydrogen powered (with much smaller batteries).

I can tell you exactly when we'll stop burning/refining petrochemicals.

When they run out.

Hopefully not, I would hope that we find better solutions for more renewable types of energy before we run out of petroleum. And while I don't think plastic production should ever run us out of petroleum, particularly as we hopefully recycle more plastic, there are enough concerns about micro-plastics and other plastic byproducts that it would be good to find greener versions of plastics. But that is for the future, I don't expect to be around when that happens.
 
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
10,612
10,359
the Great Basin
✟400,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
More similar how? I'm talking about efficiency...not optimal performance (which always means less efficiency).

How about, to start, the Tesla is considered a luxury vehicle, the Civic is considered an economy car. In this case, the Civic would compare better to the Chevy Bolt, which starts at about $26K. I believe the Bolt still wins in the power category but is much closer to the Civic, with largely similar features.

Edit: just to add, if you are talking about efficiency, it would seem that the base Honda getting 36 MPG combined is destroyed by the Tesla getting 138 MPGe. But you aren't actually talking about efficiency -- since the better performing car has better efficiency.

I agree. The civic wins pretty easily.

That sounds like personal preference, and one a lot of people would disagree with -- though it still is comparing a luxury vs an economy car. Again, comparing the Bolt and the Civic works better.
Is the versa an EV?

You seemed pretty clear you preferred the Civic, which is not an EV. You seemed to believe that "cheaper is better," as that seemed to be the crux of your argument; therefore wouldn't the Versa win against the Civic, too, since the Versa is cheaper? Or is your "cheaper is better" only because one is an EV?

No. I am buying a cheap car though....it's a depreciating asset.

Again, so why would you buy the Civic over the Versa? Your argument to this point is that the cheaper car is better; therefore, the Versa must be better than the Civic.

If he's talking about 50 years from now....then let's talk in 50 years.

It's a concession that the new technology isn't an upgrade.

And that is your opinion. At the same time, it seems like every first world nation (as well as most nations in the world) is trying to transition away from ICE cars, with the only question being how fast the transition will occur.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
How about, to start, the Tesla is considered a luxury vehicle,

By who???? I picked a Tesla 3 because they're not blowing up under water.

Again, so why would you buy the Civic over the Versa? Your argument to this point is that the cheaper car is better; therefore, the Versa must be better than the Civic.

Did I say I was buying a civic?


And that is your opinion. At the same time, it seems like every first world nation

Is increasing their CO2 emissions.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Lying to me? Don't think so as they don't talk to me. Yes, they are building some coal plants, but also installing solar and other renewable energy production

Explain whatever you think "renewable" means in that sentence please.


 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
How about, to start, the Tesla is considered a luxury vehicle, the Civic is considered an economy car. In this case, the Civic would compare better to the Chevy Bolt, which starts at about $26K. I believe the Bolt still wins in the power category but is much closer to the Civic, with largely similar features.

Edit: just to add, if you are talking about efficiency, it would seem that the base Honda getting 36 MPG combined is destroyed by the Tesla getting 138 MPGe. But you aren't actually talking about efficiency -- since the better performing car has better efficiency.



That sounds like personal preference, and one a lot of people would disagree with -- though it still is comparing a luxury vs an economy car. Again, comparing the Bolt and the Civic works better.


You seemed pretty clear you preferred the Civic, which is not an EV. You seemed to believe that "cheaper is better," as that seemed to be the crux of your argument; therefore wouldn't the Versa win against the Civic, too, since the Versa is cheaper? Or is your "cheaper is better" only because one is an EV?



Again, so why would you buy the Civic over the Versa? Your argument to this point is that the cheaper car is better; therefore, the Versa must be better than the Civic.



And that is your opinion. At the same time, it seems like every first world nation (as well as most nations in the world) is trying to transition away from ICE cars, with the only question being how fast the transition will occur.

Also...I didn't pick a Chevy Bolt because it's...

1. A subcompact.
2. An EV with an average battery life of 3-5 years...depending on conditions.
3. Replacement batteries are 16,000$.

That's just garbage. It's a waste of money and materials. I have no idea what MPG means on a Tesla. I was under the impression they don't have gas tanks. I thought they were electric.
 
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
10,612
10,359
the Great Basin
✟400,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
By who???? I picked a Tesla 3 because they're not blowing up under water.

From what I've seen previously, most of the automotive industry. For example, Kelly Blue Book, CarFax, US News & World Report, cars.com, Motor Trend, etc.

Did I say I was buying a civic?

The clear implication was it was a waste of money to buy something more than the cheapest car. So you are admitting that price is not the sole factor to look at when buying a car -- meaning that it isn't as simple that a base Honda Civic is cheaper than a base Tesla Model 3, as you were attempting to claim.

Is increasing their CO2 emissions.

Looking at this chart, it seems that most Western countries are decreasing their emissions. Granted, there were some big drops due to COVID and it is possible they might go up, but as of the end of 2022 (at least in the charts I'm looking at), they largely haven't gone back up.
 
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
10,612
10,359
the Great Basin
✟400,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Also...I didn't pick a Chevy Bolt because it's...

1. A subcompact.
2. An EV with an average battery life of 3-5 years...depending on conditions.
3. Replacement batteries are 16,000$.

