Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....  (Read 1471426 times)

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #450 on: August 11, 2015, 04:29:05 PM »
If you don't like electric vehicles, fine -- don't buy one.  But please explain how we will eliminate the 13% of global emissions from the transport sector, yet still get supplies to businesses... and goods, including food, to people... and people to their jobs... without relocating a majority of the population -- by, say, 2050 -- without them. 
(For the sake of this experiment, let's say "Curl up and die" is not an option.) ;)
In my case: I like electric cars because the drive so nice. But they produce more CO2 using Germanys' power grid than my current combustion car (<100 g/km). So EV's are not the best way to cut emission in case you need a car for something.

So the green BAU path here is: If you really believe to need a car (yes, it is mainly a matter of believing) go with an efficient <100 g/km car.

Better:
For short distance go with car sharing. E.g. Cambio has a lot of EV's for small distances and if used by many people the battery pays off fast. Furthermore, in our city they have a 100% renewables contract.
For larger distances go with the fast trains - faster than a car and cheaper than private car total cost of ownership. And way less CO2, of course.

Best:
Do not use a car. Cars are not made as something that is needed to get somewhere but as something you wish to impress someone else with. So it is not really needed.

Let me cite a very nice book from Marcel Hänggi: http://www.booklooker.de/B%FCcher/Marcel-H%E4nggi+Fortschrittsgeschichten/id/A01Lw5jW01ZZJ

In former days we were looking for "progress" (towards something desirable, e.g. could be a healthy planet) but today we are satisfied with "innovation". E.g. it is good enough for us if something is new and different but not necessary better or good at all. We are satisfied by wasting time, money, the planet and such....
And he includes also a nice chapter about cars: Cars (especially individual combustion) were not made to be of use from the beginning. E.g. when Benz wanted to export the first cars to Swizerland that was refused because the cars were not considered to be reliable. Benz explained them, that that is not the reason to buy a car. Instead he was selling the feeling of the power, the possibiliy to proudly repair the car and to show up late at the party with oil on the hands... It is sold to impress the people and especially the girls. That is what German car manufacturers are selling: Good feelings and image.  So: You do not _need_ that.

Unfortunately that car virus did spread and the infrastructure was build around the cars and though it looks like you need it. But today the cities are pedestrian area in the center (people friendly "red-flag act" area), there is a good public transportation and a railway station just in the center. So it is changing back since the Eighties.

You may think you need the car still to buy the beer crates. But actually you want the beer and someone else should bring it to you in such a SDV: http://www.streetscooter.eu/en/our-vehicles/work/  That would be innovation which is also progress. Tesla' cars and BMW i8 or i3 are innovations just without any measurable progress, I think.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #451 on: August 11, 2015, 05:29:17 PM »
Of course when switching to EVs the power grid must also switch to renewables. Theoretically, Musk's plan (or the green-BAU plan) says that by the time the grid is transitioned to solar/wind ("soon"), the small EVs will be ready and be sold like hot buns in time to save the world. In the meantime Tesla etc. are getting experienced with big expensive EVs and luring the selfish celebrities to buy this stuff and serve as examples that EVs are cool. Nice plan.

The only thing is that this transition will not happen in time when taking the BAU approach, IMHO. Not even close. The transition speed is painfully slow. Only total mobilization of society (in many countries together) can fix it in time.
So I can see where Musk is headed, and it's definitiely better than nothing. As someone posted above, at least he's doing something with >0% probability of success.
But what if Musk's marketing message causes people to believe in the green-BAU plan and delay mobilization until it will be way too late? Then that >0% comes at a heavy price.
Maybe if all sane people would market together the concept of mobilization, there would be a >0% chance of doing that?
Personally I believe no mobilization will come, but I totally get Jim's stand.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #452 on: August 11, 2015, 05:49:30 PM »
Sure, but why SUVs?
For the same reason we put cheese on the kids' broccoli or dressing on salad.  If we didn't, kids (or most people) wouldn't eat veggies at all, which is an even less healthy alternative.  To grow the business, Musk needs to make cars people will buy.  The U.S. buys expensive SUVs.  Musk will produce many times more small sedans than SUVs, once he gets his high-volume/low cost car factories up and running.  I don't think you should fault him for building a few electric SUVs to finance the growth he needs to get to his goal. They are better than gas SUVs, which are all too readily available.

When cell phones were the size of bricks, people bought them for what they could do, not for the larger size.  As car technology improves, they'll fit more capability into smaller cars.  Example: rooomy seating for 4 by facing the front seats backwards, once automomous cars no longer have steering wheels, or transmission floor humps.
« Last Edit: August 11, 2015, 06:46:43 PM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #453 on: August 11, 2015, 06:17:53 PM »
Example: rooomy seating for 4 by facing the front seats backwards, once automomous cars no longer have steering wheels, or transmission floor humps.
like that one: http://www.cnet.de/88143289/autonomes-fahren-daimler-fuehrt-mercedes-f-015-auf-der-ces-vor/ ? A first class seat with table in the train is way faster and better. But that Mercedes "solution" would actually compare to an old luxury car with own driver...

No - Tesla is not needed. Its cars are way worse (in terms of sustainability) than the products of conventional car manufacturers and even their cars are not efficient enough for green BAU. The cars are optimized for feeling and image - just like your SUV's but including that "green image" without real sustainability. But they claim that sustainability image - they are closer to the truth than Musk but still far enough to call them liars. Look at that by yourself and compare: http://www.bmw.com/com/en/insights/corporation/bmwi/sustainability.html
(edit: Found the english version)
« Last Edit: August 11, 2015, 06:46:34 PM by SATire »

JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #454 on: August 11, 2015, 09:57:02 PM »
Sigmetnow you have been around this blog easily long enough to know and understand what I am talking about if you had taken the time to read the posts on all the subjects here.  If you had you just would not make the comments you do and hold the positions you do.  That you have not figured it out yet says a lot. 

Slow Wing, Zythryn, oren I will go over some (just some) of the reasons why the approach you are advocating will not work.  But if you really do have the desire to dig into this subject (and I presume you have some interest or you would not be here) you need to spend most of your time you can spend here going back and reading over a couple of dozen of the topics in the Policy and Solutions, Consequences, Science and The Rest.  Over the last couple of years all of the items I will gloss over below have been covered in detail.  It would take weeks to repeat all of it here but the meat of all of the reasons is there.

