Electric Vehicles

[SSVol]

One thing ORNL was looking at was seeing if nano-building batteries made sense. Basically use any material manufactured in specific means to do similar to the chemical reaction found with current battery ideas.

One possibility along the same lines is whether a super-cap style technology comes along that completely obsoletes chemical batteries. The theoretical efficiency of graphene and other materials could blow this wide open. Efficient storage fixes everything...grid utilization, car cost, car range, etc. Demand makes it viable to develop new tech, but it's chicken and egg. The government pushing (subsidies + mandates) makes it viable sooner than would otherwise happen.

 

[hog88]

It's a battery...a chemical reaction...not a nuclear reaction. The amount of lithium isn't being reduced by the process of using the battery. The amount of fossil fuels in the ground are absolutely being reduced when we burn them. Not even close to the same thing.

Yes, there is entropy in every system, but if the lithium can be recycled into new batteries while being powered by renewable sources, the system has lost nothing. Until and unless we find a way to efficiently create gasoline from the sun, the entropy of burning petroleum isn't sustainable.

Again, doesn't really matter what we think. It's coming whether we want it or not. I just choose to look for the positive aspects of it.

We haven’t yet figured out a way to economically recycle lithium batteries and there isn’t a guarantee we will. Currently recycling lithium ion batteries is an energy intensive process that generates toxic waste that must be disposed of.

 

[InVOLuntary]

Oh I suppose some of them do use my stuff, but there is no particular windfall to me due to EVs.

I think the logical answer is that it takes a long time to turn a boat the size of the automotive industry, and whether or not I personally believe that anthropogenic global warming is real or not (I don't), some well-meaning people do. Oh, I think we have global warming. The climate has heated and cooled many times over the centuries. Question is are we accelerating it? I could even believe we are to some extent. My issues with EVs as they pertain to the environment and weather it will make a significant impact are several fold.

1. How much carbon is utilized in the production of energy to charge these EVs. You as an engineer know full and well that each time an energy changes form you lose a portion of than energy, the inefficiency of changing that energy. So if we take a fossil fuel and put it into the vehicle directly we bypass that conversion whereas if we place that fossil fuel and change it to electric energy we're taking a step that is inefficient. By doing this are we really making a significant impact on carbon releases?

2. How much carbon are we emitting mining for the batteries and how much environmental damage are we doing to the environment retireving the raw materials for these batteries? I'm extremely skeptical of these climates scientist and their short sightedness. We used to have paper bags, glass bottles. We switched from renewable resources, things that are renewable resources that can be easily recycled to plastic, a product derived from fossil fuels and now we have a plastic garbage problem, a product that take millennia to biodegrade.



Given that, plus the leverage that oil producing countries exert on us economically through how much they choose to pump, or not, moving to a power source for our cars that 1) isn't finite, and 2) isn't controlled by people who like to yank our chain, just seems prudent. You can have reasonable debates regarding how the government is going about it, but the size of the boat they are turning mandates that they push as hard as they reasonably believe they can.

Sure, fossil fuels are finite no doubt but there are literally hundreds of years in reserve. And up until a couple of years ago we were a net exporter of crude. I'm all for not being held hostage to any country but that shouldn't be a problem.

Finally, you want to make EV's take off? Make them more affordable to buy and own. Make them practical that will do what people need to do with them. Make them fit the needs of people. Let the free market determine when. That's what drives progress, not some government mandate. Usually government forcing things has the opposite effect.

JMO

Again, JMO. Your mileage may vary.

 

[SSVol]

We haven’t yet figured out a way to economically recycle lithium batteries and there isn’t a guarantee we will. Currently recycling lithium ion batteries is an energy intensive process that generates toxic waste that must be disposed of.

We won't be using lithium. It's really moot.

 

[SSVol]

Again, it's coming whether we want it or not. If I'm getting screwed regardless, I might as well try to enjoy it.

There is always list of reasons why something is a bad idea. And there is always a bunch of nerds trying to fix it. Ultimately it'll work or it won't. My opinion is that it will, with some pain, and in the not-too-distant future I'll be driving an EV and not missing the gas station.

But I've been wrong before. I may be on this too.

 

[LouderVol]

One possibility along the same lines is whether a super-cap style technology comes along that completely obsoletes chemical batteries. The theoretical efficiency of graphene and other materials could blow this wide open. Efficient storage fixes everything...grid utilization, car cost, car range, etc. Demand makes it viable to develop new tech, but it's chicken and egg. The government pushing (subsidies + mandates) makes it viable sooner than would otherwise happen.

Except that sense Obama the government money going into those alternate projects largely dried up.

 

[SSVol]

Except that sense Obama the government money going into those alternate projects largely dried up.

Solid state batteries are already becoming a commercial reality. It isn't exotic, but it is a significant improvement over existing lithium ion tech. Big increase in density, 500% increase in lifespan, big reduction in heat losses, and elimination of fire hazard. Samsung is building a plant now to take it to production. This is real.

NASA is going a step further with SABER, a program to build solid state batteries for aircraft. I think I read 200% the energy density of lithium ion, but at least one version wasn't lithium based.

