Blade Runner Redux - Tesla Cybertruck!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

They actually did. If you watch the video early into the trip the father is saying he would rather skip the first charge as there is plenty of range to make the 2nd but the son is relying on the software to limit charging times by keeping it in a better battery charge state.

Not replying to you now but Aerohead. As far as speed they didn't keep it at 75. They did initially but saw they wouldn't even make some of the relays so they slowed down to 65. The semis were passing them. Would 55 or even 45 mph probably saved them time overall? Probably. But at 45 you would probably literally get a ticket on those interstates. They probably could have found back roads but then the distances would have been longer and the superchargers possibly non existent.

The trailer may have been poor aero, but it's better than normal, and probably 1/2 the frontal aera of normal as far as campers go.

They were just doing what a normal user would do, I'm sure they were back to 75 mph travel with that tiny camper once it was back behind the Ram.

This is why I question the reality of what it will be like to tow with the Cybertruck. Even with better range, I see that only happening with bigger battery. So any gain at one end is lost on the charging end when it comes to more than a couple hundred miles.

Cybertruck is going to have 38.5 sq-ft frontal area,like a Hummer H2,compared to 30.77-sq-ft for the Model X,with an opportunity for any trailer it tows to hide within its turbulent wake.
The Hummer can tow pop-up campers with absolutely no change to its mpg.Although it currently takes an 11-mpg vehicle to do that.
Some tow vehicles,with no more than a rooftop air deflector,can realize 15% better mpg.With the inflated nosecone from England,up to 26% better mpg.
Cybertruck is expected to have a 200-kWh pack.416-mile HWY range in mild weather.Rated load and rated towing capacity will be more inline with current pickups.
We're just entering thousands/millions of years with BEVs.Theoretical chemistry predicts power densities and battery capacities virtually rivaling ICE.Liquid electrolyte,drained and filled in about as much time as filling with gas or diesel.
The impetus is for zero-carbon.Hard to do with pistons.
As to that Boreus trailer,I could probably pull a 30-foot Airstream Classic with the same power.That XT is a quintessential 'sky-scraper.'

[freebeard]

...Happier Campers HC1...

Thanks. But I'd call that a fiberglass knock-off of a Bambi.

My folks had a Scamp they called The Peanut. Apparently that's a thing. They towed it behind a high-top van and/or an Aerostar.

Reposting from the Trailer thread

Transport Evolved got a pusher trailer?

No. but it is a scaled-down fiberglass reproduction of a Westfalia teardrop.

I still think a pusher trailer is the solution. Ever since I saw this one at a Springfield German's Father's Day show-and-shine.


Mr.Sharkey's Pusher Trailer

[redpoint5]

Practically nothing is "zero-carbon" or "carbon-free". As my wife says, it was free after you pay...

That isn't to say that reducing CO2 emissions isn't worthwhile, only that zero is not achievable or necessary. We shouldn't let perfection be the enemy of the good.

We'll be carbon neutral when we eat photons and exhale oxygen, or never, whichever is first.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Practically nothing is "zero-carbon" or "carbon-free". As my wife says, it was free after you pay...

That isn't to say that reducing CO2 emissions isn't worthwhile, only that zero is not achievable or necessary. We shouldn't let perfection be the enemy of the good.

We'll be carbon neutral when we eat photons and exhale oxygen, or never, whichever is first.

I'm hesitant to get off track, but to me the simplest way to be carbon neutral or even carbon negative is to build mass scale atmospheric carbon scrubbers and put them as close as possible to the biggest sources of CO2 production man or natural. This may very well cost billions if not even a trillion, but that's less expensive than something like the green new deal by a factor of 10. That is based in current costs of the technology which just like batteries or anything else will get better with time and scale.

[freebeard]

Talking solutions instead of bickering? Not unpossible.

build mass scale atmospheric carbon scrubbers and put them as close as possible to the biggest sources of CO2 production man or natural. This may very well cost billions if not even a trillion, but that's less expensive than something like the green new deal by a factor of 10.

Avoiding solutions imposed by our governmental servants is priceless.

That said, for the last day I've been looking into hempcrete and hemp oil paint. Hempcrete impounds atmospheric carbon with hydrated lime. Exterior paint and particle board require additional materials and processes.

Hempcrete and biochar on mass scale could be 100x over abandoning our sovereignty.

[ME_Andy]

Rather than carbon scrubbers, I would like to see things go like this:

Rural folks start putting up more solar and batteries packs as those things get cheaper.

Eventually, rural grid operators realize there's no point to running power lines all over rural America.

And so on into the suburbs then eventually the cities.

[freebeard]

Rather than carbon scrubbers, I would like to see things go like this:

What I was getting at is that if you can roll the carbon-sequestering into creating new houses (breweries and wineries like hemp insulation for the moderation of humidity and temps)(people claim the feeling in a hemp moderated space is calming) or even just stacks of bricks, then that can offset the VOCs and BTUs expended as they are now.

Rural folks start putting up more solar and batteries packs as those things get cheaper.

Happened back during Prohibition, the growers would invest in the newest and best technology at the beginning of the grow season and then sell it off at the end. Rinse and repeat. That's what (it says here) got solar panels off the ground.

Eventually, rural grid operators realize there's no point to running power lines all over rural America.

Software Defined Electricity

[aerohead]

Earlier,I made a comment that the Tesla Model X could probably pull a 30-foot Airstream with the same power as for the BOREAS XT.
I spent some time analyzing the XT,as per Sighard Hoerner's component drag integration procedure,plus adding in the applicable interference drag.
From BOREAS's data,and the TFLcars road test,the XT will have a frontal area very close to 38.18-sq-ft. From Horner's process,the XT's drag coefficient will come in at around Cd 0.924, for a CdA of 35.278-sq-ft.
Pulling a 30-foot,1976 Airstream Classic,of 7,500-LB,will actually require 'LESS' power than the 9-foot,1,950-LB BOREAS XT.
Despite TFLcars, Tesla owners are routinely pulling trailers across America.The greatest attention must be spent,looking at the particulars of each towing/towed configuration.Context/conditions are everything!
There are more than a half-dozen parameters which must be considered when choosing trailer technology.Any one of them can spoil the party, if left unconsidered.And again,it's what's not mentioned in the TFLcars testing which proves the rule or not.The United States of America desperately needs driver education.

[freebeard]

Despite TFLcars, Tesla owners are routinely pulling trailers across America.The greatest attention must be spent,looking at the particulars of each towing/towed configuration.Context/conditions are everything!

I'd bet that slowmover would be good at that.

[botsapper]

Elon is also a marketing genius, he knows social media and cultural influencers. So the Escalade and scissor-doored hypercars have a new contender! https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=...&v=RIuk23XHYj0