First.  The problem we are trying to solve is not how to maintain US lifestyles - whether that is with black-BAU technologies or green-BAU ones.  The problem is thus:  We (the human race) is confronting an existential situation as regards the combination of rapidly worsening climate change, wildly exceeding the Earth's carrying capacity, and horrible and rapidly rising global population numbers.  This trifecta of problems is systematic and intertwined.  None of them can be solved independently of the others.  All have to be solved simultaneously.  By far the most critical leg of this is population.

It has been shown via innumerable ways that if we do not dramatically reduce global population numbers (starting about 10 years ago) and have the numbers down far below current levels by say 2050 we are facing civilizational collapse.  I probably do not need to say this, but the prospect of a global effort to do the above population reduction (in a humane as possible manner) has zero prospects of any implementation.  We will get there one way or the other though,

Humanity currently exceeds global carrying capacity by a wide margin.  Studies conducted which clearly intended to minimize the numbers still come up with 1.5-2 times carrying capacity.  More conservative numbers calculated considering all factors come up with numbers like 3-5 times.  We are burning our candle from both ends no matter how you look at it.  As population rapidly increases (UN projections are plus 2 billion by 2050) we inevitably get pushed further away from equilibrium.  One of the prime goals of global capitalism is to grow everyone's economies and raise the standards of living of everyone (the great consumer society) from the developing world to the 3rd world to the 4th.  Such standard of living improvement is one of the hallmarks of the socially humane and the political progressives, as well as the conservative business let's make a big profit faction.  Everyone wants to do this.  But..and it is a big but...what happens to those carrying capacity numbers if we add 2 billion to our 7.3 billion and then raise everyone's standard of living?  Well duh!  We run even further past carrying capacity equilibrium.  To add insult to injury we must now also add in the factor of where is the climate going to be in 2050.  It is certain it will be much less beneficial to us humans.  Almost all of the effects of climate change are going to be negative regarding global carrying capacity numbers - very negative.  So whether it is Black-BAU or Green-BAU it is still BAU.  BAU drives those numbers rapidly towards disaster.  For it is certain that the tipping point will come where our population and resource consumption cause collapse.  A little number to help you realize the depth of this problem of not addressing population is this.  If everyone on Earth had a carbon footprint equal to the average African (a bottom of the barrel number that no one will willingly accept) and the population stayed at current levels emissions would still be some 7- Gtonnes.  In other words CO2 levels do not stabilize.  Add in positive climate change generated feedbacks and CO2 likely rises quite a bit faster than even that.  Add in 2 billion extra people and it is even worse.

Anyone who has actually read my hundreds of lengthy posts here knows that I am very motivated to try and fix that trifecta of problems.  I, however, have long lost the patience with those who are incapable of conquering their fears and looking the situation in the eye.  I do not believe in miracles and I do not depend on god to come down and save us from our stupidity - as most do.  I believe when a solution or project or technology is proposed that it be vetted against our dire needs.  And if it is found wanting then it is discarded or put in proper perspective.

EV's solve none of the above.  Yes the technology has uses.  Just as solar and wind do as well.  But they - none of them - actually can solve the above trifecta.  So we put them in their proper place. 

Let's step back for a minute.  Given the above and taking into account human nature and all the complexities of what makes and maintains a civilization like ours it is certain that we are not capable of implementing solutions which would meaningfully or substantially address our core problems. This means that collapse is certain and one can make a good argument that it is underway already.  Saying the above is just acknowledging reality.  It is not 'rolling over and dying" as some foolishly think.  The first step in being able to make progress is to accept reality so that one can deal with it.  Sticking ones head in the sand because one is dominated by their fears is not the way to solve our problems.  So we accept that our nature's will not allow us to change course and we accept that our current civilizational structure is going to collapse.

So given that how should we proceed?  Well by definition from the above the vast majority of people (it is human nature after all) are going to pray, wait for a miracle, put their faith in technology (Tesla, etc), deny reality, get out their fiddles, rearrange the deck chairs, and so on.  Those of us who are not comfortable in the company of the above folks will try and actually work on solutions which could solve our problems and work towards helping create the next civilzational structure.  That structure has to have very different forms of living and existing.

So enough of that as one can go on for hundreds of pages as I have done a number of times.

Back to your question of why ev's are not a solution and Musk is not the messiah.  Our next civilizational structure must be based upon local production, living and working and playing.  Town people must live close to each other and they will not need cars.  Rural people will grow food.  Public transportation (electric), walking and bicycles will suffice.  Freighting of agricultural products and some goods/resources will be mostly done via ships and railroads with a small amount via trucks (electric).  No more air travel for almost anyone.  It is highly unlikely that in the next civilizational structure we will have anything like the complex globalized highly sophisticated technologies we have now.  At least not for a long time, as following the collapse and during the rebuilding stage such things just will not be possible.  And if we do rebuild those technologies we end up setting aside we will have to create and maintain them in a completely different way than we do now.  Neither of our current ways of creating and maintaining technology nor our ways of running our global economy will be viable in the future and we will need to create and build sustainable civilizational structures first in order to build upon them later.  What we have and do now is non-functional.

The train is off the tracks and we are going in the ditch.  It is not the end of all things as we have done this many times in our past.  It happens to all civilizations.  They grow, live and die.  It is just our turn.  But since we can see what is coming it is possible to make the transition easier going down and thus easier going up.  This is what I advocate for - it is the correct moral and ethical choice.  Managed decline in order to save as much as we can for those who come after us.  Alternately - and what we seem to be doing - is to double down on faith in technology and miracles and pull out all the stops in order to find some way to scrape along trying to maintain BAU as long as possible.  If we do this, and that is the unfortunate path I think we will take, it will leave a wasteland for the future and take them far deeper into the dark and leave them a far longer climb back into the light.  And they will have all the BAU folks to thank for it.  So if Musk wants my respect he drops his sci-fi fantasy of colonizing other planets and parks his Telsa and puts his creativity and wealth into working to solve the 3 great problems.  Nothing else actually matters.


We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

ivica

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1475
  • Kelele
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 99
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #455 on: August 11, 2015, 10:41:12 PM »
Let me add to
... and what we seem to be doing - is to double down on faith in technology and miracles and pull out all the stops in order to find some way to scrape along trying to maintain BAU as long as possible...
and do that being led by the same mindset which made the problem
« Last Edit: August 11, 2015, 11:39:44 PM by ivica »

slow wing

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 823
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 546
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #456 on: August 12, 2015, 02:14:36 AM »
SUV's because Musk needs to go where the demand is. Selling SUV's as well as sedans roughly doubles his customer base for luxury vehicles. He needs to sell a lot of those in order to grow his company.

Why luxury vehicles? Because electric vehicles are still expensive to make so Musk had to start in the high end market before progressing down to more mainstream and budget vehicles as he learns how to reduce costs.

While some may have other objections to them, an SUV that is built and runs on renewable energy still reduces greenhouse gases relative to a fossil fuel SUV, and even relative to a fossil fuel sedan.

More importantly, it provides a pathway to mass production of electric vehicles.


Musk has been constrained in his business plans because he has been attempting something very difficult. Tesla Motors is the first successful new major automobile company in the best part of 100 years - since the 1930s, from memory, where many have failed. And he has been doing it with a whole new technology - electric power!

EDIT: several new posts I hadn't seen before posting this. Interesting posts, and widening the scope of discussion. I have stuff to do now but will reply later.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2015, 02:19:55 AM by slow wing »

Zythryn

  • New ice
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #457 on: August 12, 2015, 04:27:54 AM »
...  I do not believe in miracles and I do not depend on god to come down and save us from our stupidity ...

So given that how should we proceed?  Well by definition from the above the vast majority of people (it is human nature after all) are going to pray, wait for a miracle, put their faith in technology (Tesla, etc), deny reality, get out their fiddles, rearrange the deck chairs, and so on.  Those of us who are not comfortable in the company of the above folks will try and actually work on solutions which could solve our problems and work towards helping create the next civilzational structure.  That structure has to have very different forms of living and existing.

So enough of that as one can go on for hundreds of pages as I have done a number of times.

Back to your question of why ev's are not a solution and Musk is not the messiah.  ...

The train is off the tracks and we are going in the ditch.  It is not the end of all things as we have done this many times in our past.  It happens to all civilizations.  They grow, live and die.  It is just our turn.  But since we can see what is coming it is possible to make the transition easier going down and thus easier going up.  This is what I advocate for - it is the correct moral and ethical choice.  Managed decline in order to save as much as we can for those who come after us.  Alternately - and what we seem to be doing - is to double down on faith in technology and miracles and pull out all the stops in order to find some way to scrape along trying to maintain BAU as long as possible.  If we do this, and that is the unfortunate path I think we will take, it will leave a wasteland for the future and take them far deeper into the dark and leave them a far longer climb back into the light.  And they will have all the BAU folks to thank for it.  So if Musk wants my respect he drops his sci-fi fantasy of colonizing other planets and parks his Telsa and puts his creativity and wealth into working to solve the 3 great problems.  Nothing else actually matters.

Jim, I respect your opinion even though I disagree with your premise.
I don't respect your communication style.
I don't believe anyone here has referred to, much less considers Musk the Messiah.
I don't believe anyone here is expecting a miracle.
And nobody expects EVs, or anything else to be a silver bullet.  It will take a lot of partial solutions.

Cleaning up the grid is critical with or without EVs.  With EVs, that part of our transportation automatically gets cleaner as our grid does.

I believe we have already put too much CO2 in the atmosphere to prevent a temp increase of 2C.  I also believe things will get worse.
I also believe that if we can start slowing our CO2 emissions, we can soften the blow.  I don't see your solution doing that, as almost no one will go that route.

Those that can be convinced to eat meat less often, drive more efficient cars than they currently are, downsize their houses, or move closer to town centers, will save millions of tons of CO2 each year.  Not because each person is saving a huge amount, but because a lot of people can be convinced to save a little.

Those of us willing to do more, will do more (go vegan, don't have kids, install wind or solar, etc).  This is wonderful, and I am thankful for everyone's contributions.
This, I believe, will soften the blow more than insisting everyone cut CO2 99%, which results in almost nobody cutting anything.

As for softening the blow, that is laudable, and is exactly what I am doing as well.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #459 on: August 13, 2015, 03:19:24 PM »
I think it is safe to say that:
In the next few years, and particularly in the U.S.:
most car buyers will not suddenly change their habits and overwhelmingly buy a car because it is "good for the planet," instead of the car they really want.  (Nor will they stop buying cars!  Let's be real for a moment.)  But the world's most urgent, critical need is to reduce carbon emissions, right now.  That can't wait.

So for today, the trick is to make cars people want, cars that also happen to lower carbon emissions.  If that means adding some sugar to the sourness of EV limited range, higher vehicle price and an uneven charging infrastructure, so be it.  It won't be needed forever.  And EVs are the only type of car that get cleaner as the grid gets cleaner. 

In a few decades, gas cars will likely be a relic of the past.  Until then, the most green, sustainable car in the world does no good if no one buys it.  Whether that is due to price, styling, or functionality makes no difference.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #460 on: August 13, 2015, 04:25:00 PM »
Sigmetnow, you are right that people buy the car they want and not the car that is "good". Same is true in Germany - but here "premium" is prefered while in USA it is "size". That is just a matter of taste and both are bad in terms of CO2. EV does not help in a SUV just like common rail does not help, if it must be 200PS...

So in USA they hype EV for silly reasons (and pay subsidies to get it on the road) while here they have clean diesel fuel (with lower tax than lighter gasoline...), so the diesel injection is possible and that is more CO2-efficient than EV. Furthermore the tast is different: In USA you may use automatic cars - which is a no-go for a real German man (unless it is tiptronic like in Formular 1). Similarily the noise is important - a turbo diesel sounds just different then an EV.

But then you have that 10% of rich Green BAU'ers / hipster / "young creative urban professionals" and the marketing experts find that nice "sustainability niche market". That is adressed nicely e.g. by BMW i3. You see, the "German premium car manufacturers" do not have to worry about Tesla - that Musk-company will probably never have any economic success. What they worry about is an Apple starting to build a car - because that company understands very well how you can make money with "premium image"...

If you think now all my words sound silly and strange: You are totally right. All the car business is about image, life-style and feeling. There is not a tiny little bit of reason inside. Same for Tesla EV and even for the way more sustainable BMW i3.

I have to point to that again, because I know that it is difficult to discuss critical about the home-countries' cars - you know, that is the feelings thing. So maybe if you look at the marketing of the BMW i3, then you could be able to think more clearly about EV's and why they are not really good today. So please take a look and find the lies in the other country: http://www.bmw.com/com/en/insights/corporation/bmwi/sustainability.html

As in most technologies EV's are not bad because the EV-technology is bad. They all just make bad cars today. Same is true for all other technologies out there. We do not need any new technology anymore to rescue the world (but we may progress the technologies with fun - but that is not condition to stop AGW, I say). We just need to stop doing wrong things and start doing right things with the technolgy. And if people do not want to stop "bad things" then educate and force them. Just like in case of similar feeling/image issues people may have: Smoking, throwing briks in windows of banks, stealing other peoples property/wife/... or things written in that bible.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #461 on: August 13, 2015, 05:44:30 PM »
Yes, smoking, another good analogy. Imagine 20 years ago instead of making smoking socially unacceptable, they would have said: Oh well, that's never going to work, we first have to put nice-smelling scents in the cigs, and then add inhalable lung cancer suppressants, and maybe then tobacco companies will have enough capacity to start producing fairy fart cigarettes?

That's what electric SUVs are. They don't need to be greenified, they need to be made socially unacceptable. Just like smoking.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #462 on: August 13, 2015, 06:13:28 PM »
Not only SUV. Take a look at the video on that page (scroll down a bit): http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/i/i8/2014/showroom/index.html

If anybody thinks he wants to buy that car because of sustainability then I'd wonder with which part of his body he is thinking. Surely not the brain...

I think it should be quite easy to supress such marketing just like smoking commercials.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #463 on: August 14, 2015, 09:48:14 PM »
Hey, SATire, the BMW i3 is a fantastic car!  I never said it wasn't.  And the thousands of U.S. owners would no doubt agree.  I also didn't say the Model S is the best.  (But oh-so-many car experts did!  ;D )

Anyway, the Nissan LEAF beats all models for global sales, which may indicate that it is currently closest to the "sweet spot" for price versus capability. Over 170,000 sold world-wide, the Nissan LEAF is the best-selling electric vehicle in history.

- - - -

As to the idea of car-shaming SUVs and sports car owners, I'll just say that most technological advancements are first developed for high-end, very expensive cars, and the technology "trickles down" to mundane, everyday vehicles.  This includes safety improvements as well as efficiency.  Pretty sure we don't want to stop that.

Maybe we develop a rating that uses sustainable construction and energy efficiency to determine a surcharge.  If a car company develops a large car that is just as earth-friendly as a small sedan, that is a good thing for people who need a bigger car on a daily basis.  (Otherwise, rent one when needed!)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #464 on: August 15, 2015, 02:02:51 AM »
California Air Resources Board chief: Automakers need to end production of ICEs around 2030
Quote
Governor Jerry Brown has set a goal to reduce California’s greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050. Meeting that goal will require dinosaur burners to be off the road by that time, and given modern cars’ long lifespans, that means they need to start disappearing from showrooms around 2030.

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/california-air-resources-board-chief-automakers-need-to-end-production-of-ices-around-2030/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #465 on: August 15, 2015, 02:06:51 AM »
Link has big infographic on EV sales.

Electric Car Sales To Hit 1 Million In September
Quote
Globally, plug-in electric car sales (including plug-in hybrid sales) will hit 1 million next month, September 2015.

http://evobsession.com/electric-car-sales-to-hit-1-million-in-september/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #466 on: August 15, 2015, 01:30:47 PM »
Hey, SATire, the BMW i3 is a fantastic car!  I never said it wasn't.  And the thousands of U.S. owners would no doubt agree.  I also didn't say the Model S is the best.  (But oh-so-many car experts did!  ;D )

Anyway, the Nissan LEAF beats all models for global sales, which may indicate that it is currently closest to the "sweet spot" for price versus capability. Over 170,000 sold world-wide, the Nissan LEAF is the best-selling electric vehicle in history.
Sigmetnow - I think it could be that the marketing experts catched you. Please reconsider your rating of cars by thinking about it with your brain and not feelings/image/or other parts of your body. The i3 may be better than Model S and others, but it is far away from good or even fantastic! "Better" means just a little bit less bad. Of course the Leaf is better than the i3 by reason. The i3/i8/Model S are not made for reasonable driving but for other things. For some other things than driving such cars work "fantastic", indeed. Please take a look at that i8 film - it demonstrates very clear what these kind of cars are made for and that is not driving or sustainability...

As to the idea of car-shaming SUVs and sports car owners, I'll just say that most technological advancements are first developed for high-end, very expensive cars, and the technology "trickles down" to mundane, everyday vehicles.  This includes safety improvements as well as efficiency.  Pretty sure we don't want to stop that.

Maybe we develop a rating that uses sustainable construction and energy efficiency to determine a surcharge.  If a car company develops a large car that is just as earth-friendly as a small sedan, that is a good thing for people who need a bigger car on a daily basis.  (Otherwise, rent one when needed!)
Funny, that you call the difference between costly premium cars and more efficient cheap cars technological advancements. All the things included in the high-end cars are not "good new sustainable technologies" but "innovations" invented to increase profit or to convince people to buy something that is actually useless. As explained in my previous post it is all about "innovations" and not about "progress" nor "advancements" in the car business.

I want to give one real example of progress in the car business: http://www.streetscooter.eu/en/
But only the business-world is buying some cars with reason - so only the "work" version is now commercially available and a success. The really efficient SDV (small distance vehicle) did not attract enough people to start production, yet. Even in this forum Neven was the only one interested in that car... So: We need to make the inefficient cars "socially unacceptable" as Neven suggested and we need politics to ban the big cars from our cities. The cars consume to much of our space and air and limit our freedom to walk at the places we want to life and work.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #467 on: August 15, 2015, 04:41:18 PM »
Sorry, SATire, I misunderstood your comment.  (And honestly, this wasn't the first time that has happened, so I've learned my lesson.)

Quote
We need to make the inefficient cars "socially unacceptable" as Neven suggested and we need politics to ban the big cars from our cities. The cars consume to much of our space and air and limit our freedom to walk at the places we want to life and work.
 
That all sounds good -- until you hear from the mom who needs to drive six of the neighbors' kids to day-care every day.  Or the volunteer who takes groups of senior citizens to museums and movies, or to mall for the air conditioning on extreme heat days. Or the hobby farmer who needs to get a big load of produce to a city market.  Or the supplier delivering equipment to the hospital.  A big car can be more efficient than a truck in many situations.

