Major issues with Tesla Model 3

[Wombat]

Return-to-base self-driving vehicles will allow other fuelling technologies to be considered with concentration of refuelling locations vs widespread ones being more economic.

 

[oivavoi]

Scientifically (it’s math and assumptions), when does it make sense to replace an old car with a new car if «environment» is the objective, aim?

I guess the question is this: How much energy goes into producing a new car, maintaining and driving it versus how much energy goes into maintenance and driving of the old car?

I think the answer is "never", on an individual case basis, assuming normal car usage (if one drives several hours every day, it might be different), as long as the old car functions. But then you also have the political aspects: Staying on a fossil cars maintains fossil infrastructure, while buying an electric car gives a small boost to the EV economy, which might make EVs over-take the market sooner. Those kind of politcal externalities are difficult to predict.

 

[svart-hvitt]

I think the answer is "never", on an individual case basis, assuming normal car usage (if one drives several hours every day, it might be different), as long as the old car functions. But then you also have the political aspects: Staying on a fossil cars maintains fossil infrastructure, while buying an electric car gives a small boost to the EV economy, which might make EVs over-take the market sooner. Those kind of politcal externalities are difficult to predict.

What is the global purpose of EV economy if it doesn’t save energy?

Locally, where I live, I am very happy though for EVs due to better air and noise.

 

[Dismayed]

What is the global purpose of EV economy if it doesn’t save energy?

Locally, where I live, I am very happy though for EVs due to better air and noise.

EVs are far more efficient in city driving than are fossil fuel cars because of regenerative braking, and because batteries are a highly efficient method of storing energy. It's also easier to manage air pollution at power plants than at millions of tail pipes.

Efficiency of electric cars will increase. There is an MIT spin-off near me, Solid Energy, that is now producing materials for solid electrolyte lithium metal batteries. They have 2x the energy density of lithium ion batteries, and they are safer. So batteries weight will be cut in half, and prices will fall.

http://www.solidenergysystems.com/

 

[oivavoi]

What is the global purpose of EV economy if it doesn’t save energy?

Locally, where I live, I am very happy though for EVs due to better air and noise.

Point is: EVs lead to lower C02 emissions and lower energy use, even when electricity comes from fossil fuels (and even more so when electricity is renewable of course). If we don't change to EVs or hydrogen cars, people will still buy fossil cars 20 to 30 years from now. So we prolong the era of fossil fuels. Buying an EV can therefore quicken a global change to EVs, and lead to quicker phase-out of fossil energy.

But assume this scenario: I have an old fossil car which works just fine. I drive maximum 30 minutes to 1 hour a day. I can keep this car for 15 more years. In this case, it is very likely that my total individual emissions will become higher if I choose to buy a new EV instead of keeping my old car.

So the difference is between effects on the individual level, and aggregate socio-political effects on the macro level.

 

[svart-hvitt]

Point is: EVs lead to lower C02 emissions and lower energy use, even when electricity comes from fossil fuels (and even more so when electricity is renewable of course). If we don't change to EVs or hydrogen cars, people will still buy fossil cars 20 to 30 years from now. So we prolong the era of fossil fuels. Buying an EV can therefore quicken a global change to EVs, and lead to quicker phase-out of fossil energy.

But assume this scenario: I have an old fossil car which works just fine. I drive maximum 30 minutes to 1 hour a day. I can keep this car for 15 more years. In this case, it is very likely that my total individual emissions will become higher if I choose to buy a new EV instead of keeping my old car.

So the difference is between effects on the individual level, and aggregate socio-political effects on the macro level.

Maybe Havanna will be the locally most polluted city and save the world, while Miami will be clean but drive the world to hell?

(Think of Havanna and Miami as metaphors).

Remember, the social responsibility of the corporation is to grow profits, not save the world. A corporate CEO of a listed company who says he wants to save the world could be jailed for setting his private interests before that of the shareholders.

The sum of short-term is long-term in many models behind modern society. I wonder who is to release that Gordian knot.

 

[Sal1950]

My car is 24 years old.

I can wait.

You got me beat Ray, my Ram pickup is only 12 yo. I'm in the market for a heart transplant, a used 707hp Dodge Hellcat engine that some dude totaled the body on. Or I might just spring for a new Hellcat Ram if they become available first.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/a21028358/the-hellcat-ram-is-real/

 

[Blumlein 88]

EVs are far more efficient in city driving than are fossil fuel cars because of regenerative braking, and because batteries are a highly efficient method of storing energy. It's also easier to manage air pollution at power plants than at millions of tail pipes.

