Fuse replacement -- CX-706

[mbond]

The innovation trend continues with the new AFIPM motors.

Assuming the EV thing picks up steam, both motor and battery technology should provide a lot of spin-off technology.

Things are moving quickly, I sure hope these Giga battery plants we're building don't burn down or become obsolete before they recoup 1% of the "investment"

Lithium ion technology has a theoretical energy density problem.

 

[Susquatch]

Lithium ion technology has a theoretical energy density problem.

Ya, very hard to beat the energy density of gasoline.

 

[PeterT]

Ya, very hard to beat the energy density of gasoline.

Well, hydrocarbons in general. Even the electric evangelists have no practical choice to HC if the ever want to see the can airborne, albeit with some O2 & other goodies. But I digress...

 

[slow-poke]

Ya, very hard to beat the energy density of gasoline.

Lithium ion technology has a theoretical energy density problem.

Completely agree, however:
- for a typical city commuter existing batteries work just fine.
- advertising hype aside (450 miles per charge), actual cold weather range of > 400km per charge is on par with most existing I.C. cars.

I'm retired, on average I drive about 100-200km per week. The only thing holding me back is I don't want to have to put up with the inferior quality associated with pretty much all the EV brands presently available. My 2005 Toyota has has had one repair <$300 in 20 years that peace of mind is priceless. We recently inherited a (40,000km) 2018 Sonata it has given me more problems in 20km of driving than I have had in 20 years with the Lexus. Anyone want to buy a low mileage Sonata? It's going up on Autotrader today.

Now if you live out of the city, have long commutes etc. agreed EV makes little sense at this point.

 

[Susquatch]

Now if you live out of the city, have long commutes etc. agreed EV makes little sense at this point.

I maintain they don't make sense anyplace. The problem in my mind are all the incentives and the life cycle emissions impact.

Incentives when the new vehicle is purchased (which trickles down the used vehicle chain), tax breaks for manufacturing, incentives for charging stations, etc etc. It's not free money, somebody someplace has to pay for it.

Then I ask why? What is the true life-cycle cost and life cycle impact on the environment? Generation, material, battery material, manufacturing, infrastructure, recycling and disposal, etc etc. These all have costs and they all have an impact on the environment. It sure as hell isn't zero like they claim. It's all just electric coolaide.

 

[slow-poke]

I maintain they don't make sense anyplace. The problem in my mind are all the incentives and the life cycle emissions impact.

Incentives when the new vehicle is purchased (which trickles down the used vehicle chain), tax breaks for manufacturing, incentives for charging stations, etc etc. It's not free money, somebody someplace has to pay for it.

Then I ask why? What is the true life-cycle cost and life cycle impact on the environment? Generation, material, battery material, manufacturing, infrastructure, recycling and disposal, etc etc. These all have costs and they all have an impact on the environment. It sure as hell isn't zero like they claim. It's all just electric coolaide.

With all the bias and spin these days, who knows. What I do know for sure is there is a whole lot of parts (entire exhaust system, transmission is some cases, hundreds of parts in the actual ICE) that simply don't exist in a EV, and so they can't break if there not there. In general people fear change. My hunch is that the primary reluctance from the automakers is the loss in revenue from all the parts and service they won't be providing.

According to the EPA, life cycle impact all in < 1/2 from EV.

 

[Susquatch]

With all the bias and spin these days, who knows. What I do know for sure is there is a whole lot of parts (entire exhaust system, transmission is some cases, hundreds of parts in the actual ICE) that simply don't exist in a EV, and so they can't break if there not there. In general people fear change. My hunch is that the primary reluctance from the automakers is the loss in revenue from all the parts and service they won't be providing.

According to the EPA, life cycle impact all in < 1/2 from EV.

And so it goes. If that source was almost anyone other than the EPA, I'd be up for a deep read. But unfortunately government studies and manufacturers claims have almost zero credibility with me. They are the foxes in the hen house.

You are certainly right about the automakers need to make a profit - someplace. It's completely wrong to ignore that. Just as wrong as subsidies to make the alternative view make sense.

I don't think you aimed that resistance to change at me, you would be miles off if you did. I've pioneered and championed change throughout my entire career - just not change for changes sake. Someday we are destined to meet and you will discover that for yourself.

Just to be clear, my earlier rant wasn't JUST the environmental impact. It was the true environmental impact balanced with true cost.

I remain of the view that our future is not electric. The dark horse in my stable is plantoline. True neutral energy from bio-engineered plants that directly produce a high energy density hydrocarbon fuel from sunlight - the most efficient and environmentally friendly solar panel ever developed is a plants leaf. True green energy.

H2O + CO2 + sunlight energy = HxCx + O2 = chemically stored energy = CO2 + H2O + useful energy.

Although I know it is being worked on, I really don't understand why work on this goal hasn't exploded. Special interests? Foolish Interests? It's not really green unless it hurts? It cannot be right if not mandated? Nothing is worthy unless it brings a giant down. Read with heavy sarcasm.

I hate the windmills that pollute my local peace and quiet and ruin my view of the world around me at a heavy cost to my wallet. But I am truly happy for the farmers around me who benefit from the land leases.

Just like I'm truly happy for you and how well your electric vehicle meets your needs (functionally and financially). And I mean that most sincerely! Not one mg of sarcasm included.

 

[PeterT]

What I do know for sure is there is a whole lot of parts (entire exhaust system, transmission is some cases, hundreds of parts in the actual ICE) that simply don't exist in a EV, and so they can't break if there not there. In general people fear change.

That's true. This is another one of those 'all depends on how you spin it' type narratives. By comparison, how many 'parts' are on any dedicated computer board in a typical vehicle? Thousands? Times how many boards, so now millions? What happens when a component goes south? Likely you buy a new board, nobody goes chip hunting. So 999 'parts' are perfectly fine, 1 is defective, into the muncher you go. Its the same argument, just more waste. Certainly lots of boards on an IC are dedicated to engine management & would not be there if strictly related to fuel, exhaust management etc. But I would have to think as many or more boards dedicated to e-motor controlling, battery & charging management. I replaced the control board on my washer for 1/3 the cost of a new washer. The pumps & mechanicals are still happy. Then you go line item through the thousands of other parts that make a car which is a very high %. A door hinge is a door hinge, a wheel is a wheel... they are e-motor agnostic from the complexity & manufacturing perspective. Vehicle count & market conditions & subsidies outweigh the delta. My engine can be hoisted out in an hour, I haven't seen to many battery packs even capable of being dropped. Many most? are integrated to the frame.

I'm certainly not against the technology, in fact there are many positives. But I am very distrustful of the policymakers & individuals & corps who have a vested interest (on both sides of the discussion) that don't have the publics best interests in mind. Pollution in another country related to the 'clean energy manufacturing' is still pollution on a global scale. So which is it, are we saving the world, or just NIMBY? On the Kanukistan front, we are talking about the same brainiacs that to this day have not figured out how to pay their employees with reliability, or could describe what an electron is. But we trust them to dismantle an entire infrastructure because its relatively easy to jot down dates & let the public/market figure it out? Sounds vaguely like 'the budget will balance itself'. OK back to hobby machining LOL

 

[mbond]

With all the bias and spin these days, who knows. What I do know for sure is there is a whole lot of parts (entire exhaust system, transmission is some cases, hundreds of parts in the actual ICE) that simply don't exist in a EV, and so they can't break if there not there. In general people fear change. My hunch is that the primary reluctance from the automakers is the loss in revenue from all the parts and service they won't be providing.

According to the EPA, life cycle impact all in < 1/2 from EV.

View attachment 57956

There is so much to say on this topic, but consider this graph for a moment. It can't possibly be accurate. Without diving into any of the other numbers, the EV is shown to have no bar at all for the 'vehicle in use' portion. That alone tells you that these numbers have been fudged.

It is unclear what they mean by any of these categories, but something as simple as washer fluid is used in about equal measure by both types, is only used while the vehicle is in use, and does not have zero cost. The same for tires, grease, air filters and every other consumable. There is also the matter of how the electricity is actually generated and transmitted, but maybe that's part of what they call 'feedstock and fuel'. If it is, the chart is designed to be misleading, and if it is not, then it is incomplete

But they wouldn't have to make charts like this at all if the vehicles were obviously better. People would just buy them according to the principle of the invisible hand. If it is a question of pollution, set more stringent limits and people will adjust - as people have done since the first real limits on pollution were set in the 70's

Plus there is the basic science problem that no salt ion technology can ever complete with covalent bonds for energy density or power availability. They are orders of magnitude apart

Having said all of that, I own a hybrid and it works well for the short trips my wife mostly makes in the city