Before banning all big cars, we need to be sure adequate alternatives are in place.  Perhaps in the future that will be the case, but it is not so today. 

If you don't like my idea of a surcharge on less efficient / less sustainable vehicles, please explain how you would make big cars "socially unacceptable."
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #468 on: August 15, 2015, 05:42:52 PM »
I'm missing something here - possibly because I've never driven an SUV.


Why is an SUV socially unacceptable if it is electrically powered? I concede that a larger vehicle uses more road space and contains more raw material than a much smaller one, but is this what the fuss is about?


Terry

ghoti

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #469 on: August 15, 2015, 06:38:49 PM »
Perhaps it is a symbol of excess.

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #470 on: August 15, 2015, 07:42:30 PM »
I'm missing something here - possibly because I've never driven an SUV.


Why is an SUV socially unacceptable if it is electrically powered? I concede that a larger vehicle uses more road space and contains more raw material than a much smaller one, but is this what the fuss is about?


Terry
Because the electric SUV produces (to make that electricty and the battery) double as much CO2 than an efficient combustion car. And that is not healthy for arctic sea ice, the planet and us people. And all that without any reason if used in the city... If you need it to carry treas in the forrest, that would be acceptable, I think.

No - those inefficient cars are burning also my last pice of carbon. Therefore burning more carbon than necessary is an insult for other people. And the necessary amount is that produced by the most efficient cars and thus well below 100g/km today. Most electric cars can not do that and electric SUV would double that easily...

edit: Maybe compare that issue with SUV and other inefficient cars with smoking again: One reason to ban smoking was the danger of passive smoking. So the smoker does not harm only himself but also other people. The same is true with CO2 emission: Producing CO2 is not only dangerous for my children but for all other peoples children as well. So maybe in a few years people will not spray colour on furry but cut the tires of SUV - just to render them nonhazardous for a while...
« Last Edit: August 15, 2015, 08:01:22 PM by SATire »

JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #471 on: August 15, 2015, 09:48:33 PM »
To jump in here a bit on the SUV/Pickup thing.

Besides what SATire is talking about there are a host of other reasons why we need regulations whose goal is to eliminate large vehicles.  Yes there are a few people who have justification for extra capacity but those needs were perfectly satisfied with other vehicle types before the advent of the SUV.  They are called station wagons and small vans.

But to my main point.  At least 95% of the large SUV and full size pickups are owned and driven by people who have zero legitimate justification for having them.  People buy these vehicles substantially due to the effects of consumer marketing (whose purpose is just to increase profits for car companies).  They also buy them for the perverted reasons of safety.  There are so many huge vehicles on the road that they feel in danger in a small car - legitimately.  So it is like an arms race.  The real solution of course is to get rid of the excess big vehicles and go towards smaller not bigger. 

Most men who own full size pickups (almost all of them) use them as commuter vehicles.  Where I live it is by far the norm for men to drive pickups.  Even 70-80 year old men.  They have zero need for them.  Or large jeeps with giant tires most of which never see a dirt road.  SUV's primarily driven by women, are a similar story.  The number of women hauling more than 1-2 people around is much rarer than it used to be when most women did not have SUV's.  It is all marketing crap.  Almost all of the fancy technology, computers and electronics stuff in cars today is to make extra profits for the car companies and serves little other purpose and in many cases makes the cars more dangerous not less.

Car companies want to sell these vehicles because they make large profits on them.  Many of the very small efficient cars (including ev's) are sold at small to zero profit just to maintain a foothold in that market - just in case.

As an aside - just talking business here.  This is one of the great weaknesses of the Tesla approach.  Musk is trying to break into the major car business by starting out in the luxury division where the profits are usually large (though he is losing money) and then to branch out into the higher volume smaller markets.  But if he can't make big money on luxury then he is not likely to make it in the small car market which is much more competitive.  On top of that he is going up against competitors who have really deep pockets and who will have no problem being able to outspend him on development and also on production facilities and who have monstrous dealer networks of which he has none.  If the ev market ever really takes off (and nothing we have seen yet shows it has or is on the verge of doing so) the major car companies are much better positioned to take advantage of it than Tesla is.  There are very sound business reasons why there is almost never a new car company start up which succeeds. 

Once again just to keep all things in perspective.  Ev's are not the answer.  No cars is the answer.  No luxury vehicle serves any legitimate social purpose of any kind in today's world.
We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #472 on: August 15, 2015, 09:53:22 PM »
And since I am talking about cars again today here is something which will have a huge impact on the global car industry.  The ripple effects will hit every car maker in the world negatively as well as thousands of companies which manufacture car parts and such.

More large headwinds to the global economy.

Quote
China’s auto market, which had been the single most important element in the convoluted growth story of GM and other global automakers, was getting battered even before the yuan devaluation. But now elements coagulate into a toxic mix.

Sales of passenger vehicles in July dropped 6.6% from a year ago, to 1.27 million, according to the China Association of Automobile Manufacturers, a 17-month low, after they’d already fallen 3.4% in June, and after they’d relentlessly trended down since late last year.

This debacle happened even though automakers had cut prices and heaped incentives on the market to stem the decline. GM and VW started it, and it has now turned into a price war.....Nearly half of GM’s earnings are generated by its operations in China, as are a third of VW’s earnings. VW, the other German automakers, and the Japanese automakers have been benefiting from the sharp decline of their home currencies against the yuan over the past year when they converted their yuan-based revenues and earnings into euros or yen....

http://wolfstreet.com/2015/08/14/china-mess-yuan-devaluation-dropping-auto-sales-spread-to-the-us-gm-ford-chrysler-component-makers/
We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #473 on: August 15, 2015, 10:20:51 PM »
[...] People buy these vehicles substantially due to the effects of consumer marketing (whose purpose is just to increase profits for car companies).  They also buy them for the perverted reasons of safety.  There are so many huge vehicles on the road that they feel in danger in a small car - legitimately.  So it is like an arms race.  The real solution of course is to get rid of the excess big vehicles and go towards smaller not bigger. 

JimD - I see I was way too implicit above. To make it clear also for U.S. people reading here: The reason to buy a premium car or a big SUV or sportscar is just: Sex. No reason. Sex. Look at the commercial I mentioned above, it is not about sustainable or reason or such:


JimD

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2272
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #474 on: August 15, 2015, 10:38:28 PM »
[...] People buy these vehicles substantially due to the effects of consumer marketing (whose purpose is just to increase profits for car companies).  They also buy them for the perverted reasons of safety.  There are so many huge vehicles on the road that they feel in danger in a small car - legitimately.  So it is like an arms race.  The real solution of course is to get rid of the excess big vehicles and go towards smaller not bigger. 