Admittedly those are both just incremental improvements, but they are real now and would have a very meaningful impact on EVs.

But with the worldwide market for EVs being 100s of millions of vehicles, the money will be there in the private sector to fund new tech. Government mandates the changes, but it's ultimately private business that will develop the tech, and they have a huge motivation to do so.

 

[Wireless1]

Durability is crap too. EVs will eventually be a failed experiment

Was discussing with a coworker, spending 25%+ to replace the batteries every 8 years, will there be a new market where EVs will be “remanufactured” (like many industrial components like valves, pumps, and motors) and sold at 50-75% or a new model with similar warranty and life expectancy

 

[hog88]

We won't be using lithium. It's really moot.

I just want to say, this has been a great discussion. All to often in the PF it devolves into "your a poopy head" name calling. Thanks.

Now back in topic. I get that we will see advances in battery tech but we're not there yet and I hope one day we will get there. What I oppose and what pisses me off is our tax dollars being wasted pushing an unreliable and unproven tech and ignoring a proven clean reliable energy source that we have a plethora of right under our feet.

 

[hog88]

Was discussing with a coworker, spending 25%+ to replace the batteries every 8 years, will there be a new market where EVs will be “remanufactured” (like many industrial components like valves, pumps, and motors) and sold at 50-75% or a new model with similar warranty and life expectancy

I don't see how they can be viable if there isn't.

 

[SSVol]

I just want to say, this has been a great discussion. All to often in the PF it devolves into "your a poopy head" name calling. Thanks.

Now back in topic. I get that we will see advances in battery tech but we're not there yet and I hope one day we will get there. What I oppose and what pisses me off is our tax dollars being wasted pushing an unreliable and unproven tech and ignoring a proven clean reliable energy source that we have a plethora of right under our feet.

I'm am old engineer. I have opinions, but I know my limitations. It's a little easier to talk about things like this without emotion, and hopefully without hubris.

It's a well established truth that we get more of what we subsidize and less of what we tax. So the government uses that as the carrot and stick. Sucks, but that's the reality.

 

[SSVol]

I just want to say, this has been a great discussion. All to often in the PF it devolves into "your a poopy head" name calling. Thanks.

Now back in topic. I get that we will see advances in battery tech but we're not there yet and I hope one day we will get there. What I oppose and what pisses me off is our tax dollars being wasted pushing an unreliable and unproven tech and ignoring a proven clean reliable energy source that we have a plethora of right under our feet.

...and that is the chief reason I don't wander far from the RF. We have our biases there, but I know the players.

 

[FLVOL_79]

1 word: hydrogen fuel cell.

 

[VolStrom]

I'm am old engineer. I have opinions, but I know my limitations. It's a little easier to talk about things like this without emotion, and hopefully without hubris.

It's a well established truth that we get more of what we subsidize and less of what we tax. So the government uses that as the carrot and stick. Sucks, but that's the reality.

I found it interesting when the new $7500 federal tax credit came along all EV manufacturers suddenly had major price increases.

 

[LouderVol]

Solid state batteries are already becoming a commercial reality. It isn't exotic, but it is a significant improvement over existing lithium ion tech. Big increase in density, 500% increase in lifespan, big reduction in heat losses, and elimination of fire hazard. Samsung is building a plant now to take it to production. This is real.

NASA is going a step further with SABER, a program to build solid state batteries for aircraft. I think I read 200% the energy density of lithium ion, but at least one version wasn't lithium based.

Admittedly those are both just incremental improvements, but they are real now and would have a very meaningful impact on EVs.

But with the worldwide market for EVs being 100s of millions of vehicles, the money will be there in the private sector to fund new tech. Government mandates the changes, but it's ultimately private business that will develop the tech, and they have a huge motivation to do so.

Except that the only reason EVs are viable at all is because of private development. Tesla made EVs sexy enough to sell. They existed before but there wasnt a demand, and there is still no government mandate for them.

It's part of why I hate the government got involved. Back then, 2010 or so you had two groups pushing green tech. The generally right leaning prepper/independent types who wanted to be off grid for their own gains. And the tree huggers. Government involvement nuked the first group. Instead of letting it happen naturally over 50 years with wide acceptance the government has tried to force it over 20 years with some big resistance. And because the government forced it jt has lead to the pending lithium/other heavy metal battery issue, the energy supply issue, and general infrastructure complexity.

The market would have solved that before it became an issue. Instead the government made up a new problem to TRY and solve and old problem and failed at both. Back in the day you used to be able to resale any left over energy back to the grid. The governments got involved and you largely cant do it as easily/profitably as you could.

 

[SSVol]

I found it interesting when the new $7500 federal tax credit came along all EV manufacturers suddenly had major price increases.

Tesla just dropped prices by as much as 20% in some models, and the subsidies are still in force. Ultimately the government mandate is forcing all car manufacturers into the space, and Tesla is having to actually compete.

But yeah, gamers will game.

 

[SSVol]

Except that the only reason EVs are viable at all is because of private development. Tesla made EVs sexy enough to sell. They existed before but there wasnt a demand, and there is still no government mandate for them.

