# The future isn't EV cars, hydrogen, or even hyperloop. I was wrong. The future is Aptera Solar Powered Cars.



## Space Lynx (Nov 22, 2021)

Honestly, for 25 grand, I am considering saving up and buying this. No fuel cost for my commute = amazing, and on days when the sun doesn't shine enough, I can plug it in and charge it overnight I guess. If I get the 400 mile range though for only 29 grand...  (1000 mile range is only 45 grand...) the amount of my commute in miles, and even cloudy days, won't matter so much, because I won't use that many miles before the next sunny days.
No more reliance on oil companies, no more reliance on geopolitical games, no more reliance on utilities companies... this is FREEEDOOM!!!! - HOW LONG HAVE I SOUGHT THEE???:










GO TO 1:15MINS IN!!!  ^^^^

1000 MILE RANGE!!! THIS IS FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NO MORE KNEELING BEFORE THE OVERLORDS!!!!!!!!!               


I had it wrong all along, the future isn't traditional EV, hydrogen, or hyperloop.  This is the future, it's not a joke anymore, they are already in production of beta models. My guess is officially launch will be pushed back to 2023 though.


















						Aptera Motors
					

Aptera is the world’s first Solar Electric Vehicle that requires no charging for most daily use - giving you the freedom to do more with less impact on the planet.




					www.aptera.us
				
























edit:  its not in Alpha anymore as the first video shows, its in Beta now.  and a lot has changed according to new videos from last week that I also linked above.




old links that are now retired and make no sense, only solar makes sense now:










						Why did we abandon hydrogen cars so quickly?
					

The more I look at what Toyota has done (and is doing) with a hydrogen powered internal combustion engine even... I just don't get it. I know storage costs of hydrogen are expensive, but if it were scaled up, wouldn't the cost dramatically lower? The Boring Company could dig giant underground...




					www.techpowerup.com
				












						Ocean currents and hydropower, solving the worlds energy problems without fusion dreams?
					

So @R-T-B and I were having a discussion, it got me thinking about something since Wash State has hydro power, same with British Columbia, really benefits that region of the world immensely.  If the ocean currents are predictable, and we already have the capability of laying wires entire ocean...




					www.techpowerup.com
				












						Cost effective transportation, how to live a better life with more money in your pocket, 8.1 kWh per 100 km EV car's. Let's discuss.
					

Sketching out some rough ideas... basically what gave me this idea was how hard it is to find decently priced transportation to get back and forth to work.  How vulture like car salesman have been towards me, etc. I absolutely can't believe humanity has come to this. It's really sad and...




					www.techpowerup.com
				












						Seems to me, that Hyperloop is not only the future, it will benefit all of us and save us a lot of time.
					

Watch this video in full before commenting please.  Keep in mind, even in the pandemic like now, hyperloop would still be better than all other modes of public transport (the pods are more sanitary since only small number of people for each one, versus air being exchanged on an entire train...




					www.techpowerup.com


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 9, 2022)

Interesting concept car. Lots of great ideas. Kinda ugly though. They need to make something a lot more stylish.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 9, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Interesting concept car. Lots of great ideas. Kinda ugly though. They need to make something a lot more stylish.



They wouldn't be able to achieve 1000 mile range then, as the whole goal is the 0.13 coefficient against wind, less than a Tesla by a lot.

I like the looks of it (the silver only version looks like a dolphin kind of), I like that it has a built in tent/awning as well, this would be amazing to camp with and see a bit of the world in.

There are only about 5 states that require a motorcycle license to drive 3-wheel vehicles, but most people would be able to drive this with a regular driving license.

I think this is the future. It makes a lot of sense.  Freedom from utility companies and gas station fill ups, and hydrogen logistics... 40 miles per day... lets say you only get 30 even if your car supports the full 40. I mean most people have a day or two off they aren't doing anything, so if you get the 600 or 1000 mile range vehicle, the days off will add up rather quick, might not ever have to plug it in, depending on your commute, time of year, etc.  Amazing.

It's a shame Congress has not given this thing a tax incentive like it has for other EV cars, this one makes a lot of sense imo.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jan 9, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> Honestly, for 25 grand, I am considering saving up and buying this. No fuel cost for my commute = amazing, and on days when the sun doesn't shine enough, I can plug it in and charge it overnight I guess. If I get the 400 mile range though for only 29 grand...  (1000 mile range is only 45 grand...) the amount of my commute in miles, and even cloudy days, won't matter so much, because I won't use that many miles before the next sunny days.
> No more reliance on oil companies, no more reliance on geopolitical games, no more reliance on utilities companies... this is FREEEDOOM!!!! - HOW LONG HAVE I SOUGHT THEE???:
> 
> 
> ...



Old news and you clearly found another clickbait source  one per day keeps the doctor away?









						World Solar Challenge - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 9, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> Old news and you clearly found another clickbait source  one per day keeps the doctor away?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I disagree, this isn't about breaking records, this is a tangible product someone can buy at 25 grand that gives them freedom from utilities companies and gas companies, why you would want to degrade that boggles my mind. Also, why would I care about clickbait titles? I get no monetary gains from any of my topics. Even the $10 I won from @W1zzard for being very active I immediately donated/giveaway to someone else as soon as I won it. Not here for the money, here because I am sad the world won't change, as I often say, humans are capable of so much, yet so little...so what is my incentive for making clickbait titles as you are suggesting I am doing? This is freedom, all of our lives are tied to energy in one way or the other, and this is affordable and not hypothetical. 

Sure it wouldn't work for cloudy parts of the world, but even large parts of USA that are cloudy still get quite a bit of sun, and in the off months a charger can be used (fyi it accepts every charger there is according to the FAQS page).  That is impressive.

I would like to know what the warranty lifespan/charge cycle count is on the batteries though, and how much to replace them, etc.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jan 9, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> I disagree, this isn't about breaking records, this is a tangible product someone can buy at 25 grand that gives them freedom from utilities companies and gas companies, why you would want to degrade that boggles my mind. Also, why would I care about clickbait titles? I get no monetary gains from any of my topics. Even the $10 I won from @W1zzard for being very active I immediately donated/giveaway to someone else as soon as I won it. Not here for the money, here because I am sad the world won't change, as I often say, humans are capable of so much, yet so little...so what is my incentive for making clickbait titles as you are suggesting I am doing? This is freedom, all of our lives are tied to energy in one way or the other, and this is affordable and not hypothetical.
> 
> Sure it wouldn't work for cloudy parts of the world, but even large parts of USA that are cloudy still get quite a bit of sun, and in the off months a charger can be used (fyi it accepts every charger there is according to the FAQS page).  That is impressive.
> 
> I would like to know what the warranty lifespan/charge cycle count is on the batteries though, and how much to replace them, etc.



Tangible? 25K?









						Reserve Aptera
					

Reserve Reserve Aptera |




					aptera.us
				




You can pre order this. It does not exist yet. 25K gets you a 250 mile battery. GL on just solar with that. The 1000 mile battery wont work on just solar either. You will be using a charge point daily.

And thats the marketing story. I drive an EV. 420km (300mi?) rated is now 250km on winter tires. In bad weather comditions you can drop to 200KM of range. I need to charge daily. I also have 10 solar panels worth 3100kwh rated. On a sunny day those deliver about enough charge for one full 54KW battery. Price: 39K euro. 

Other aspects: this Aptera thingy has no boot. You can transport yourself. Public transport does that too but doesnt cost 25K and can also go electric. Four bags of groceries? Thatll be fun in this 'car'  It also means that the range is determined based on transporting minimal weight. 

The real scenario is that you are paying 44900 bucks or more for 1000 mile range, no boot space and a very small range of use cases. And in practical use, it does not avoid fossil at all because charging still happens on a non green energy grid. 

Stop running away with every marketing story you read, man


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 9, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> Tangible? 25K?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



there is a large space behind the two seats. plenty of room for camper cooler, groceries, what have you. not sure where you are getting that. plenty of room for me anyway. lets forget the solar even exists.  25k for a 250 mile range with a 0.13 coefficient (which means those miles will go further than a standard EV car due to less drag), still beats every single other EV on the market in price range.  the Nissan Leaf is like 127 mile range at 29k...

solar depending how much you drive is still awesome benefit imo.  at not much extra cost

also, if the entire grid collapses someday, which is not impossible, you could still chug along, but eh, that's not really the point here.

for your use case @Vayra86 this is probably not a good car, but for most people who have a small commute and live in sunny areas, 25k is hard to beat.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 9, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> but for most people who have a small commute and live in sunny areas, 25k is hard to beat.