JimD - I see I was way too implicit above. To make it clear also for U.S. people reading here: The reason to buy a premium car or a big SUV or sportscar is just: Sex. No reason. Sex. Look at the commercial I mentioned above, it is not about sustainable or reason or such:

I understand you and agree.  I believe the black pickup with smoked windows works best.   Nobody buys a Tesla for efficiency or greenness.  They buy it because it is a cool sportscar.  You can use it to catch the hot Progressive chicks.  If you want a hot conservative chick maybe a Dodge Charger or a Corvette.  A rich girl wanna be maybe one of those Porsche's or Audi's.  The trophy wife would like a Lexus or Mercedes - at least that is what they drive around here.  It's sad.  Though I admit I cast glances of longing when I see all those tricked out Jeep Wrangler's with the giant tires go by - I could use one of those - I think  ;D  My Chevy Cruz is so wimpy it is an embarrassment. It is a good thing I have been out of the market for the last 35 years or I would be living a lonely life.
We do not err because truth is difficult to see. It is visible at a glance. We err because this is more comfortable. Alexander Solzhenitsyn

How is it conceivable that all our technological progress - our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal? Albert Einstein

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #475 on: August 15, 2015, 10:41:28 PM »
Because the electric SUV produces (to make that electricty and the battery) double as much CO2 than an efficient combustion car. ...

SATire, please state your source for this claim.  The only study I find that has not been debunked is this one by Renault, which found that the EV's production+use footprint became less than the gasoline or diesel versions over time:

Quote
Broadly, the LCA found that the principal source of environmental impacts for the combustion engined cars is the use phase; the principal sources of environmental impacts for EVs are production—notably that of the Li-ion battery pack—and the source of electricity.

Although the EV had a much greater impact on emissions during its production phase than the gasoline or diesel versions, the initial deficit was more than overcome during the use phase, even using electricity at the current grid configuration.

Renault makes public its lifecycle study of Fluence ICE vs Fluence EV
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2013/07/renault-20130711.html


Too recent to be considered by that study, of course, is that used EV batteries are now being recycled as home storage and to feed the grid, etc.  Soon, the Tesla gigafactory will increase the sustainability of the current battery manufacturing process:

Quote
In keeping with Musk’s environmentally sustainable reputation, the facility, which will sit on 500 to 1,000 acres, will not only recycle older battery packs but will also be powered by “new local renewables,” namely wind turbines and photovoltaic panels.

http://venturebeat.com/2014/08/01/how-teslas-battery-gigafactory-could-change-everything-not-just-electric-cars/


The "EVs are less sustainable" argument is weakening every day, as the grid, and EV manufacturing, gets cleaner. 
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #476 on: August 15, 2015, 10:42:07 PM »
The technology improvements many people here scoff at are precisely what will decrease the number of cars the most over the next few decades.  Autonomous cars will cut total vehicle needs drastically.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #477 on: August 15, 2015, 11:10:59 PM »
Because the electric SUV produces (to make that electricty and the battery) double as much CO2 than an efficient combustion car. ...

SATire, please state your source for this claim.  The only study I find that has not been debunked is this one by Renault, which found that the EV's production+use footprint became less than the gasoline or diesel versions over time:
Sigmetnow - I presented the links and calculation on page 5 in this thread. In case you think that those Renault cars are working for US people I would be very happy and a bit surprised...

ghoti

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #478 on: August 15, 2015, 11:57:04 PM »
In most of the developed world EVs are less carbon intensive than ICE vehicles.


http://www.afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.php
http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/ask/2014/lifecycle-emissions.html#.Vc-x5rJViko
http://shrinkthatfootprint.com/electric-cars-green
http://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2494.epdf?referrer_access_token=fSVt90mhS-7mJ2VR6aUeDtRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0O9lRkXBFCTJh7pA6_mxsqcs3xFIYQtz3RwxYPDy3Xp2c3aP09BtQhLjdfyx9LnF2uPRkYSHnGBckKJSkp5yCAGqntu-yHQF_A-ENmZ0-zLJ4ngy7DdR4r30jDQdUkR2lnw4XhkcSEe8SxItJOfVcpN-9RHL6BRlXAaS-ETuUI8_XEDNEycAu1YmhQW9SvGSWfB0hvyk_9RB7djSkynIQnpvhKsGO8p2f1itgh2lUpSfMw50xclpgwc7UfRmdRu0H0FbO5vLy5lpyqU98a13ZMD&tracking_referrer=www.cbc.ca

The details in the Nature article show this is true for the EU27, Germany, UK, Canada, USA, and more. The situation leans even more towards EVs with the continuing transition away from coal. The improvements in battery tech pushes this advantage even further and when batteries become mass produced using only renewable energy there will be no contest since the vast majority of the carbon emissions of EVs are those attributed to the battery manufacture.


SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #479 on: August 16, 2015, 12:26:53 AM »
Yes, you are right with that citations. If the electric energy is produced from renewables, EVs are less carbon emitting than efficient 100 g CO2/km combustion cars. So in Norway that is the case today. In Germany it is not yet. In USA that it is not in 10 years.

If you buy a EV today and use it for 10 years in your country - what do you think is the CO2 emission per km? Compare that with that 100 g/km. Add the extra that is used to produce the battery - will it be better over the life-time of that car?

And now consider that you buy an electric sportscar or SUV or such - you are out and people will cut the tires of your car and they are right doing so. It is not about which technology you use but it is about how you use the existing technologies. Do the right thing. Blame the people doing the wrong things. That's all. 

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #480 on: August 16, 2015, 05:08:58 AM »
Sig wrote: "That all sounds good -- until you hear from the mom who needs to drive six of the neighbors' kids to day-care every day.  Or the volunteer who takes groups of senior citizens to museums and movies, or to mall for the air conditioning on extreme heat days. Or the hobby farmer who needs to get a big load of produce to a city market.  Or the supplier delivering equipment to the hospital."

Yeah, that's partly how they sell those behemoths. But isn't that what renting is for--for the rare occasion when you need something that you don't need to own every day?

It's like always walking around with a huge duluth pack on because someday you might go camping, even though what you carry around on a daily basis could fit in a small satchel.