You are completely wrong on the Bolt -- the battery should last as long as the car. You do realize the batteries came with, at a minimum, an 8-year, 100,000 mile warranty? Yes, Chevrolet did get a few bad battery cells from their supplier (my recollection is it was LG) and ended up recalling all Bolts and replacing the batteries to ensure they repaired the issue. That had nothing to do with "wear" but was a manufacturing issue when the batteries were produced.

That's just garbage. It's a waste of money and materials. I have no idea what MPG means on a Tesla. I was under the impression they don't have gas tanks. I thought they were electric.

MPGe (Miles per Gallon, electric) is a term "invented" by the EPA so you can compare efficiency between gasoline and electric vehicles (to include plug-in hybrids while in electric mode). An explanation, "To determine MPGe ratings, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) uses a set amount of electric energy that's equal to the energy contained in 1 gallon of gasoline. The EPA says one gallon of gas contains 115,000 BTUs of energy--which equates to 33.7 kilowatt-hours. For a battery-electric car, the distance it can cover on that amount of energy is used to determine its MPGe rating, which goes on the window sticker in place of the traditional miles-per-gallon figures."

So, the base Honda Civic can go 36 miles on 115,000 BTUs of energy (one gallon of gasoline), while the Tesla Model 3 can go 138 miles on that same 115,000 BTUs (33.7 kWh of electricity).
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
The clear implication was it was a waste of money to buy something more than the cheapest car.

The implication was to pick a comparable car. I don't consider a Tesla 3 a "luxury" car. If you do though I'll gladly take an example of a comparable luxury vehicle from your list.


Looking at this chart, it seems that most Western countries are decreasing their emissions. Granted, there were some big drops due to COVID and it is possible they might go up, but as of the end of 2022 (at least in the charts I'm looking at), they largely haven't gone back up.

You know what? I'll grant it...even with the covid. I completely forgot about the covid co2 dip and it's too soon to say if they'll return to increasing or not....

Fair?

Also none of this matters since this is the world emissions chart...


co2.png


Can you tell if that's trending up or down?
 

Attachments

  • co2.png
    co2.png
    5.2 KB · Views: 13
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You are completely wrong on the Bolt -- the battery should last as long as the car. You do realize the batteries came with, at a minimum, an 8-year, 100,000 mile warranty?

A warranty won't cover accidents....and you're making my case for me.

Because the idiots in this thread that want to ban ICE cars dream of a future where all cars are electric....

And you know what will happen then?

No more free batteries. You'll pay out thousands every few years because you won't have any other options.


MPGe (Miles per Gallon, electric) is a term "invented" by the EPA so you can compare efficiency between gasoline and electric vehicles (to include plug-in hybrids while in electric mode).

See below for the problem with that.


So, the base Honda Civic can go 36 miles on 115,000 BTUs of energy (one gallon of gasoline), while the Tesla Model 3 can go 138 miles on that same 115,000 BTUs (33.7 kWh of electricity).

A Tesla 3 is about 1000lbs more than a Honda Civic.

So no...while they may have convinced you that the Tesla actually has a further range....it doesn't, it's not even close.

More weight requires more power....at lower speeds and shorter distances.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
39,990
12,573
✟487,130.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You are completely wrong on the Bolt -- the battery should last as long as the car. You do realize the batteries came with, at a minimum, an 8-year, 100,000 mile warranty? Yes, Chevrolet did get a few bad battery cells from their supplier (my recollection is it was LG) and ended up recalling all Bolts and replacing the batteries to ensure they repaired the issue. That had nothing to do with "wear" but was a manufacturing issue when the batteries were produced.



MPGe (Miles per Gallon, electric) is a term "invented" by the EPA so you can compare efficiency between gasoline and electric vehicles (to include plug-in hybrids while in electric mode). An explanation, "To determine MPGe ratings, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) uses a set amount of electric energy that's equal to the energy contained in 1 gallon of gasoline. The EPA says one gallon of gas contains 115,000 BTUs of energy--which equates to 33.7 kilowatt-hours. For a battery-electric car, the distance it can cover on that amount of energy is used to determine its MPGe rating, which goes on the window sticker in place of the traditional miles-per-gallon figures."

So, the base Honda Civic can go 36 miles on 115,000 BTUs of energy (one gallon of gasoline), while the Tesla Model 3 can go 138 miles on that same 115,000 BTUs (33.7 kWh of electricity).

Here....I'll help you out with a more realistic power conversion.

1 gallon of gasoline (an incredibly energy dense fluid per weight) is roughly 36.6 kilowatt hours. The entire 12.5 gallon tank therefore holds 460ish kilowatt hours of energy....moving a 3000 lbs vehicle.

Your Tesla 3 battery? 75 kilowatt hours....the whole battery. A full charge. That's the model 3 long range lol. The base model is around 57.5 on a full charge. It has to move a 4000lb vehicle.


So no.

It's not close. There's simply no comparison. Long after you driving a Tesla 3 long range with a full charge comes to a dead stop with no power....I would be going hundreds of miles further in realistically any similar sized sedan.


Edit- maybe some day in the future that battery will hold 500 kilowatt hours of energy but we aren't there yet, and realistically, we won't be there in our lifetimes. Do you understand the problem? Gasoline is extremely energy dense for how incredibly light it is. The giant battery which powers an EV is not only much heavier, but also far less energy dense.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.