This. For many use case scenarios in many area's of the world, this kind of thing could work well. Where I live? Not going to work so well, we get WAY too much snow and cloudy days during the later half of autumn, winter and early spring.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 9, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> This. For many use case scenarios in many area's of the world, this kind of thing could work well. Where I live? Not going to work so well, we get WAY too much snow and cloudy days during the later half of autumn, winter and early spring.



I was about to type, "yeah and England and Ireland can also forget something like this" but then I just remembered that gas/diesel is much more expensive there than it is here, and this would still be the cheapest EV with that kind of range on the market. Hmm, not sure how well it's turn radius is though, it would need to be very agile for those small roads over there. If I had the money to by a Tesla Model 3 brand new or for same price get a 1000 mile range EV, forget the solar panels, and I lived in England/Ireland, I'd take the 1000 mile range any day. That's plenty to see large swaths of England/Ireland since they are so condensed/lot of charging stations popping up.

Apparently this will support Tesla Supercharger "hopefully" it says in FAQS page, I think they are just waiting for permission from Elon, he will probably say yes, who knows with Elon, just depends if he feels like laughing that day or not.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 9, 2022)

My problem is lithium based battery chemistry. I don't trust it. It's too dangerous for use in vehicles. It's dangerous enough for phones, tablets, laptops and other such portables. We need a breakthrough in battery chemistry...


----------



## Vayra86 (Jan 9, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> there is a large space behind the two seats. plenty of room for camper cooler, groceries, what have you. not sure where you are getting that. plenty of room for me anyway. lets forget the solar even exists.  25k for a 250 mile range with a 0.13 coefficient (which means those miles will go further than a standard EV car due to less drag), still beats every single other EV on the market in price range.  the Nissan Leaf is like 127 mile range at 29k...
> 
> solar depending how much you drive is still awesome benefit imo.  at not much extra cost
> 
> ...



Thing is, so far we have seen that the low range cars are not here to stay and even 'small commute' struggles with the early EVs like the BMW i3 with about 300km WLTP range - they drop below 150Km in bad conditions which is usually saying 'recharge on the road for daily commute'. Saw a lot of those used for exactly the use case you describe. They had issues. Many drivers encountered problems in daily commute. Almost everywhere the trend is pushing range up or people wont feel comfy. Range anxiety is a thing. 

The practical consideration is that you need quite a lot of 'spare' range to drive without those issues. Even sunny areas get windy, for example. Its clear this car is aimed at a use case you describe, but I think thats the use case where public transport can be and IS a whole lot more efficient and cheaper. If you leave the emotion of driving your own car behind, what is the gain here really? Because you are still going to have to resort to more expenses for longer range movement, too... 

Also. 250 miles rated is not 'a better mile because of better drag coefficient' - those bonus points are already in the mile range measurement. Therefore you will have a much stronger adverse impact from adding weight, but also from weather conditions. The range relies on a much tighter set of ideal conditions. EVs are strange like that. Heavier EVs suffer less from adding weight because in a relative sense, you are adding less. 

You're not any more independent from anything with a more efficient car  Running on solar alone aint happening. I wont contest it can be competitive in the market, but there are a lot of caveats here, much like all types of EVs have their tradeoffs.

Turn radius and general road behavior of most EVs is stellar, weight can be placed much lower in the car and divided over all wheels.

Aptera claims that even with the most optimal setup (1K mile range, full solar package) and 'sun level 8' you already need the grid if you travel 35 miles per day. So yeah... gl with 250 miles...


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 9, 2022)

You are correct that this would be useless in UK/IRL. I have seen 1 tesla in my city, and pretty much only a few other EV's. Petrol is very expensive here compared to the USA, but our GOV is greedy and taxes the feck out of it. 

I would love a full EV, but charging it is not green even though it does not in itself pollute, the power to charge it is.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 9, 2022)

Tigger said:


> You are correct that this would be useless in UK/IRL. I have seen 1 tesla in my city, and pretty much only a few other EV's. Petrol is very expensive here compared to the USA, but our GOV is greedy and taxes the feck out of it.
> 
> I would love a full EV, but charging it is not green even though it does not in itself pollute, the power to charge it is.



as someone who walked on streets of UK in the past and had to smell ****** diesel fumes cause the cars are so damn close to the sidewalks, I absolutely prob damaged my health some from that experience. i could care less where the electricity comes from, but Europe and UK, especially in those medieval cities where everything is condensed need to be electric only imo for this reason alone.  its just an unpleasant experience trying to enjoy your day and sightsee and have to smell some **** car, most you can't smell, but even then they are prob still damaging your health.


----------



## Remeca (Jan 9, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> there is a large space behind the two seats. plenty of room for camper cooler, groceries, what have you. not sure where you are getting that. plenty of room for me anyway. lets forget the solar even exists.  25k for a 250 mile range with a 0.13 coefficient (which means those miles will go further than a standard EV car due to less drag), still beats every single other EV on the market in price range.  the Nissan Leaf is like 127 mile range at 29k...
> 
> solar depending how much you drive is still awesome benefit imo.  at not much extra cost
> 
> ...


For a small commute, I recommend a bicycle.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 9, 2022)

Remeca said:


> For a small commute, I recommend a bicycle.



I was thinking in small in terms of American cities. like 15 miles each way small. lol

and no ty in negative 6 degree weather which it was last week here.


----------



## Divide Overflow (Jan 9, 2022)

They haven't had a lot of success delivering this in the past.  I'll just drop this here.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 9, 2022)

I'm all for electric vehicles and solar power, but sunlight is about 1 KW per square meter at best, so the solar cells on the car are not remotely enough; not even sure they are enough to run air-conditioning when the car is not running, perhaps enough to run a fan in the Summer.

That said, electric cars are the future.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 9, 2022)

Divide Overflow said:


> They haven't had a lot of success delivering this in the past.  I'll just drop this here.



they discuss this with Jay Leno in the first video i linked in post one, that was due to the 2008 economic crisis. nice way to just post negativity without context though



Andy Shiekh said:


> I'm all for electric vehicles and solar power, but sunlight is about 1 KW per square meter at best, so the solar cells on the car are not remotely enough; not even sure they are enough to run air-conditioning when the car is not running, perhaps enough to run a fan in the Summer.
> 
> That said, electric cars are the future.



they can do up to 40 miles charging per day, prob more realistically 28 per day for those outside of california/nevada region etc

even at 28, that is most all anyone needs for a short commute, especially since those other miles will be gained back on days you don't really drive anywhere


----------



## Vayra86 (Jan 9, 2022)

Divide Overflow said:


> They haven't had a lot of success delivering this in the past.  I'll just drop this here.



Part of my earlier point. Making a good EV isn't easy and this has many traits of not being a good one. Will it find a purpose? Possibly.

We have a Dutch start up trying something similar.









						Lightyear 0 - Wikipedia
					






					nl.wikipedia.org
				




They're a lot closer to production of something realistic. But we can expect many of these concepts to pop up in the coming years.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> Part of my earlier point. Making a good EV isn't easy and this has many traits of not being a good one. Will it find a purpose? Possibly.
> 
> We have a Dutch start up trying something similar.
> 
> ...



hey at least they are trying. all we do is sit on our asses and talk on tech forums.


----------



## Remeca (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> I was thinking in small in terms of American cities. like 15 miles each way small. lol
> 
> and no ty in negative 6 degree weather which it was last week here.


15 miles isn't untenable on a bike, even in sub freezing temperatures. If it is, add a battery and motor. Maybe it just isn't for you though. -6(F, C?) is a bit inconvenient, but how well do you think solar panels work in the winter? (Hint: not great.)


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

Remeca said:


> 15 miles isn't untenable on a bike, even in sub freezing temperatures. If it is, add a battery and motor. Maybe it just isn't for you though. -6(F, C?) is a bit inconvenient, but how well do you think solar panels work in the winter? (Hint: not great.)



like I said in the first post, during the two months out of 12 that is deep winter here... can plug it in...


----------



## Shihab (Jan 10, 2022)

Is no one going to comment on how wide this thing is? Nearly half a meter wider than my Corolla! And that form factor looks like it would be a pain to handle.

It's an interesting concept, but I'd rather keep my PVs stationary on a roof top, plenty of space, plenty of storage capacity, plus you get to make your independence from big-oil more solid.



Andy Shiekh said:


> I'm all for electric vehicles and solar power, but sunlight is about 1 KW per square meter at best, so the cells on the car are not remotely enough; not even sure they are enough to run air-conditioning when the car is not running, perhaps enough to run a fan in the Summer.