It's part of why I hate the government got involved. Back then, 2010 or so you had two groups pushing green tech. The generally right leaning prepper/independent types who wanted to be off grid for their own gains. And the tree huggers. Government involvement nuked the first group. Instead of letting it happen naturally over 50 years with wide acceptance the government has tried to force it over 20 years with some big resistance. And because the government forced it jt has lead to the pending lithium/other heavy metal battery issue, the energy supply issue, and general infrastructure complexity.

The market would have solved that before it became an issue. Instead the government made up a new problem to TRY and solve and old problem and failed at both. Back in the day you used to be able to resale any left over energy back to the grid. The governments got involved and you largely cant do it as easily/profitably as you could.

It's impossible to know what the cause and effect really is, and everyone will view the problem from their own bias...it's simple human nature. As a former Army officer, I've seen both extremes of what the government can do. I do not believe the extremes of either side, I.e., the government can do no right, or the government can do no wrong. The reality is always more nuanced than that.

 

[hog88]

It's impossible to know what the cause and effect really is, and everyone will view the problem from their own bias...it's simple human nature. As a former Army officer, I've seen both extremes of what the government can do. I do not believe the extremes of either side, I.e., the government can do no right, or the government can do no wrong. The reality is always more nuanced than that.

There are a few things the government does right, an extremely minuscule amount of things.

 

[SSVol]

There are a few things the government does right, an extremely minuscule amount of things.

The military is government. I disagree.

 

[hog88]

The military is government. I disagree.

The military gets a helluva lot of things wrong. Been there done that got the t-shirt.

 

[SSVol]

The military gets a helluva lot of things wrong. Been there done that got the t-shirt.

And they are the most effective and feared fighting force on the planet. Hence my point. Government is neither as incompetent as some suggest, nor as infallible as others would. Yes, there is a middle ground.

 

[LouderVol]

And they are the most effective and feared fighting force on the planet. Hence my point. Government is neither as incompetent as some suggest, nor as infallible as others would. Yes, there is a middle ground.

You dont have to be 100% competent to be feared. We are feared because our politicians will roll up and deploy us at the drop of a hat. I doubt China is looking over at our death by power point and fearing that.

The nuance I see is that even when they are right or wrong, they also generally have some of the opposite in there as well. Only caveat would be I fully believe the government is capable of getting something 100% wrong.

The only other nuance would be are they getting it "wrong" on accident or by intent. there is a good bit of both. Every good they do comes with a self serving hook

 

[SSVol]

You dont have to be 100% competent to be feared. We are feared because our politicians will roll up and deploy us at the drop of a hat. I doubt China is looking over at our death by power point and fearing that.

The nuance I see is that even when they are right or wrong, they also generally have some of the opposite in there as well. Only caveat would be I fully believe the government is capable of getting something 100% wrong.

The only other nuance would be are they getting it "wrong" on accident or by intent. there is a good bit of both. Every good they do comes with a self serving hook

The government isn't a monolithic entity. It's people, just like you and I. Some of them are more flawed than others. Some of them are as fine a human as I've known. The worst of the private sector is motivated by greed. The worst of the government by control. The best of both can be a force for good. I do not inherently trust or distrust one over the other. Flawed people are flawed. Good people are good.

 

[Orangeburst]

And they are the most effective and feared fighting force on the planet. Hence my point. Government is neither as incompetent as some suggest, nor as infallible as others would. Yes, there is a middle ground.

Yes..but very inefficient..the programs that even produce hardware like the F-22..worlds premiere AS fighter..but so expensive hits the death spiral. But economies of scale are lost with a continuing revolving door Congress snd priorities.
A Nimitz cost like $4-5B..but lets gold plate with new multiple insertion tech that results in a $13B Ford. Or look at the I dont know $20B or so spent on LCS..and now to be retired. The Zummwalt with new 155 mm guns that are now sheleved for the price of the munitions.

Baby steps and with this mandated artificial push by the Feds..the tech and infrastructure isn't ready for PT

Lord knows..the gov is broke and should not subsidize anything as BIG as this at this point

 

[SSVol]

Yes..but very inefficient..the programs that even produce hardware like the F-22..worlds premiere AS fighter..but so expensive hits the death spiral. But economies of scale are lost with a continuing revolving door Congress snd priorities.
A Nimitz cost like $4-5B..but lets gold plate with new multiple insertion tech that results in a $13B Ford. Or look at the I dont know $20B or so spent on LCS..and now to be retired. The Zummwalt with new 155 mm guns that are now sheleved for the price of the munitions.

Baby steps

Oh I know. Again, my entire thesis is acknowledgement that nothing, private or public, is all good or all bad. it's all shades of grey.

I just chuckle that right leaners tend to trust the private sector, while distrusting the government, but generally supporting the military, while seemingly ignoring that military is government. While left leaners tend toward a complete inverse of that...business bad, government good, but military bad...even though it's government.

For the record, I lean right. I've just mellowed enough in my old age to concede that government does have a role in useful things...at times.

Even EVs. :grin: