I still don't see EV's Replacing ICEs.

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to frenchyd :

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

I understand your support of the oil companies. Plus they compete with each other. .   Further "big Oil" is also investing in renewables. That is why Texas is reported to have more renewable power generation than any other state. 

 

I'm not supporting oil, just calling balls and strikes. I enjoy the convenience of my current methods of travel, and resist increases in costs travel or to power and heat my home. Or to ship the goods that I rely on. I also appreciate the security our military provides. If those can be done without oil, great. We aren't anywhere near there yet.

    I have no doubt about the truth  of the complexity of figuring out the various tax breaks the oil companies get.   I won't bother.  To me it's not which gets more or anything like that.  I hope the field is more or less level.  
 

But it's not level, and maybe it shouldn't be. We want the best option for society. The problem is, it's really hard to determine what that is when we cherry pick evidence to support a conclusion rather than use an evidence to reach a conclusion. 

  I just know that we will be pulling oil out of the ground long after you and I are worm food. 
        Do you know anything about trains?  Steam was king through WW2 and by the mid 50's diesel electric took over. 10 years from coal to oil. 
    Will it only take another 10 years for EV's to take over I don't know.  
   But most people ( 99%) don't care what powers the car. Cost and Convenience are all they care about. 

Diesel replaced steam because it was better in just about every way. That example- just like the horse and car example- might seem relatable to the ICE vs EV discussion, but it really isn't. EV's do a lot of things better, but most of those things were already good enough for most ICE drivers. Cost and charge time are still sticking points. But speaking of trains, California is pushing for zero emission freight trains by 2035. Technically zero emissions in the state, so I guess they will haul train cars full of batteries around within the state? It's a good thing transportation costs aren't very important to the economy. 

Diesel electric trains?   How hard would it be to use all electric?  ( not hard at all).  Incidently most trains are well in excess of 20 years old.   They already need replacing.  
    As far as cost?   
 Tesla's Model 2's will cost starting at $17,500 with 300+ range*and 10 minutes to  add 200 additional miles on a Tesla supercharger. Right now there are 45,000 of those chargers nation wide and the goal is the New York plant is increasing production to 10,000 annually.    
  *. My speculation  based on Tesla's investors day information 

In reply to frenchyd :

Every few posts you say something that makes me think that you can't be real, that you have just been trolling us all this time. That post above is one of them. If so, well done. 

I think frenchys account has been hacked by Elon Musk.  Tesla has been promising things that will probably never happen for almost a decade.  I would not take there promises of what is coming too seriously.

Out of curiosity, I tried to calculate how much battery would be needed to take a freight train up the busy Cajon Pass in California. I figured a mid sized freight train of 10,000 tons. The train would need to climb about 3,700 feet. I figure the the energy needed to lift 10,000 tons 3,700 feet is about 30 mega Watts. This is just the vertical energy needed, not including the horizontal energy needed to travel. A stationary 1 MW battery takes up a 20' container and weighs around 18 tons. So 30 MW would be over 500 tons of batteries. I'm sure they could condense it a bit for train use, but weight would likely go up to make it suitable for the environment. So a good chunk of the train's size and weight would be batteries. I'm sure I'm off a bit somewhere, but it should be in the ballpark. 

With Regard Elon musk. He is an expert at getting free publicity.  So sometimes he needs to pull others into his dreams,  his goals 

  Yet often enough he achieves them.  Perhaps not exactly as we'd like them  or exactly on schedule.  
   That doesn't mean you can dismiss him . Ignore all that he has achieved so far.  
   For example his reusable rockets have already saved NASA 80 billion this year alone.  
 He popularized  a mode of auto propulsion that history had ignored.  In doing so  He's changed the whole global auto industry.  
  Ignoring the EV portion  the cars themselves are brilliant. Designed to minimize production costs  and use of materials.   The rear chassis for example which is typically made up of more than 100 parts  he has reduced to one stamping. 
     Unlike every other manufacture  improvements to existing cars  appear as if magic during the recharging phase,  Free 

Boost_Crazy said:

Out of curiosity, I tried to calculate how much battery would be needed to take a freight train up the busy Cajon Pass in California. I figured a mid sized freight train of 10,000 tons. The train would need to climb about 3,700 feet. I figure the the energy needed to lift 10,000 tons 3,700 feet is about 30 mega Watts. This is just the vertical energy needed, not including the horizontal energy needed to travel. A stationary 1 MW battery takes up a 20' container and weighs around 18 tons. So 30 MW would be over 500 tons of batteries. I'm sure they could condense it a bit for train use, but weight would likely go up to make it suitable for the environment. So a good chunk of the train's size and weight would be batteries. I'm sure I'm off a bit somewhere, but it should be in the ballpark. 

It won't be battery.  It will be like The old street cars with overhead contact. 
  The rails would provide one leg and the overhead wire the other. Since they would be separated by the height of the train plus addition clearance required. 
     Subways use three rails to provide power.  I'm not sure how trains in Europe that are electric work.  
 But no it won't be batteries. 

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

There are already 6 countries in the world working on in road battery recharging. Sweden Germany  South Korea China  ( Sorry I forgot the other two. ). 
  Germany is doing what I suggested for trains for heavy trucks overhead lines. 
    Sweden has in the road inductive charging. South Korea has a road set up for buses.   China has roads ready  with inductive coils in place.  
        Nobody is suggesting every road, the whole length.  But based on traffic density  etc. certain lengths/area's 

In reply to frenchyd :

It won't be battery.  It will be like The old street cars with overhead contact. 
  The rails would provide one leg and the overhead wire the other. Since they would be separated by the height of the train plus addition clearance required. 
     Subways use three rails to provide power.  I'm not sure how trains in Europe that are electric work.  
 But no it won't be batteries. 
 

This was tried in the past. It was prohibitively expensive and maintenance intensive. Hence the current method of diesel electric locomotives. But you know what they say about those who ignore history. 

Boost_Crazy said:

This was tried in the past. It was prohibitively expensive and maintenance intensive. Hence the current method of diesel electric locomotives. But you know what they say about those who ignore history. 

A third of all rail lines are electrified. I seem to remember tunnel restrictions and a lack of standards on double-stacking is the real reason it wasn't used much here in the USA, but it's literally a power line over a rail; nothing "hard" to do considering what cross state power lines carry.

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

It's not hard. It's expensive. If it was more economical than diesel electric, we would be doing it right now. People like to use Europe or Asia as an example, but not to be Captain Obvious- those are different places. The United States is the land of wide open spaces, not the same as much more population dense parts of the world. We also have the number one economy, and we spend more on defense- to the benefit of most of the world- than the next 10 countries combined. Why would we want to emulate Europe or Asia?

The past 5 presidents have slowly reduced our international exposure.  Instead of 100's of destroyers  protecting  international trade we have gone the super carrier route.  Almost one per ocean.  ( one at sea one in port being Re outfitted/updated and repaired as needed)      
    That will reduce our costs tremendously and countries like Japan, France, Germany, will need to help solve these International  crisis  problems  the instead of  leaving that to the USA 

    Europe and Asia aren't so different then America. We buy a lot of things from them they buy from us.   To insist only American solutions  are used in America is really stupid. 

Figured I'd check in to see if frenchy was still just making E36 M3 up.  I see he is. carry on.

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

It's not hard. It's expensive. If it was more economical than diesel electric, we would be doing it right now. People like to use Europe or Asia as an example, but not to be Captain Obvious- those are different places. The United States is the land of wide open spaces,

3/4ths of China is open desert and they still have Maglev out to nowhere. I'm pretty sure- but would have to research- that a diesel electric can use overhead lines instead of the diesel so you could have it running only electric, but that's trying to remember hours of random podcasts.

Climate Classification map of China.

Rail Map of China.

We also have the number one economy, and we spend more on defense- to the benefit of most of the world- than the next 10 countries combined. Why would we want to emulate Europe or Asia?

Because they might be doing something better, duh. It's only natural to ask your successful classmate what they're doing to get that A on a test.

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

It's not hard. It's expensive. If it was more economical than diesel electric, we would be doing it right now. People like to use Europe or Asia as an example, but not to be Captain Obvious- those are different places. The United States is the land of wide open spaces,

3/4ths of China is open desert and they still have Maglev out to nowhere. I'm pretty sure- but would have to research- that a diesel electric can use overhead lines instead of the diesel so you could have it running only electric, but that's trying to remember hours of random podcasts.

Climate Classification map of China.

Rail Map of China.

We also have the number one economy, and we spend more on defense- to the benefit of most of the world- than the next 10 countries combined. Why would we want to emulate Europe or Asia?

Because they might be doing something better, duh. It's only natural to ask your successful classmate what they're doing to get that A on a test.

I'm well aware of the geography and population distribution of China, and I anticipated that you would use it as an example. But it's a poor comparison. 94 percent of their people live in the same region, because of the desert you mentioned. But they all live in the East, not split between the East and West coasts like the United States.
 

94% of the people in China live East of this line…

If 94 percent of the US lived East of the Mississippi, things might be different. Also, I don't think China is a great example of how to complete public works projects. Unless the ends justifies the means and electric trains trump human rights.  

Boost_Crazy said:

I'm well aware of the geography and population distribution of China, and I anticipated that you would use it as an example. But it's a poor comparison. 94 percent of their people live in the same region, because of the desert you mentioned. But they all live in the East, not split between the East and West coasts like the United States.

Why is it a poor comparison? Trains are literally the most cost-effective form of transport known to mankind, their benefits are innumerable and we only got away from them as regular passenger use because we were sold the dream of suburbs and car ownership and such.

If 94 percent of the US lived East of the Mississippi, things might be different. Also, I don't think China is a great example of how to complete public works projects. Unless the ends justifies the means and electric trains trump human rights.  

We weren't much better in the recent past, especailly with guys like Robert Moses. Even AARP has stories about it. Either way, building electric or building a rail lines doesn't mean you're gonna slam it though a protected wilderness region; frequently the elevation of the ground will dictate where you go and how you'll do it. Hell, depending on how old the train is running anything else might be an improvement for air quality.

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

It's not hard. It's expensive. If it was more economical than diesel electric, we would be doing it right now. People like to use Europe or Asia as an example, but not to be Captain Obvious- those are different places. The United States is the land of wide open spaces,

3/4ths of China is open desert and they still have Maglev out to nowhere. I'm pretty sure- but would have to research- that a diesel electric can use overhead lines instead of the diesel so you could have it running only electric, but that's trying to remember hours of random podcasts.

Climate Classification map of China.

Rail Map of China.

We also have the number one economy, and we spend more on defense- to the benefit of most of the world- than the next 10 countries combined. Why would we want to emulate Europe or Asia?

Because they might be doing something better, duh. It's only natural to ask your successful classmate what they're doing to get that A on a test.

 

I'm well aware of the geography and population distribution of China, and I anticipated that you would use it as an example. But it's a poor comparison. 94 percent of their people live in the same region, because of the desert you mentioned. But they all live in the East, not split between the East and West coasts like the United States.
 

94% of the people in China live East of this line…

 

 

If 94 percent of the US lived East of the Mississippi, things might be different. Also, I don't think China is a great example of how to complete public works projects. Unless the ends justifies the means and electric trains trump human rights.  

Only 80% of American  population lives east of the Mississippi 

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

No, the bicycle is still the most efficient machine man has ever built for transportation.  The diesel electric locomotive can move massive amounts of material long distances very effectively.  I'm not sure how the mandate to stop these in CA will play out, but I have popcorn, beer and a freezer full of meat and I will watch the show. 