The panels are rated for 700w peak. Could generate the necessary amount to drive the stated distance under very favourable conditions. Problem is, without actually seeing numbers from an independent third party, the power generation estimates and energy consumption/km figures are little more than marketing bs (unless you're on a low sodium diet).
Not saying that their claims are impossible, but I personally wouldn't bite into the hype just yet.

As for air conditioning: Do note that this is a battery-equipped machine that has a very small internal volume to cool. You don't need big panels to run an AC. Granted, doing so would cut down the range figures, but it would do so to any other type of vehicle. Energy-wise, the PV contribution to cost reduction holds either way.


----------



## Remeca (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> like I said in the first post, during the two months out of 12 that is deep winter here... can plug it in...


"Here" isn't everywhere. It's functionality just a stripped down electric car, with a solar panel. It won't be replacing anything anytime soon. Pre-ordering this is ridiculous.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

Shihabyooo said:


> Is no one going to comment on how wide this thing is? Nearly half a meter wider than my Corolla! And that form factor looks like it would be a pain to handle.
> 
> It's an interesting concept, but I'd rather keep my PVs stationary on a roof top, plenty of space, plenty of storage capacity, plus you get to make your independence from big-oil more solid.
> 
> ...



I do agree, I'd like to see numbers from a third party reviewer, etc.

I disagree however on the size, looks about normal to me, based on the cars parked next to it.









Remeca said:


> "Here" isn't everywhere. It's functionality just a stripped down electric car, with a solar panel. It won't be replacing anything anytime soon. Pre-ordering this is ridiculous.



its good for a lot of peoples use contexts, just not yours.


----------



## Remeca (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> I do agree, I'd like to see numbers from a third party reviewer, etc.
> 
> I disagree however on the size, looks about normal to me, based on the cars parked next to it.
> 
> ...


A bike is better for more people in more places, I posit.


----------



## Shihab (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> I do agree, I'd like to see numbers from a third party reviewer, etc.
> 
> I disagree however on the size, looks about normal to me, based on the cars parked next to it.



Quoting the FAQs:


> What is the width across the front wheels?​Aptera is 88″ wide. We realize this may be wider than local regulations permit for some of our global customers and we are working through this process with industry experts to ensure we can make Aptera available in Europe and the UK.



The other vehicles in the shot are trucks (vans?) from what I see. Perspective -and other- distortions make the comparison slightly more difficult from one image. 
So even if it was equal in width, that doesn't make its size less problematic. This thing shouldn't even be competing with sedans, leave vans.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

Shihabyooo said:


> Quoting the FAQs:
> 
> 
> The other vehicles in the shot are trucks (vans?) from what I see. Perspective -and other- distortions make the comparison slightly more difficult from one image.
> So even if it was equal in width, that doesn't make its size less problematic. This thing shouldn't even be competing with sedans, leave vans.



Nice find... and how wide is a corolla, its 70" so 18 more inches wide, that actually is quite a bit.

well that does indeed make this limited to USA only market, and small town only market at that, primarily in the southwest where the sun is prevalent. where i live the streets are massive, so this wouldn't be an issue for me, but nice find I did not know this at all



Remeca said:


> A bike is better for more people in more places, I posit.



yeah... that's not the point of this thread, I agree with that... everyone has a different use case. i am not biking in winter, also my commute is 40 minutes each to way to work on the highway, have fun biking that.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 10, 2022)

Shihabyooo said:


> The panels are rated for 700w peak.



To give this perspective, 700W is very close to 1HP, and all those batteries will make it heavy.


----------



## Remeca (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> Nice find... and how wide is a corolla, its 70" so 18 more inches wide, that actually is quite a bit.
> 
> well that does indeed make this limited to USA only market, and small town only market at that, primarily in the southwest where the sun is prevalent. where i live the streets are massive, so this wouldn't be an issue for me, but nice find I did not know this at all
> 
> ...


That's a long commute. The average is much less than that. If winter isn't doable on a bike, there's always trains and buses. Trains, buses and bikes are better for the environment than putting a solar panel on every car. This isn't a new concept. Solar airplanes have been around for many years, but they aren't a viable alternative to passenger jet aircraft. Same thing here. There is nothing new here.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 10, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> Part of my earlier point. Making a good EV isn't easy and this has many traits of not being a good one. Will it find a purpose? Possibly.
> 
> We have a Dutch start up trying something similar.
> 
> ...



Nice but 119000 euros, without taxes. yowsa. I'd just get a audi R8

Spend £5k on a bloody good Ebike and use that for work and back, will be fast and bloody good fun too.


----------



## Shihab (Jan 10, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> To give this perspective, 700W is very close to 1HP, and all those batteries will make it heavy.



This is not a simple circuit where PVs are hooked directly to the motors. Motors are fed from batteries, which can supply more than enough power (peak is 2 or 3 times 50KW) for *relatively* long duration of time, and motors don't -typically- run at great power at all times, PVs otoh always give you whatever irradiance reaches them, on the hand.

It would be better to look at it from an energy perspective. Manufacturer claims energy consumption of  62.5 w.h/km. A 700w PV running at peak power for 6 hrs (or equivalent curve) would produce 4200 w.h. That's ~67 km worth of energy.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

Remeca said:


> Trains, buses and bikes are better for the environment than putting a solar panel on every car. This isn't a new concept. Solar airplanes have been around for many years, but they aren't a viable alternative to passenger jet aircraft. Same thing here. There is nothing new here.



I agree, but that won't happen in the United States, I wish it would. People love their cars here and they won't change.



Shihabyooo said:


> This is not a simple circuit where PVs are hooked directly to the motors. Motors are fed from batteries, which can supply more than enough of the power (2 or 3 times 50KW) for a long duration of time, and motors don't -typically- run at large power at all times, PVs always give you whatever irradiance reaches them, on the hand.
> It would be better to look at it from an energy perspective.
> 
> 
> ...



and it does have the regenerative breaking for all 3 wheels as well to help regain some energy back


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> I agree, but that won't happen in the United States, I wish it would. People love their cars here and they won't change.
> 
> 
> 
> and it does have the regenerative breaking for all 3 wheels as well to help regain some energy back



If petrol/Gas cost what it does in the UK it might be different.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

Tigger said:


> If petrol/Gas cost what it does in the UK it might be different.




good point, it is inevitable as oil is finite, just depends how many decades for that to happen here. its sad we can't all get along as a species, cause it makes sense to me that they should have finished the oil pipeline to Canada, but maybe had a requirement that the x percentage of the profit from that pipeline go into green transportation as well, so poor people don't get hit hard on gas prices skyrocketing, but also maintaining a smooth transition. regardless humans will never get along, so its best to not be reliant on them, hence if I only drove 15 mins to work each way and lived in somewhere like Arizona, I would buy the 400 or 600 mile range of this car and never ever need to charge once in my life. completely free of the grid. would be amazeballs to have that kind of freedom


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> good point, it is inevitable as oil is finite, just depends how many decades for that to happen here. its sad we can't all get along as a species, cause it makes sense to me that they should have finished the oil pipeline to Canada, but maybe had a requirement that the x percentage of the profit from that pipeline go into green transportation as well, so poor people don't get hit hard on gas prices skyrocketing, but also maintaining a smooth transition. regardless humans will never get along, so its best to not be reliant on them, hence if I only drove 15 mins to work each way and lived in somewhere like Arizona, I would buy the 400 or 600 mile range of this car and never ever need to charge once in my life. completely free of the grid. would be amazeballs to have that kind of freedom



Buy a biggish camper van, cover it in solar panels and fill it with battery's


----------



## Divide Overflow (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> they discuss this with Jay Leno in the first video i linked in post one, that was due to the 2008 economic crisis. nice way to just post negativity without context though


I'll see your "negativity" and raise you some reality.  Lets see some third party reviews and real world statistics on this.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

Divide Overflow said:


> I'll see your "negativity" and raise you some reality.  Lets see some third party reviews and real world statistics on this.



I mean I said I want those things too in previous posts... so ok...


----------



## Liquid Cool (Jan 10, 2022)

I hope homeowners aren't going to be upset when people start plugging their new "government subsidized" EV's into our antiquated and overencumbered grid system ~ en masse.

So-called green energy is lacking one thing...cost feasibility.

I'm watching this sector with keen interest.

It's what dreams are made of.  IF you're a quick buck artist.

Best,

Liquid Cool


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

Liquid Cool said:


> I hope homeowners aren't going to be upset when people start plugging their new "government subsidized" EV's into our antiquated and overencumbered grid system ~ en masse.
> 
> So-called green energy is lacking one thing...cost feasibility.
> 
> ...



I mean USA is already biggest crypto mining country in the world to my knowledge, and no one seems to care about that in regards to the power grid... meh.

Cost feasibility?  If you live in a sunny place, for 25 grand you can buy this Aptera and with a small commute, never charge your car or use a gas station ever again... seems like a win win to me. Sure that doesn't help everyone, but its a hell of a good start, and something Tesla/Elon never cared about (the middle class market).


----------



## Liquid Cool (Jan 10, 2022)

My comment was in reference to EV's, not solar-powered vehicles.  It won't be Meh when you're plugging in 200 million cars, it will be a nightmare.

With that said...don't take me as a person not liking greener energy.  I do...it's just that when I examined these technologies well over a decade ago I didn't see any one of them that is actually green &/or cost feasible.  With wind turbines being the worst offender if I'm recalling correctly.

I'd personally LOVE to have a car powered by solar, although....until that can happen.  I believe there are "disruptive" technologies that could be released that would allow some of these greener technologies to compete.  gas engines with passive electric capabilities(passive recharging technology) that would net you well over 100mpg and still be, you guessed it!  Cost feasible.

Why do I say disruptive?  Because these newer technologies that I believe have been available for decades would disrupt the oil markets and the world order.  Countries like Saudi Arabia and especially Russia would suffer greatly.

If we head in the direction of EV's at this pace, with the current players...only one country benefits...and it isn't the US.

I still can't believe we left Afghanistan...the lithium deposits there are huge and will soon be in control of/have access to...well, not us.

The whole move...seems orchestrated to extract as much capital from the us taxpayer as possible. 

I'll leave it at this.

Take care buddy,

Liquid Cool


----------



## Vayra86 (Jan 10, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> hey at least they are trying. all we do is sit on our asses and talk on tech forums.



They're all trying to make money off an EV concept and provide clickbait for us to talk about. Thát is the real bottom line. Nobody in any of those companies is going to change the world. We're still using tons of energy to transport individuals across distances - note my comments about public transport earlier, if you want to talk efficiency. Meanwhile we seem to be unable to reduce our fossil footprint to generate that energy. And transitioning to 'more green' is apparently also a catalyst to use more fossil. Global coal- and gas based energy production is higher than it ever was. Green is used to generate energy for data centers that serve to transport all that clickbait nonsense...and cat videos 

That's marketing for ya. Reflect on the title of this topic  Do you know why we progress so slowly and keep producing more bullshit? Because we keep trying to believe every bit of marketing is a game changer. And try to make others believe it too. Missionary work to make start ups rich by sitting on our ass talking on tech forums. Its a strange, strange world...

You might have noticed I'm usually entering the fray to add nuance to the screaming ads and topic starts. I'm also never on social/online 'news' media, like honestly I just straight up never go there, because its all static and misdirection. I still know exactly whats going on though just from a quality newspaper (old media). Reflect on what you've just said and what you're actually doing here. I think its counter productive, even to your own stance on what's happening to the planet and its people.

This rabbit hole is fking deep and we're all in it, often barely realizing it.



Liquid Cool said:


> My comment was in reference to EV's, not solar-powered vehicles.  It won't be Meh when you're plugging in 200 million cars, it will be a nightmare.
> 
> With that said...don't take me as a person not liking greener energy.  I do...it's just that when I examined these technologies well over a decade ago I didn't see any one of them that is actually green &/or cost feasible.  With wind turbines being the worst offender if I'm recalling correctly.
> 
> ...



Yep.. the current 'transition' is worth nothing without major systemic adjustments to our societies and ways to generate and (re)distribute wealth. The orchestrating is ingrained in our current systems, everything is geared towards growth. Growth is going to kill us. No matter how green we washed everything. Because that's what it currently is. Greenwashing and exporting our issues like we always have. I don't even see any conspiracies here, or higher powers that be, its just the way we organized everything. That's also why its so damn hard to change it.

But... that's an international effort. Its not just the US taxpayer... same stuff happens in Europe and Asia.



Liquid Cool said:


> I hope homeowners aren't going to be upset when people start plugging their new "government subsidized" EV's into our antiquated and overencumbered grid system ~ en masse.
> 
> So-called green energy is lacking one thing...cost feasibility.
> 
> ...


The Netherlands, where I live, has already got some of the highest densities of solar @ homes and also EV charge points on the planet right now, and this is indeed a challenge but not a major problem. Its not something that will just 'destroy the grid', you just end up charging your car a bit slower (or not at all ). Longer term, it requires a different approach to energy transport, probably more decentralized, and probably with the inclusion of some system of home-stored energy. Much like Elon's idea of the battery at home.

But in real numbers. I have a single-phase charge point on the driveway. It does not exceed 3500 watts which is all you can pull from any single socket in the house / group in the fuse box. There is nothing extraordinary about it really. It translates to needing 9-11 hours for a nearly full charge 10-100%. Its perfectly feasible. You can also go triple phase and charge twice as fast, but realistically, you'd never really need it even for daily commute using the whole battery of the car.



Remeca said:


> A bike is better for more people in more places, I posit.



And _very green. _You also get bonus health points, it refills one heart per day


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 10, 2022)

I used to cycle a lot, the bonus is girls love the chunky thighs you get too  Done 100 milers a few times.

I would love a really good ebike, some have a helluva range too.

Some countries are just not very viable for solar that much, specially the UK, sometimes we hardly get any sun, even in winter. I guess a few EU countries are the same too. EV's are the best bet, but like Liquid Cool said when there are a lot it will be a helluva stress on the grid.


----------



## Vayra86 (Jan 10, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Nice but 119000 euros, without taxes. yowsa. I'd just get a audi R8
> 
> Spend £5k on a bloody good Ebike and use that for work and back, will be fast and bloody good fun too.



Yeah, its a stunning... price tag


----------



## silentbogo (Jan 10, 2022)

Looks suspicious as hell. Solar is just a gimmick for that car, since 700W is barely enough to charge at most a 5kWh battery module over the course of a perfectly sunny day in Cali. Even if we assume it'll go on a single hub motor in RWD, while driven by a weightless toddler - it won't get you anywhere. What's funny, is that marketing is still pushing too hard on calling it a "solar car", even though one of CEOs noted in his interview that it's just a gimmick and won't contribute to vehicle's range. My bad, re-watched it one more time without skipping, and it was his bragging that 700W wasn't contributing much in general, but "pushes the needle" on Luna. Still clings to 40 miles of solar in FWD.

Other than that - it's a just another gimmicky EV with super-inflated specs. Numbers don't make sense, especially range. I assume they either took the most appealing number from electric dragster, or they simply assumed that if they weigh only half of Tesla model Y with same theoretical power and battery - then they'll automatically get twice as much.
So far they've only shown tests on the drag strip and short stretches of streets. They also don't talk about motors and batteries too much, except that brief promo about partnership with
Another suspect is their team. Two dudes from "Aptera take #1", bunch of marketers and designers, and only 3-4 dudes with careers related to EVs or drivetrains in general.
Aptera already failed once. This time they just have a bigger marketing and design team.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 10, 2022)

silentbogo said:


> . What's funny, is that marketing is still pushing too hard on calling it a "solar car", even though one of CEOs noted in his interview that it's just a gimmick and won't contribute to vehicle's range.



can you link this interview?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 11, 2022)

Remeca said:


> A bike is better for more people in more places, I posit.


Agreed. People need to invest in bicycles. It still a fairly speedy way to get around over short distances, is good for the environment AND good for the body & health of a person.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

I bike to and from work but may one day get an electric bike.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 11, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Agreed. People need to invest in bicycles. It still a fair speedy way to get around over short distances, is good for the environment AND good good for the body and health of a person.



I agree. i am 52 and have a resting HR of less than 50, from cycling. I would definitely like a nice Ebike with a 100 mile daily range. I have seen some that can do 50+ MPH too, which is deffo fun.

Unless a car can totally charge itself from the sun, it is still contributing to polluting in some way, so will never be totally green.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

How about nuclear fusion?

I guess one could also classify sunlight as from nuclear fusion.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 11, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> How about nuclear fusion?
> 
> I guess one could also classify sunlight as from nuclear fusion.



The fusion is not happening on our planet though


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

Not yet


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 11, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> Not yet


maybe another 50-100 years yet imo


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

Not arguing with that, just hoping you are wrong.

I kinda like the idea of mining tritium from the moon.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 11, 2022)

Tigger said:


> The fusion is not happening on our planet though


Not true. Fusion reactors are currently being built and tested in several countries around the world.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 11, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Not true. Fusion reactors are currently being built and tested in several countries around the world.



Didn't think they had working fusion yet. They don't yet have cold fusion though which is the one they really want.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

Working they have, even break-even, but not commercial.

On a separate thread, there was even one idea to use muons, which are sort of like heavy unstable electrons that would orbit much closer and so allow hydrogen atoms to get closer for fusion.

Fusion is easier for deuterium and even easier for tritium; that is why I like the idea of moon mining tritium.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 11, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> Working they have, even break-even, but not commercial.


It's getting there. The one in southern France, when running a full capacity, will generate a usable output.



Tigger said:


> They don't yet have cold fusion though which is the one they really want.


That would solve a lot of problems.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

Cold fusion died long ago.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 11, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> It's getting there. The one in southern France, when running a full capacity, will generate a usable output.
> 
> 
> That would solve a lot of problems.




I think at some point, whether we as humans like it or not, we are simply going to have to accept there are finite resources in the Cosmos, and simply live more simply, enjoy public libraries, walking/biking in the park, and so on so forth. Our perception of our immediate reality is hyper greed and hyper feeding our ego, it is hard to overcome these desires when they have been ingrained in us as normal since we were kids. Even if they announced fusion tomorrow, what would that mean for plastic pollution? What about other things in the supply chain. 

Video below is loosely related... but it makes me wonder if we as a species really need to try to redefine who we are and what our wants/desires are.  I know this won't matter in the end, because humans will do what they do until everything is destroyed, but at a personal level I find peace in thinking this way.

This video is really good, just released today.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 11, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> Cold fusion died long ago.


You might want to take a look at the progress made in the last 5 years.








						Machine
					

The 23,000-tonne ITER Tokamak is a complex assembly of one million components and an estimated ten million individual parts. Surrounding the central reaction chamber are all of the systems that will work in concert to create a 150-million-degree plasma: the powerful magnet systems, as well as...



					www.iter.org


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

Confused: that's not cold fusion


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 11, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> Confused: that's not cold fusion


Sorry, I was just suggesting a good read.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

Ah, my bad; much appreciated.

But let us not get off topic for fear that they close down this thread.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 11, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> It's getting there. The one in southern France, when running a full capacity, will generate a usable output.
> 
> 
> That would solve a lot of problems.



Ya think cold fusion is really possible Lex?



lynx29 said:


> I think at some point, whether we as humans like it or not, we are simply going to have to accept there are finite resources in the Cosmos, and simply live more simply, enjoy public libraries, walking/biking in the park, and so on so forth. Our perception of our immediate reality is hyper greed and hyper feeding our ego, it is hard to overcome these desires when they have been ingrained in us as normal since we were kids. Even if they announced fusion tomorrow, what would that mean for plastic pollution? What about other things in the supply chain.
> 
> Video below is loosely related... but it makes me wonder if we as a species really need to try to redefine who we are and what our wants/desires are.  I know this won't matter in the end, because humans will do what they do until everything is destroyed, but at a personal level I find peace in thinking this way.
> 
> This video is really good, just released today.



Unfortunately, humans will not change. There are people with multi billions of dollars doing nothing, yet there are homeless and hungry people in their country's, yet they do nothing. Even spending a 10th of it could help a lot, but they do nothing. Greed, religion, and hate are the end of the human species


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 11, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Ya think cold fusion is really possible Lex?
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, humans will not change. There are people with multi billions of dollars doing nothing, yet there are homeless and hungry people in their country's, yet they do nothing. Even spending a 10th of it could help a lot, but they do nothing. Greed, religion, and hate are the end of the human species



ya it's a shame, some RND into 3d printed homes on a smaller scale (forget the notion of dream middle class homes just give people something livable) and 3d print a crap ton of them when the best RND for it gets sorted, that would go a long way to solve homelessness, nothing to nice but just some basic shelter in a studio sized room where one can at least have some basic living.  you could probably have done that for all of the homeless in the entire united states for less what the failed 1.7 trillion dollar F-35 jet program cost.  pathetic.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

Are printed homes cheaper than other homes?

As OP I guess you are allowed to take things off topic (it's your thread)


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 11, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> Are printed homes cheaper than other homes?
> 
> As OP I guess you can take things off topic.



i think mods will prob move it to lounge at some point, but I don't care either way

yes I have read it being done for under 10 grand (a basic studio one room no walls type setup.  like I said, it needs more RND, and peoples expectations will have to come down. it won't be a dream home. but it will beat the shit out of living on the sidewalk.

this styrofoam house in france (not the link, but I saw a youtube video of it once and it was impressive, sound damped, better insulated, and much cheaper than a wood home and better quality, but studio apartment one room could be a good option









						Styrofoam™ Homes
					

Styrofoam™ is emerging as a promising building material for residences.




					www.nachi.org
				




lego homes, ftw.  most of the cost of a house is in labor, so you make it fast like this and boom, dunzo


----------



## Shrek (Jan 11, 2022)

Thought this was


Home
Forums
Other
Science & Technology

not that I mind, but I'm not a moderator.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 11, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> Thought this was
> 
> 
> Home
> ...



ya I thought it was in lounge already. they will prob move it there someday


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 11, 2022)

Ask for it to be moved before the viper bites you


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 11, 2022)

Styrofoam is made out of *styrene* which is a petroleum-based product.

Its Not good for the Environment either


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 11, 2022)

dorsetknob said:


> Styrofoam is made out of *styrene* which is a petroleum-based product.
> 
> Its Not good for the Environment either



I mean everything is made from oil that we need, its going to be interesting in 200 years when oil is gone, medical industry won't have its plastics anymore... food industry won't...  hehe  we will be going back to medieval times when oil runs out. there really aren't sufficient alternatives that scale to 10 billion humans.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 11, 2022)

Yeah can't wait to see arabs trying to sell sand


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 11, 2022)

Oil and Oil from Coal  will still be around for use in various industrys but there will NOT be the Reserves for Propulsion.
Those industrys rely on cheap and abundent Supplies.

Give you an historical Example...............................Germany in the 39/45 war.
Germany has no known Oil Reserve's  for the most part they relied on Romanian Oil and their own extensive Coal Reserves which were cracked and Distilled for Hydrocarbon products.

Oil Reserves are measured in commercial extractable Quantity's.
Wells are closed and Capped when its no longer commercially possible to extract the Oil that remains.
If Oil was $500 a barrel unlike the current price of approx $80 then it would be economical to re open many of these capped wells


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 12, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Ya think cold fusion is really possible Lex?


It is possible in theory. There is science that suggests strongly that it is supposed to be possible. The question is, can we figure it out and if so, can we make it useful as a common power source.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 12, 2022)

I was not aware that it was theoretically possible.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jan 12, 2022)

ill take this with a bigggg pinch of salt.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 12, 2022)

I take my science seriously and I'd not like to see this moved to the lounge. When it's here, it stays true to a science discussion (and I can slap folks for being silly).

We could ask @lynx29 if a name change might better suit the entire thread? I mean, it is a bit... OTT   

How about, 'Lynx's clean future power thread, from Aptera to Tokamaks...and beyond'?


----------



## Shrek (Jan 12, 2022)

Or open up a new thread on clean energy production


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 12, 2022)

the54thvoid said:


> I take my science seriously and I'd not like to see this moved to the lounge. When it's here, it stays true to a science discussion (and I can slap folks for being silly).
> 
> We could ask @lynx29 if a name change might better suit the entire thread? I mean, it is a bit... OTT
> 
> How about, 'Lynx's clean future power thread, from Aptera to Tokamaks...and beyond'?



you can change it to whatever you like, yes it is a bit eccentric of a topic.  honestly, the only reason I got so excited with the topic name is because this really does seem like a slam dunk idea to me (for some people, who live in certain areas, with a tight budget)... I'd like to keep solar powered car in the topic title as that is the only reason I was excited to make this topic, it did get off topic a few times though so I understand, you can do whatever else you like though.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 12, 2022)

All Hail! Lynx general Science thread? Is there a general science one?


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 12, 2022)

> you can change it to whatever you like, yes it is a bit eccentric of a topic.  honestly, the only reason I got so excited with the topic name is because this really does seem like a slam dunk idea to me (for some people, who live in certain areas, with a tight budget)... I'd like to keep solar powered car in the topic title as that is the only reason I was excited to make this topic, it did get off topic a few times though so I understand, you can do whatever else you like though.


I don't wish to change the title. It's your thread. And in line with those thoughts, can I ask we all stay on topic. Which is solar powered transport, tangential to Aptera's model.




> All Hail! Lynx general Science thread? Is there a general science one?



A general science thread? No. There's too much science-it'd be absolute chaos. But post a thread in Science and Technology if you have a _specific_ angle.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 12, 2022)

the54thvoid said:


> I don't wish to change the title. It's your thread. And in line with those thoughts, can I ask we all stay on topic. Which is solar powered transport, tangential to Aptera's model.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I've already said what I want to say in several posts throughout the thread honestly. Not much else I can think I'd want to add, I just wanted to raise awareness that there are soon to be alternatives... honestly if shortages didn't exist and this was already out and I lived in Arizona or something I would have 100% bought this instead of my Corolla. A small commute + never having to charge + no reliance on oil/tune ups/most maintenance that comes with non-EV cars... I mean it would be so ******* amazing and stress free.

You have my permission to close thread if you want, I mean its done the job I intended it to do, I'm not sure what else could ever be added to it at this point, already had a few basic debates.


----------



## tabascosauz (Jan 12, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> I've already said what I want to say in several posts throughout the thread honestly. Not much else I can think I'd want to add, I just wanted to raise awareness that there are soon to be alternatives... honestly if shortages didn't exist and this was already out and I lived in Arizona or something I would have 100% bought this instead of my Corolla. A small commute + never having to charge + no reliance on oil/tune ups/most maintenance that comes with non-EV cars... I mean it would be so ******* amazing and stress free.
> 
> You have my permission to close thread if you want, I mean its done the job I intended it to do, I'm not sure what else could ever be added to it at this point, already had a few basic debates.



Like everything, enthusiasm is good - in moderation  but like with the laptop cooling Macgyver mod idea, a concise title goes a long way in helping keep things easily understandable and on-topic

As for the car, you know what they say about a bird in the hand. Corolla will get you infinitely further than a car that doesn't exist in final production, purchasable form. Like a lot of things nowadays, seems it should be considered the real threshold at which vaporware turns into real innovation.


----------



## Shrek (Jan 13, 2022)

the54thvoid said:


> I don't wish to change the title. It's your thread. And in line with those thoughts, can I ask we all stay on topic. Which is solar powered transport, tangential to Aptera's model.



So no fusion?


----------



## cvaldes (Jan 13, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> So no fusion?


Is that the thing that happens in a styrofoam coffee cup?


----------



## nguyen (Jan 13, 2022)

I strongly support EV, even though it still create pollution from unclean energy sources (coal, gas, etc...) and the disposal of batteries. The pollution from EV is generally kept far away from populous cities, it can keep air quality in cities much more tolerable than ICE.

Secondly power plants have much higher efficiency then ICE, there would be less pollutant to power EV vs ICE.

Living in polluted city with PM2.5 index >100, I just wish the transition to EV come quickly.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jan 13, 2022)

As mentioned. This thread is for EV discussion. Solar is the main point. It's not a great problem to occasionally diverge into other EV systems. But this thread isn't about the general economics of power. 

Please stay on topic.


----------



## Assimilator (Jan 15, 2022)

Oh, you changed you mind again? Any hints on what next month's future car tech of yours will be?


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 15, 2022)

Solid-state batteries can reach an 80-percent charge within 15 minutes and incur less strain after multiple charging cycles. A lithium-ion battery will begin to degrade and lose power capacity after 1,000 cycles. On the other hand, a solid-state battery will maintain 90 percent of its capacity after 5,000 cycles.Aug 2, 2021 - JDPower

I mean it seems to me toyota with its solid state hybrids coming in 2025 most likely... that will be a game changer year.  let's hope they can keep the 26-27k hybrid cost the same as it is now. if they can do a solid state hybrid in 2025 for 27k brand new, i may trade in my car on one.  seems like a solid deal longevity wise.

so maybe aptera solar powered cars can exist in places where there are lots of sun, maybe someday those can be upgraded with solid state batteries to boot, and for places with not much sun, stick with hybrids like toyota has coming that utilize solid state.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 15, 2022)

lynx29 said:


> I mean everything is made from oil that we need


We could always just switch back to bakelite and make our "plastics" from wood resin and formaldahyde.

But honestly, stuff is shitty.  And brittle.



the54thvoid said:


> As mentioned. This thread is for EV discussion. Solar is the main point. It's not a great problem to occasionally diverge into other EV systems. But this thread isn't about the general economics of power.
> 
> Please stay on topic.


Oops sorry, I was somewhat misled by discussion of broader issues.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 20, 2022)

This is the only commercial electric car announced that I approve.  The battery problem isn't going to get solved any time soon so in order to make a more practical vehicle, one must leverage the variables we can control: mass and drag.  Electric drivetrain is perfect for addressing these problems because almost everything can be crammed inside of the wheel (except cooling and battery) which means the mechanical parts of the car can be placed virtually anywhere.  Aptera used that to craft the most efficient battery electric, road legal vehicle possible.


Full disclosure: I have purchased over 200 shares in Aptera.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 20, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> This is the only commercial electric car announced that I approve.  The battery problem isn't going to get solved any time soon so in order to make a more practical vehicle, one must leverage the variables we can control: mass and drag.  Electric drivetrain is perfect for addressing these problems because almost everything can be crammed inside of the wheel (except cooling and battery) which means the mechanical parts of the car can be placed virtually anywhere.  Aptera used that to craft the most efficient battery electric, road legal vehicle possible.
> 
> 
> Full disclosure: I have purchased over 200 shares in Aptera.



I am considering buying some shares as well, I see it as being very freeing for a lot of people in sunny areas.  I haven't decided yet.

Welcome back to the site!!!


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 20, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Full disclosure: I have purchased over 200 shares in Aptera.


Fair enough. Just because you're an investor doesn't make you an unqualified opinion.


----------



## Space Lynx (Jan 25, 2022)

I was doing the math, Aptera since they have 15k + pre-orders now, based on their production capacity, it would take like until 2025/2026 to get your order, unless they expand production. My math might be wrong though, I don't know.  I feel like in 2026 I'd rather have a Toyota Solid State Hybrid especially if it comes in at a similar price point of 25k, but who knows on that as well. I mean none of this applies to me anyway, I am happy with what I got, so yeah.









						Emissions from aluminum production are bad news for solar energy
					

In some cases, producing one tonne of aluminum can result in 14 to 16 metric tons of CO2.




					arstechnica.com
				




Also not sure what to think of solar after reading this article. @the54thvoid I'd like to remove the all caps from the thread title, just get rid of that... after reading this article. I don't feel so confident anymore, lol


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 25, 2022)

Carbon fiber?  No reason why they can't build stands/mounts out of carbon fiber other than it's expensive.

Also that article isn't relevant to Aptera because the solar panels are built into the carbon fiber shell.  There's not much aluminum in the vehicle other than the running gear.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 8, 2022)

Reuters did an expose on how electric vehicle roll out in the USA is...well, a failed experiment:








						The long road to electric cars in the U.S.
					

How long it could take to transition to electric vehicles and the challenges ahead




					graphics.reuters.com
				




Aptera attempts to make electric vehicles affordable to lessen the economic burden on the purchasing decision.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 8, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Reuters did an expose on how electric vehicle roll out in the USA is...well, a failed experiment:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



yeah I don't want an EV car, I am not going to wait 2-3 hours charging my car multiple times just because I want to go on a road trip...  and those who think superchargers charging you to 80% in 15 minutes is a good idea, well your batteries won't last very long doing that...

I really want an Aptera 29k 400 mill range model, I came close to putting my $100 down when Jay Leno reviewed it, but I chickened out, I regret it now... because the list was only like 4-7k people long then, now the waitlist is like 17k people, and Aptera already said they can only church out like 250-300 a month I think I read... so I will be waiting 5-6 years at this point if I join up...

and Solid State toyota hybrids will be there then for similar price I expect...  

i think aptera and solid state hybrids should be the future not full EV.  i guess full EV is great for people who having boring lives and just live to work and sleep... but I actually want to go on long road trips and see the world a bit, so eh.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 8, 2022)

If a manufacturer really wants to make an impact they need to cut the cost of these vehicles by at least half of the present rate.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 8, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> If a manufacturer really wants to make an impact they need to cut the cost of these vehicles by at least half of the present rate.



the 25k price of aptera is honestly a good price, but only if you live in the southwest of the USA.  cause you literally will never need to plug it in or fill it up.  it will pay for itself over time


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 8, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> If a manufacturer really wants to make an impact they need to cut the cost of these vehicles by at least half of the present rate.


They can't because the batteries themselves are so costly.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 8, 2022)

I suppose that $5K Tesla proposed is just a tease...I would not consider one without a steering wheel though.


----------



## Assimilator (Feb 8, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> They can't because the batteries themselves are so costly.


Which is why massive government subsidies are necessary. They should be literally giving away EVs.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 8, 2022)

Assimilator said:


> Which is why massive government subsidies are necessary. They should be literally giving away EVs.



I think we should have focused more on aerodynamics and solid state hybrids personally. a lot of people are ok with EV's, but also a lot of people want to go on 1000 mile road trips and not wait half a day charging the car...

and lighter cars.  like the toyota corolla hybrid for example, if it was just slightly smaller with less trunk space, more cone shaped front, and solid state, there is no reason it couldn't reach upwards of 80-90 mpg on highway... might have to make it a two seater I am not sure.  lot of people like myself don't have a family, I'd rather have the higher mpg hybrid over EV personally.

I'm also not sure who is going to make all the plastic if the oil companies go bankrupt...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 8, 2022)

Assimilator said:


> Which is why massive government subsidies are necessary. They should be literally giving away EVs.


Government can't solve anything.  It can attempt to incentivize one behavior over another but it's literally at the expense of all of its taxpayers.  Consider this scenario: If you abolished the government entirely so all of the tax money returned to your pocket, would those extra liquid funds _encourage_ you to buy an electric vehicle over an internal combustion vehicle?  If the answer is "no," then no amount of subsidies (and taxes) is going to overcome the existing market pressures (it simply isn't a better product for you).  If the answer is "yes," then electric vehicles already are a better product for you.

The only way internal combustion engines will be resoundly defeated is if a technology comes along that is competitive with them in every regard.  The only near term technology that can do that without involving carbon is hydrogen.

Wikipedia has a list of energy densities here:





						Energy density - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				



Pay particular attention to the MJ/kg column.  Mass is important because whatever energy source is used in a vehicle must be moved by the energy source itself.
Li-ion: 0.875
Diesel: 45.6
Gasoline: 46.4
Natural Gas: 53.6
Hydrogen: 119.93

Basic physics question: upgrade or downgrade?


Aptera sacrifices passenger and cargo space for range.  For a lot of people, these tradeoffs aren't acceptable.  But that's what all electric vehicles are: a series of tradeoffs compared to internal combustion.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 8, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Government can't solve anything.





FordGT90Concept said:


> The only way internal combustion engines will be resoundly defeated is if a technology comes along that is competitive with them in every regard.  The only near term technology that can do that without involving carbon is hydrogen.



That's absolutely not true, many countries and states around the world have already deadlines for the end of production of internal combustion vehicles. The role of the government is to make rules, and they did. And it will solve the problem IN THOSE PLACES.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 8, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> That's absolutely not true, many countries and states around the world have already deadlines for the end of production of internal combustion vehicles. The role of the government is to make rules, and they did. And it will solve the problem IN THOSE PLACES.


I could tell you right now, but wait and see how that turns out...


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 8, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> I could tell you right now, but wait and see how that turns out...



i know someone who works for a car company that already has all the plans to make it so and comply with the law. If they didn't do they had to disclose it, make provisions in accounting, etc...


----------



## londiste (Feb 8, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The only way internal combustion engines will be resoundly defeated is if a technology comes along that is competitive with them in every regard.  The only near term technology that can do that without involving carbon is hydrogen.
> 
> Wikipedia has a list of energy densities here:
> 
> ...


Especially with hydrogen, you are forgetting the other aspect of energy density - energy per volume, the MJ/L columns:
Li-ion: 2.63
Diesel: 38.6
Gasoline: 34.2
Natural Gas: 0.0364 (9 at 25 MPa)
Hydrogen: 0.01005 (4.5 at 69 MPa)


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 8, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> yeah I don't want an EV car


I do, but not with current battery tech. We need fast-charging batteries that do NOT blow-up or burn-up easily, have an energy density 2 or 3 times greater than lithium and are not super expensive. I want a range of 500 to 600 miles per charge and a charge-to-full time measured in minutes not hours. Until those conditions are met, I'm not buying one.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 8, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> I do, but not with current battery tech. We need fast-charging batteries that do NOT blow-up or burn-up easily, have an energy density 2 or 3 times greater than lithium and are not super expensive. I want a range of 500 to 600 miles per charge and a charge-to-full time measured in minutes not hours. Until those conditions are met, I'm not buying one.



is this irony? can't tell

Man, you do have good cars, with good bateries, fast charge (enough), decent ranges depending on what you do but for most it's more then fine. And batteries don't explode or burn like that. You literally hold one against your head everyday.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 8, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> Man, you do have good cars, with good bateries, fast charge (enough), decent ranges depending on what you do but for most it's more then fine.


No, we don't. The EV models that have been and are currently available are a fire hazard, get 330 to 360 miles per charge and take 3 to 4 hours to recharge. These conditions are COMPLETELY unacceptable. I travel frequently and current EV's are not, in any way, up to the job. The rigmarole one would have to tolerate to use an EV in my use case scenario is intolerable.


Bomby569 said:


> And batteries don't explode or burn like that.


Total BS, I've seen it personally. Yes, they do.


Bomby569 said:


> You literally hold one against your head everyday.


I've had two phone batteries and one tablet battery burst and/or catch fire. There is no fraking way I'm driving around with a bunch of them packed together in a confined space in my vehicle.

The car industry will meet my above requirements or they will not be selling me an EV. End of story.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 8, 2022)

i've seen a normal car burn, and i'm sure i'm not the only one


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 8, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> i've seen a normal car burn, and i'm sure i'm not the only one



Current batteries do burn. They all could. Do they though, statistically and/or frequently? They do not. And usually they only do burn when coupled with bad engineering, whereas a burning car can happen because of... bad engineering  The difference being... software then? Nope... Most systems are identical between EV and ICE. The only real difference here is where your engine is located. On the wheels or not.

I'm not entirely sure what the burning battery argument is in favor of or against... ICE cars have suffered numerous burning wrecks, and you can actually do that by simply revving the engine too much. Its not something that's comfortable to do, but where an EV is limited digitally, an ICE is often not quite so limited as its mechanical limits can be exceeded quite simply, its even built that way if you disable the helpers in the car. The engine is built to 'go in the red'. For whatever reason.

In both cases though its just something 'you don't do' because it goes beyond any sort of comfortable driving.

Its a total non-argument in the battle between EV and ICE.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 8, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> i've seen a normal car burn, and i'm sure i'm not the only one


Yeah, but normal IC cars don't just burst into flames. Lithium batteries do and it can be caused buy something as small a microscopic imperfection in the battery material.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 8, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> No, we don't. The EV models that have been and are currently available are a fire hazard, get 330 to 360 miles per charge and take 3 to 4 hours to recharge. These conditions are COMPLETELY unacceptable. I travel frequently and current EV's are not, in any way, up to the job. The rigmarole one would have to tolerate to use an EV in my use case scenario is intolerable.



The tech is evolving fast.

We already have 350KW charger units.
I can charge my VW ID3, good for 300-350km on a 100KW charger in about 30 minutes. Basically, this means you can have lunch after driving for three hours straight.

The range anxiety is a non issue, all you need to do is plan your trips a bit more, which gets normal quite fast. But... the density of charging points, and most importantly, how fast your car can charge does matter. To each their own of course, but its really a state of mind thing for a large part, we're used to driving all day on a single 'charge', but realistically we always took breaks in between


----------



## Chrispy_ (Feb 8, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> I was thinking in small in terms of American cities. like 15 miles each way small. lol
> 
> and no ty in negative 6 degree weather which it was last week here.


I cycle 30_km_ a day with ease but you can't use 2-wheeled vehicles on ice safely.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 8, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Yeah, but normal IC cars don't just burst into flames. Lithium batteries do and it can be caused buy something as small a microscopic imperfection in the battery material.



but there's already protections inside the cars to at least let you get out safety, it's the same as we did for gasoline cars.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 8, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> The tech is evolving fast.
> 
> We already have 350KW charger units.
> I can charge my VW ID3, good for 300-350km on a 100KW charger in about 30 minutes. Basically, this means you can have lunch after driving for three hours straight.
> ...



doesn't that mean your battery cycle recharge count will be lower though in the long term? or are car lithium batteries different than phone batteries? I was told if a phone charges too fast, it loses longevity lifespan, would that not be the same logic for a car lithium battery? and replacing that battery is going to cost a small fortune...


----------



## Assimilator (Feb 8, 2022)

The people worried about EV batteries being combustible are the same people who are happy to walk around with the same combustible batteries in the smarphone in their pocket. One gets the idea that said people are either incredibly stupid or incredibly disingenuous.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 8, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> doesn't that mean your battery cycle recharge count will be lower though in the long term? or are car lithium batteries different than phone batteries? I was told if a phone charges too fast, it loses longevity lifespan, would that not be the same logic for a car lithium battery? and replacing that battery is going to cost a small fortune...