(But the analogy would be better if duluth packs were enormously expensive, constantly spewed vast amounts of pollutants into the air, and were a constant threat to the lives and well being of those around it when in use...'-))

https://74fdc.wordpress.com/2012/12/26/the-duluth-pack-the-first-patented-backpack/




"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #481 on: August 16, 2015, 02:39:24 PM »
Sorry, SATire, I misunderstood your comment.  (And honestly, this wasn't the first time that has happened, so I've learned my lesson.)

Quote
We need to make the inefficient cars "socially unacceptable" as Neven suggested and we need politics to ban the big cars from our cities. The cars consume to much of our space and air and limit our freedom to walk at the places we want to life and work.
 
That all sounds good -- until you hear from the mom who needs to drive six of the neighbors' kids to day-care every day.  Or the volunteer who takes groups of senior citizens to museums and movies, or to mall for the air conditioning on extreme heat days. Or the hobby farmer who needs to get a big load of produce to a city market.  Or the supplier delivering equipment to the hospital.  A big car can be more efficient than a truck in many situations.

Before banning all big cars, we need to be sure adequate alternatives are in place.  Perhaps in the future that will be the case, but it is not so today. 

If you don't like my idea of a surcharge on less efficient / less sustainable vehicles, please explain how you would make big cars "socially unacceptable."
no problem. Misunderstandings are normal in international discussions so we need to explain a bit more than at home.

The alternative to big cars, sportscars and SUV are small efficient cars, which are well in place.

I like your idea of surcharge of less efficient cars - e.g. higher tax on gasoline and electricity proportional to CO2 emission. But I have learned that this is "impossible" in USA because the government is so weak it can not tune taxes. Strange for me but I try to accept.

So a work arround would be some kind of a "environmental badge": http://www.environmental-badge.co.uk/en/environmental-badge.html
But of course not only for particle emission but for CO2 emission, too. E.g. with following example for future banning:
If your car produces < 100 g/km or <160 g/mile (EV or combustion does not matter), you get a green badge and you may enter every place with that car.

For 100 g/km - 150 g/km (average new car here), you get an yellow badge and you are not allowed to enter areas with high population e.g. city centers.

With a red badge (>150 g/km or >240 g/mile) you may not enter any city. Such cars are for working in the forrest or in rural areas only. If you find any electric SUV with less than 240 g/mile, you are welcome ;-)

Let me cite from Bob's post #202 here: "Electricity EV U.S. Mix..........333" (g/mile) -> pretty red badge...

The other not so legal way to demonstrate "social unacceptance" is cut the tire. In former days e.g. the red color on fury worked fine to get the attention of the people. Just for the case your government is too lame such action could be a work arround.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2015, 02:47:03 PM by SATire »

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #482 on: August 16, 2015, 03:28:15 PM »
Sig wrote: "That all sounds good -- until you hear from the mom who needs to drive six of the neighbors' kids to day-care every day.  Or the volunteer who takes groups of senior citizens to museums and movies, or to mall for the air conditioning on extreme heat days. Or the hobby farmer who needs to get a big load of produce to a city market.  Or the supplier delivering equipment to the hospital."

Yeah, that's partly how they sell those behemoths. But isn't that what renting is for--for the rare occasion when you need something that you don't need to own every day?

Yup.  I said that too, somewhere.  Ah, in #463.  Last sentence.   :)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #483 on: August 16, 2015, 03:41:08 PM »
The power of the Model X (SUV) will allow it to pull a sizeable trailer, which will be important to some people.  Most electric cars cannot do this.

Tesla exec Jim Chen, VP of Regulatory Affairs
Quote
“This vehicle will have Class III towing capability. That means over 5,000 pounds, actually close to 10,000 pounds of towing capability.”

http://gas2.org/2015/06/22/tesla-model-x-towing-capacity-close-to-10000-pounds/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #484 on: August 16, 2015, 03:42:37 PM »
Money, money, money!

Tesla to raise $500 million – wait, make that $650 million – with new stock offering
https://chargedevs.com/newswire/tesla-to-raise-500-million-with-new-stock-offering/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #485 on: August 16, 2015, 03:45:55 PM »
Is the Model XXL comparable to a Humvee, because that's what I need to make sure the eggs from the supermarket don't break.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Zythryn

  • New ice
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #486 on: August 16, 2015, 03:50:43 PM »
Again, I agree no cars is the best situation.
How do we get to that point?

Currently we can't even get a carbon tax passed.

The "perfect or nothing" position lowers society's carbon foot print by so little it is difficult to see any change.  Until one day everything falls apart and society has no choice.

Taking a good, but not perfect stance of EVs (which automatically get cleaner as we clean the grid) gets us started towards cutting some co2 emissions and might just delay everything falling apart.
More time for society to respond is a good thing.

Zythryn

  • New ice
  • Posts: 81
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 47
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #487 on: August 16, 2015, 03:56:54 PM »
Is the Model XXL comparable to a Humvee, because that's what I need to make sure the eggs from the supermarket don't break.

If you are referring to the Tesla Model X, no, it is a car based SUV, typically designated a "crossover".
Looks like you will just have to get that Humvee ;)

I'm curious, did you check out the Mitsubishi Miev?

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #488 on: August 16, 2015, 04:29:07 PM »
Yes, I saw the MiEV a couple of years ago (and coincidentally saw a BMW i3 two days ago, thought it was a Transformer). That's the kind of size of car I'd want to buy in a few years when/if I have the money and still need a car. A car you can put a small trailer behind for bags when travelling.

But perhaps converting a small car would be even more interesting. Financially, of course, but also because you get to cut out all the breakable stuff and gadgets, eliminating the planned obsolescence of these cars.

Speaking of which, I fixed a kitchen appliance this week, which broke after 1.5 years of service, because of a small piece of plastic that was elemental to its working, and thus meant to break. Right now I'm battling it out with a HP printer that refuses to print after just two years of little printing. This kind of stuff makes me so angry. Just like the Model XXL.

It's not SUVs that are causing AGW and a host of other problems, but a way of thinking that will simply not accept and allow limits. It springs forth from a diseased mind that eats children in order to live forever. That's why every emanation from it needs to be shown for what it is and resisted. If this doesn't happen, the predicament will never be solved, no matter how 'earth-friendly' you make it. Like the French say: Too much c'est too much.