Efficiency of electric cars will increase. There is an MIT spin-off near me, Solid Energy, that is now producing materials for solid electrolyte lithium metal batteries. They have 2x the energy density of lithium ion batteries, and they are safer. So batteries weight will be cut in half, and prices will fall.

http://www.solidenergysystems.com/

Just to be clear, efficiency of electric cars is unlikely to increase much. There simply isn't much more efficiency possible with the car running on electricity. Battery size, weight and energy storage can be improved and will have the largest impact. Conventional IC cars could use less energy if they were built totally of carbon fiber due to greatly reduced weight. Yet that mostly hasn't happened due to costs.

 

[Thomas savage]

Just to be clear, efficiency of electric cars is unlikely to increase much. There simply isn't much more efficiency possible with the car running on electricity. Battery size, weight and energy storage can be improved and will have the largest impact. Conventional IC cars could use less energy if they were built totally of carbon fiber due to greatly reduced weight. Yet that mostly hasn't happened due to costs.

They need to ‘charge ‘ while being driven.. so maybe some kind of conducting from a device imbedded in the road ..

Relying on the energy Carried around in a ‘battery’ is bollocks ( excuse the high level scientific terminology).

 

[Blumlein 88]

Scientifically (it’s math and assumptions), when does it make sense to replace an old car with a new car if «environment» is the objective, aim?

I guess the question is this: How much energy goes into producing a new car, maintaining and driving it versus how much energy goes into maintenance and driving of the old car?

Note: Tesla’s models S and X are heavier than most cars.

Is Ray the biggest environmentalist on ASR?

I've read several treatments of this question. It is all about assumptions and data on manufacturing, and I've found little consistency while lacking access to actual data beyond wide extremes of what is possible.

Reasonable treatments of the question seem to cluster around 5 years for new cars. That is a new IC car vs a new Tesla or similar. Beyond something like 5 years the electric is better for the environment based up energy use to make and use the vehicle. If comparing an existing car to buying a new EV it roughly doubles that to 10 years being the point at which EV is better. Of course details matter. Is the existing vehicle a Hummer or a Camry? Do you drive the average 13,000 miles per year or only 1300?

So Ray has probably driven at least two Florida species to extinction by keeping his gasoline burner for 14 excess years. Unless he mostly bikes around the flat land in Florida and drives only 1000 miles per year.

Then I drive a 23 year old small truck. And I couldn't have traded it for an EV 13 years ago as no practical versions were available. I'm unlikely to trade to an EV soon (though I would love to have one) due to environmental concerns. Buying the $49,000 version of the Tesla model 3 currently on offer would economically reduce the quality of my local environment for quite some time. I do have audio gear to buy yet you know.

 

[Blumlein 88]

They need to ‘charge ‘ while being driven.. so maybe some kind of conducting from a device imbedded in the road ..

Relying on the energy Carried around in a ‘battery’ is bollocks ( excuse the high level scientific terminology).

The solution to that was arrived at long ago.

 

[DonH56]

They need to ‘charge ‘ while being driven.. so maybe some kind of conducting from a device imbedded in the road ..

The former has been discussed and demos have been done but it is a major infrastructure issue to tear up all the roads to install the charging system, and then energy transmission efficiency is still not great...

Relying on the energy Carried around in a ‘battery’ is bollocks ( excuse the high level scientific terminology).

Compared to riding around with a gas tank at one end and ignition source at the other?

"There ain't no tens, there's flaws in all of them..."

Room-temperature superconductors could come in handy.

 

[Thomas savage]

The solution to that was arrived at long ago.

I was thinking about some wonderous alternating magnetic force but this will do .. , and the great thing about your solution here Is it’s safe to operate these while pissed up..

 

[DonH56]

Maybe we need to bring back the real Tesla?

 

[Thomas savage]

Maybe we need to bring back the real Tesla?

View attachment 12962

We gona shoot down those North Korean nukes with one of these ...?

 

[DonH56]

We gona shoot down those North Korean nukes with one of these ...?

Ironically, I considered mentioning nuclear-powered cars, but just knew someone would bring NK into the discussion, so I passed. And here it is after all; is there a moderator in the house?

 

[Cosmik]

We could use laser propulsion. Simply track every car with a high power laser mounted on a huge tower or airship over the city.

A general class of propulsion techniques in which the laser beam power is converted to electricity, which then powers some type of electric propulsion thruster.

A small quadcopter has flown for 12 hours and 26 minutes charged by a 2.25 kW laser (powered at less than half of its normal operating current), using 170 watt photovoltaic arrays as the power receiver and a laser has been demonstrated to charge the batteries of an unmanned aerial vehicle in flight for 48 hours.

 

[DonH56]

We could use laser propulsion. Simply track every car with a high power laser mounted on a huge tower or airship over the city.

Would make me nervous about the results of speeding... The penalty could be severe.

 

[DonH56]

I was thinking about some wonderous alternating magnetic force but this will do .. , and the great thing about your solution here Is it’s safe to operate these while pissed up..

Clearly a language barrier here... I suspect the image I have in mind is not what Sir Thomas had in mind.

 

[Wombat]

Low-energy traffic jam: