Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
1) I doubt that I have the facility to navigate your favorite thing.
2) There is a specific purpose for everything said in the videos. Anyone participating in a conversation about energy and work must be acquainted with the fundamentals. All units are interchangeable. Pistons are going away. People need to be able to communicate in the units of measure that will come to dominate the market.
3) Since all the energy data for the Tesla are in Watt-hours/mile, it's imperative that the audience can compare the performance of a ICE vehicle in the same units. All the car magazines have been publishing dual-data for years now.
4) The Rivian is out now, and 'truck' owners will be purchasing 'Watts' when they 'refuel'.
5) There's less familiarity with electric units, however that's evolving.
6) So many Watt-hours per mile at a given speed becomes so many Watt-hours per hour at that speed.
7) Knowing the usable battery capacity, divided by the hourly rate yield the hours, then easily the distance, just like with fuel.
8) Say, @ $ 0.12 / kWh, and the usable pack capacity, simple multiplication gives your cost.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9) the comment about trailer design inefficiencies didn't rear its ugly head until EVs entered the picture. Only now can people see what crap's passed for acceptable design until recently. Which is completely lost on the original videos.
10) we demonstrated that a trailer can have a net-negative drag coefficient, and actually increase the range of the to vehicle when pulling.
11) as to the horse trailer, we demonstrated the aerodynamic particulars of the Model X, the intellectual dishonesty of the comparison, and the NASA-inspired aerodynamic technology which would address that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12) The point about the F-150 is that, it has an 1,180-kWh 'pack' and only a 'non-anxiety' range of 270-miles when towing the 5th-wheel.
13) You're making subjective evaluations about cost, within an industry that's in its infancy, as if all extant performance is fixed, with no prospects for improvements.
14) If you get 1-million miles out of a pack, does it matter what its cost is, over the life of the vehicle?
15) higher front -end costs overshadowed by lower back- end costs can ultimately result in lower total cost of ownership. I don't see a downside.
16) Charge at home.
17) Run on fusion energy.
|
2. People don't need to understand future units until we're in the future. Currently we live in the present, which means present units of measure are relevant now.
3. Why? People don't care how much energy is expended, only how far they can go and how much it's going to cost. My wife doesn't consider how many what hours a microwave is going to consume to heat something up, she only cares that she can do it quickly.
9. It rears it's ugly head when considering EVs because the thing that sucks about them is the battery, and to tow with an EV requires an enormous battery; the very thing that massively sucks from a cost, weight, volume, refilling time, degradation, environmental regulation perspective.
10. "Better" trailer design will only occur when its needed. So far, it seems it hasn't been needed. I'm as annoyed as anyone when I observe inefficient designs, but aerodynamics isn't the only consideration. In fact, it's among the last considerations. Even less important if only used very infrequently.
11. I didn't read the truck article, but I imagine there were dishonest aspects of it. Doesn't negate the overall opinion that current EVs tend to be suboptimal for most people who tow.
12. 270 miles of worry free towing and rapid refilling is not a compelling point if one is defending EVs for pulling a trailer. I hope that's obvious to you.
13. No, I'm commenting about the state of things as they exist in reality. I'm withholding opinion about what may or may not occur in the future. I'm a superfan of EVs, so I have great hope for a future where batteries suck a lot less.
14. Total cost of ownership is relevant, which is why I made my spreadsheet. The initial cost of the EV/battery is relevant to that calculation. Depreciation is the single largest cost to most people, so reducing initial purchase price is the best way to reduce overall cost per mile.
15. Depends on use case. Higher initial costs can be made up in the long run, but how long do most people keep a vehicle and how far do they drive? My spreadsheet makes it relatively simple to "do the math".
17. I hope for fusion one day too. It's not enough to have an idea, it must become reality.