FORD F-150 EV announced

[wdb]

Originally Posted by aerohead

An EV pickup is a concession to at least,CAFE and climate change.
For CAFE calculation purposes,automakers are allowed to factor in an EV at 135-mpge.So the F-150 will allow Ford to sell more gas-guzzlers.
As to climate change,perhaps those who will be the early adopter F-150 EV purchasers,wouldn't necessarily prioritize fuel price as a deciding factor in the purchase.They'd be going for zero carbon.That's what I mean about their calculus.
Many of my neighbors are contractors.The more they spend on fuel the less federal income tax they owe.
https://ecomodder.com/forum/a

Thinking on it a bit more, and taking your excellent point regarding CAFE into account, I could see the early adopters of EV pickups being fleet owners. For example the regional rain gutter installer, pest control service, lawn fertilization service, and so on. Short enough daily routes to fit comfortably within the EV range, huge savings in terms of routine maintenance costs. Offset that with the initial cost of setting up charging stations, and probably higher initial vehicle cost. If I operated a fleet of pickups like that I'd be seriously looking at the numbers.

[RedDevil]

More heavy electric equipment, as in heavier...
https://electrek.co/2017/09/17/elect...-battery-pack/

A partnership between two Swiss companies converted a Komatsu dumper truck with a giant 700 kWh battery pack. This single conversion alone has an impressive impact in term of fuel savings and emission reduction.
A typical dumper truck consumes between 50,000 and 100,000 liters of diesel per year, depending on its application, and it can emit between ~131 and 262 tonnes of CO2
....
What is interesting about electrifying dumper trucks is that they are often used to carry ore up and down mines. While diesel trucks burn fuel even on their way down a mine, there’s a great opportunity for electric vehicles to actually gain energy on their way down thanks to regenerative braking.
...
The Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (EMPA) expects that the truck will be able to recuperate 40 kWh of its way down the quarry – something the truck does 20 times a day for a total of 800 kWh of energy capacity through regenerative braking.

While this isn't tiny, it is nothing compared to a 238 meter long electric ferry.
I'm not joking...! https://electrek.co/2017/08/24/all-e...c-ferries-abb/

ABB already started installing the more than 4 MWh of battery packs inside each ship

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Those heavy construction equipments and giant dumper trucks already take benefit of the enhanced efficiency of a serial-hybrid layout, with a constant-speed ICE and the fewer losses of an electric drive compared to a conventional transmission which also has a greater weight penalty than it seems to do in an F-150.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by aerohead

An EV pickup is a concession to at least,CAFE and climate change.
For CAFE calculation purposes,automakers are allowed to factor in an EV at 135-mpge.So the F-150 will allow Ford to sell more gas-guzzlers.

The thing is, automakers don't really need EVs to meet CAFE. CAFE is based on vehicle type, size, and the actual mix of cars sold by an automaker. All of the big 3 are selling full size trucks today that meet 2025 CAFE requirement. (The 2025 standard is 30 mpg CAFE which equals 22 mpg combined on the EPA window sticker)

Then there is the fact that the fine for not meeting CAFE is only $55 per vehicle for every 1 mpg under that target. It is way cheaper to just pay the fine then to make an electric truck. An extra $55 added to the MSRP gets lost when the average transaction price for a full size truck is $39,000.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by JSH

It is way cheaper to just pay the fine then to make an electric truck. An extra $55 added to the MSRP gets lost when the average transaction price for a full size truck is $39,000.

Even though some MPG improvement would be desirable for the average Joe who gets a truck to haul a handful of grocery bags once in a while, and considering that a contractor would most likely get an F-250 instead of an F-150, it sounds like even some technical improvement way less radical than switching to a full-EV becomes hard to justify from the standpoint of the bean-counters.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Even though some MPG improvement would be desirable for the average Joe who gets a truck to haul a handful of grocery bags once in a while, and considering that a contractor would most likely get an F-250 instead of an F-150, it sounds like even some technical improvement way less radical than switching to a full-EV becomes hard to justify from the standpoint of the bean-counters.

True. However, RAM and GMC have added 48V mild-hybrid systems to their trucks recently. The GMC version improves combined fuel economy by 10%. From what I've read a 48V system costs $350 for the automaker.

Then there is the fact that stop-start technology hardly shows up in the EPA city test standard. The real world savings are bigger.

Having 48V on board also opens up a host of electric possibilities not possible with 12V power.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by JSH

RAM and GMC have added 48V mild-hybrid systems to their trucks recently. The GMC version improves combined fuel economy by 10%. From what I've read a 48V system costs $350 for the automaker.

In short-to-mid term, 48V systems seem to be somewhat of a low-hanging fruit that will eventually make its way even in entry-level cars.

Having 48V on board also opens up a host of electric possibilities not possible with 12V power.

Well, even if some accessory such as an EPAS or an A/C compressor can be driven with 12V, a 48V system provides the same power with fewer weight. Another advantage, even though some small places to take a handful of ounces out of a landyacht may look negligible at first...

[Piotrsko]

Don't forget that most network UPS systems & home solar run on 48 vdc. So you have ready made high current inverters in both 120 & 220.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JSH

The thing is, automakers don't really need EVs to meet CAFE. CAFE is based on vehicle type, size, and the actual mix of cars sold by an automaker. All of the big 3 are selling full size trucks today that meet 2025 CAFE requirement. (The 2025 standard is 30 mpg CAFE which equals 22 mpg combined on the EPA window sticker)

Then there is the fact that the fine for not meeting CAFE is only $55 per vehicle for every 1 mpg under that target. It is way cheaper to just pay the fine then to make an electric truck. An extra $55 added to the MSRP gets lost when the average transaction price for a full size truck is $39,000.

We have a Duck Creek Wastewater Treatment plant in Garland,Texas which used to routinely discharge untreated sewage into the adjoining lake.'guess it was cheaper to pay the non-compliance fine than 'cleanup' their act.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by aerohead

We have a Duck Creek Wastewater Treatment plant in Garland,Texas which used to routinely discharge untreated sewage into the adjoining lake.'guess it was cheaper to pay the non-compliance fine than 'cleanup' their act.

Considering that biogas/biomethane could be extracted from the sewage, and it could also serve as a base for nitrogen-rich agricultural fertilizer, discharging untreated sewage into the nature is pointless not only from a tree-hugger standpoint. Making some money out of it makes more sense than paying fines. BTW since organic matter won't quit rotting and releasing methane into the atmosphere whenever EVs become widespread, I still believe the ICE is going to remain relevant in a long term, even if it happens in form of microturbines powering gensets in range-extenders and eventually relying on biomethane among its fuel options.