Freedom is not about being able to do whatever you want to do. It's about being grateful, respectful and responsible. Model XXL is none of that. It's just the thing that Musk and his engineers would want to drive.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #489 on: August 16, 2015, 05:11:04 PM »
Is the Model XXL comparable to a Humvee, because that's what I need to make sure the eggs from the supermarket don't break.
:o  --  ;D

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #490 on: August 16, 2015, 08:31:47 PM »
Neven
WRT Planned Obsolescence:


The worst examples I've noticed were a solid state timer/relay on a 2 year old portable dehumidifier & a small window A/C without oiling ports on the combination condenser fan motor/blower motor.
The timer/relay could have been replaced by separate components at a cost of ~$20 per component, but the motor's replacement would have been close to 25% of the cost of the machine (on sale).
Johnson Controls introduced a solid state gas valve some time ago that integrated all the safety functions onto a single board (that at the time wholesaled for >$ 150.) This was a replacement for 5 independent safety's that individually wholesaled for <$5.00.
While a salesman might be able to exclaim that the new model uses the latest solid state technology, the truth was that the new technology simply made repairs much more expensive.


Fewer components is not automatically better design. Solid state circuitry is no panacea. Unrepairable appliances should be banned. Household appliances should be comparable to commercial models in that both should utilize standardized, off the shelf components.
Terry

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #491 on: August 16, 2015, 09:33:40 PM »
Technology may affect things faster, but the biggest force for a societal tendency towards less car ownership could end up being the simplest one: time.  In the U.S. today, kids aren't buying cars at rates anything like their grandparents are.

Quote
In the past five years, the number of new cars registered to households with a head age 65 or older has risen 62 percent, according to IHS. Drivers over the age of 75, meanwhile, registered about six times as many new cars as those age 18 to 24.  The children may well be the future, but the fogies have the cash. What’s more, they want to use it before it’s too late.
...
Of all new cars registered last year, only 12 percent went to households led by someone under the age of 35.
...
[But the] problem with old people is that they have a nagging tendency to suddenly stop being consumers altogether. In economic lingo, the expected lifetime value of an 85-year-old customer isn’t great, no matter how wealthy she is. The problem isn’t the “value”—its the “lifetime” part of the equation.

How Old People Became the Future of the U.S. Auto Industry
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-11/how-old-people-became-the-future-of-the-u-s-auto-industry
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #492 on: August 16, 2015, 09:39:00 PM »
Thanks for that article, Sigmetnow. It emphasizes what I wrote before: It springs forth from a diseased mind that eats children in order to live forever.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9805
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3584
  • Likes Given: 3922
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #493 on: August 16, 2015, 11:54:14 PM »
Technology may affect things faster, but the biggest force for a societal tendency towards less car ownership could end up being the simplest one: time.  In the U.S. today, kids aren't buying cars at rates anything like their grandparents are.

Quote
In the past five years, the number of new cars registered to households with a head age 65 or older has risen 62 percent, according to IHS. Drivers over the age of 75, meanwhile, registered about six times as many new cars as those age 18 to 24.  The children may well be the future, but the fogies have the cash. What’s more, they want to use it before it’s too late.
...
Of all new cars registered last year, only 12 percent went to households led by someone under the age of 35.
...
[But the] problem with old people is that they have a nagging tendency to suddenly stop being consumers altogether. In economic lingo, the expected lifetime value of an 85-year-old customer isn’t great, no matter how wealthy she is. The problem isn’t the “value”—its the “lifetime” part of the equation.

How Old People Became the Future of the U.S. Auto Industry
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-11/how-old-people-became-the-future-of-the-u-s-auto-industry

Those statistics are simply amazing. Such a glaring proof that today's society is sick, if anyone needed such proof.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 25753
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1153
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #494 on: August 17, 2015, 04:28:04 PM »
Thanks for that article, Sigmetnow. It emphasizes what I wrote before: It springs forth from a diseased mind that eats children in order to live forever.
But while the oldsters may be buying cars with "reckless abandon," the youngsters are not staying away due to a huge concern for the planet, as far as I have seen.  Instead, as the article mentions, the reason is mostly financial, due to underemployment and crushing amounts of college tuition debt.  (Also, perhaps, electronic devices are replacing the entertainment and social benefits they used to get from cruising???)

It will be interesting to see, as the younger generation's financial situation improves, if the trend continues.  Various tuition debt-forgiveness or re-financing solutions have been proposed, so we may see action on that in the near future.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #495 on: August 17, 2015, 05:40:56 PM »
(Also, perhaps, electronic devices are replacing the entertainment and social benefits they used to get from cruising???)
Such observation is also possible here (I have children in that age): A lot of young people do not even make a driver licence - that was a no-go in may generation, since that was considered abstinence from freedom. Furthermore younger people are using car sharing more often and I do not see them washing or repairing cars at all- somehow cars do not have the same sex-appeal any more. Instead social nets seem to be much wider and much more important. Maybe people with big cars are looking quite old now...

ghoti

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 767
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #496 on: August 17, 2015, 06:10:42 PM »

SATire

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 514
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 34
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #497 on: August 17, 2015, 06:34:23 PM »
"The great diesel car deception"

https://twitter.com/IronMillTech/status/632837732885233664
That is true only without catalyst and particulate filter: http://www.peugeot.ph/diesel-particulate-filter/
You can not get a new car without that. Without catalyst and particulate filter also old diesel cars are not allowed to be used in several European cities.

Please remember: It is not the technology to blame. It is the way you use any technology, which may be bad or good. Using a Diesel engine without filter is "bad".

Gonzo

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 123
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #498 on: August 17, 2015, 06:59:35 PM »
Neven  August 06, 2015, 09:45:28 PM
Quote
So, when are they going to build a useful car for minimalists such as I?
If you don't have to deal with much winter, then one of these would be good.
I'm thinking of getting one.
All electric: 185miles city range.
http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/zero-s/sr.php

I've got one of these - all wheel drive hybrid (pretty good on gasoline, not great, but best I can do right now.)
http://tinyurl.com/qbu9esr
« Last Edit: August 17, 2015, 07:12:01 PM by Gonzo »

Gonzo

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 123
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cars, cars and more cars. And trucks, and....
« Reply #499 on: August 17, 2015, 07:10:47 PM »
ghoti
Quote
"The great diesel car deception"
https://twitter.com/IronMillTech/status/632837732885233664
Don't trust anything from Rupert Murdoch's media group.