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

This isn't remotely on topic (not that this has been on topic for many pages) but I will tell you about "the dream of the suburbs". I was born in NYC and the suburbs allowed my parents to afford a house...........by contrast my grandparents rented all there lives.........their rent was more than our mortgage. Additionally having a car gave us access to things my grandparents could have never dreamed; better schools, stores and a better quality of life.

The suburbs are a paradise.......if you don't think so I can get you an apartment to rent in Hunts Point over in the Bronx......one bedroom is only $2800 a month.......you may also want to up your life insurance.

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

Why is it a poor comparison? Trains are literally the most cost-effective form of transport known to mankind, their benefits are innumerable and we only got away from them as regular passenger use because we were sold the dream of suburbs and car ownership and such.

It's a poor comparison because you compared a large country in which the population is relatively concentrated to a large country in which it is not. It's also a poor comparison because you are comparing a country in which the people have little say over how their resources are used to one in which they can influence policy through their voice and their vote. 
 

We weren't much better in the recent past, especailly with guys like Robert Moses. Even AARP has stories about it.Either way, building electric or building a rail lines doesn't mean you're gonna slam it though a protected wilderness region; frequently the elevation of the ground will dictate where you go and how you'll do it. Hell, depending on how old the train is running anything else might be an improvement for air quality.

Yes, the irony of the similarities of how our railroads were largely built by the Chinese and how they treat their labor is not lost on me. But are we really comparing present day with methods of the 19th century? 

I don't quite get the Robert Moses tie in. China doesn't need to do the shady stuff that he did, they just do what they want, no questions asked. It would seem to me like an example of why large infrastructure projects are more difficult in the US. And we don't need to go back to Robert Moses, the current California "high speed" rail project is pretty much following his playbook. 
 

In reply to frenchyd :

Only 80% of American  population lives east of the Mississippi 
 

Yes, and around 40% of our GDP is generated west of the Mississippi. The west is also rich in resources and home to some of the countries' largest ports. China's west is a wasteland.

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

If you are suggesting that China isn't exactly like America, you win.  
     But there are similarities,  Just like Europe. And Japan  as well as the rest of the world. 
     However,  Just like they copied things America does.   Perhaps we can use some of their best ideas  to improve America.  Make it a better place for all Americans.  

In reply to frenchyd :

I think "copying" China is one of the worst opinions Ive ever heard, considering what underpins the whole thing. You can not separate "good" things they have done with the system they operate in.

Opti said:

In reply to frenchyd :

I think "copying" China is one of the worst opinions Ive ever heard, considering what underpins the whole thing. You can not separate "good" things they have done with the system they operate in.

Did you forget this nation had trains before China did? Or that Europe uses them? Are we now not gonna consider something Europe does because they're not us?

I clearly failed to convey my thoughts. 
      "Copy"? China. 
  There are too many flaws there. 
    Yet China has learned much from the west.   As most countries do. 
  They take good ideas, concepts, approaches, adapt them to their country.  
That makes their country better.  
Governments that do that well have a population that appreciates their government.  
    Their people are Happy.    It's not about being the cheapest.  It's about serving the people. 
  Our government is too focused on being cheap.  Not Good. 

In reply to frenchyd :

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

If you are suggesting that China isn't exactly like America, you win.  
     But there are similarities,  Just like Europe. And Japan  as well as the rest of the world. 
     However,  Just like they copied things America does.   Perhaps we can use some of their best ideas  to improve America.  Make it a better place for all Americans.  
 

I think saying China isn't exactly like America is a bit of an understatement. You are looking at the end result, and not looking at what it took to get there. If China wants to do something, it just does it. Little things like property rights, paying workers agreed upon wages, worker health and safety, and environmental concerns are just afterthoughts. We don't do it that way here. To achieve the same result within our system, it would be very expensive. That is what we chose as a people, both by our choices in representatives, and directly (California's "high speed rail" project was a voter approved initiative.)