There is a lifespan on the cars batteries, they will all eventually die like in the phones, but you can just replace a section, there is no need to replace them all. It's expensive but not that much when you compare to the cost of the car. And you save on maintenance and in the difference between gas and electricity.



Assimilator said:


> The people worried about EV batteries being combustible are the same people who are happy to walk around with the same combustible batteries in the smarphone in their pocket. One gets the idea that said people are either incredibly stupid or incredibly disingenuous.


 worst they hold them against their ears


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 8, 2022)

Assimilator said:


> The people worried about EV batteries being combustible are the same people who are happy to walk around with the same combustible batteries in the smarphone in their pocket. One gets the idea that said people are either incredibly stupid or incredibly disingenuous.



This does not worry me in the slightest, I trust the engineers overall.



Bomby569 said:


> There is a lifespan on the cars batteries, they will all eventually die like in the phones, but you can just replace a section, there is no need to replace them all. It's expensive but not that much when you compare to the cost of the car. And you save on maintenance and in the difference between gas and electricity.



you still really are not answering my question though, because if a car battery will last ten years on a slow charger, vs say 2 on a ultra fast 18 min charger station... i mean the answer is obvious you have to opt for the 10...  that is where the problem lies and the question i am asking about


----------



## tabascosauz (Feb 8, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> doesn't that mean your battery cycle recharge count will be lower though in the long term? or are car lithium batteries different than phone batteries? I was told if a phone charges too fast, it loses longevity lifespan, would that not be the same logic for a car lithium battery? and replacing that battery is going to cost a small fortune...



I mean, the solder balls on your GPU technically have a finite number of expansion cycles too, which is shrunk even further if you have a high TDP GPU on air cooling, but you don't go worrying yourself sick over it every time you open up a video game, do you?

Take care of your batt with the usual procedures, and don't go pretending that the manufacturer advertised it for twice-weekly roadtrips in mind, and you'll be fine.

If you're ready to take the plunge on EVs, do it. If you're not ready, don't do it. Don't go on a crusade hating it like it's Satan spawn......it's just amusing to me the number of armchair experts sitting on the sidelines immersing themselves in this alternate reality of speculation, all whilst never having been behind the wheel of any EV...

And let's be real here. How many manufacturers still make an ICE engine that is consistently drop-dead reliable, isn't weighed down by unreliable emissions equipment, and is simple and repairable?


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 8, 2022)

tabascosauz said:


> I mean, the solder balls on your GPU technically have a finite number of expansion cycles too, which is shrunk even further if you have a high TDP GPU on air cooling, but you don't go worrying yourself sick over it every time you open up a video game, do you?
> 
> If you're ready to take the plunge on EVs, do it. If you're not ready, don't do it. Don't go on a crusade hating it like it's Satan spawn......it's just amusing to me the number of armchair experts sitting on the sidelines immersing themselves in this alternate reality of speculation, all whilst never having been behind the wheel of any EV...



What are you talking about? GPU usage is completely different context and only costs me $500, not $25,000. 

Also, I made this thread in support of a full EV (though heavily focused on solar I admit) powered car.  Longevity of battery is important to middle class consumers, who can barely get by as it is. Replacing cell batteries is going to be pricey, and they deserve to know how ultra fast charging VS trickle charging will effect battery life... when spending that kind of money.


----------



## Assimilator (Feb 8, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> worst they hold them against their ears


One hopes that the battery will actually explode while they're doing that, thus notably improving the gene pool.


----------



## tabascosauz (Feb 8, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> What are you talking about? GPU usage is completely different context and only costs me $500, not $25,000.
> 
> Also, I made this thread in support of a full EV (though heavily focused on solar I admit) powered car.  Longevity of battery is important to middle class consumers, who can barely get by as it is. Replacing cell batteries is going to be pricey, and they deserve to know how ultra fast charging VS trickle charging will effect battery life... when spending that kind of money.



Did I say anything about the price? I'm talking about the idea. If you've ever been a 12th-13th gen F150 owner you'd be aware of the sheer number of Ecoboost owners who buy a truck and still worry day in day out over whether it'll grenade itself......just drive the damn thing and be mindful of maintenance.

All EVs have a batt warranty for that reason, and most if not all the time, longer than just about any ICE powertrain warranty. If you take care of your batt, you shouldn't need it, but it's there in case.

I've been through powertrain problems on brand new ICE vehicles way too many times to buy into the idea that I have to always worry about EV batt but can always "rely" on an ICE motor. And I've been through that ringer too many times to believe that powertrain warranty means the dealer/manufacturer will actually take the matter seriously.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 8, 2022)

Meanwhile GM is making...









						GM launches Hydrotec hydrogen fuel-cell generators
					

General Motors expands horizons of its hydrogen fuel cell technology as a stationary power source for rapid DC recharging of EVs as well as other mobile power applications.



					www.sae.org
				









Portable Hydrogen generators the size of trailers... designed to charge electric cars with hydrogen-fuel.

--------

You know, just to prove everyone in this topic wrong.



> In addition to mobile EV charging, GM and Renewable Innovations have collaborated to develop the Empower rapid charger. This charger is intended for existing fuel stations seeking the ability to add DC fast charging capability. GM states the Empower rapid charger will help satisfy the growing need for fast charging infrastructure with no additional investment in electrical infrastructure upgrades.
> 
> The rapid charger is powered by eight GM Hydrotec power cubes and can supply a DC charge for up to four vehicles simultaneously at a rate of 150 kW. The estimated target for a full charge time of an EV via these units is 20 minutes. GM claims up to 100 or more EVs can be replenished by the rapid charger before the unit would need to be resupplied with hydrogen. Renewable Innovations plans to deploy 500 Empower rapid chargers across the U.S. by the end of 2025.



I'm not personally sure if this is the future. I just find it an amusing combination of technologies that no one in this thread (or other threads) have discussed so far.

Apparently this thing has been around for military uses:





Providing easily deployable, portable power-stations for US soldiers.


----------



## R0H1T (Feb 8, 2022)

londiste said:


> Especially with hydrogen, you are forgetting the other aspect of energy density - energy per volume, the MJ/L columns:
> Li-ion: 2.63
> Diesel: 38.6
> Gasoline: 34.2
> ...


Should probably try to get them antimatter capsules


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 8, 2022)

Assimilator said:


> The people worried about EV batteries being combustible are the same people who are happy to walk around with the same combustible batteries in the smarphone in their pocket. One gets the idea that said people are either incredibly stupid or incredibly disingenuous.




__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/comments/ppqqwg

Your cell phone in your pocket won't explode in this level of fire this quickly. Note the color of the flames: red-lithium. Yellow is gasoline of course, if you're not aware. Focus on the red-fire, how quickly it explodes, how violently Li-ion technology works in these cases.

The above video is funny because the guy survived and mostly just got his dad-angry. But I'm aware of some other video-fires that erupt just as quickly and everyone dies. A cell-phone fire will burn a hole in your pants and cause burns. The above kind of fire is clearly an imminent life-threatening danger.

That kind of fire can occur if you hop a curb in a Tesla. It is known, it is well documented. If the curb penetrates the "battery shield", its all over. The lithium-ion batteries immediately explode on such force.

----

We don't regularly throw our cell-phones at 60-miles-per-hour with 4500 lbs of steel of momentum behind them. The kinds of forces that occur in typical car-driving scenarios are the kind that a *steel plate wielded below your battery pack cannot stop*. The forces involved are far greater than you can imagine. They will absolutely puncture the battery pack and potentially cause issues.

----------

The size, scope, and scale of these car-fires are far above-and-beyond what your cell phone will do. But yes, cell phones are about as dangerous as a grenade in terms of energy density. Do you know the safety measures we put onto airplanes to deal with such issues? We have powerful bags that can contain that level of energy and keep everyone else safe from a malfunctioning cell phone, and if that ever were to happen in my pocket, I'd just throw the phone away from me.

Planning for a car-sized event is far more difficult and worthy of discussion.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 8, 2022)

@dragontamer5788 you as well have ignored my question about battery longevity due to ultra fast charging.  sigh, I guess I simply no longer exist on these forums. oh well.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 8, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> @dragontamer5788 you as well have ignored my question about battery longevity due to ultra fast charging.  sigh, I guess I simply no longer exist on these forums. oh well.



for my part i simply don't know the answer, i was not ignoring it

i fast charge 2 different equipments (phone and headphones) and non of them warned it would reduce battery live, and yes i did read the manuals. Honestly i do it because i need to or convenience, even if it reduces battery live i can live with that trade off.

You also have to understand that it's just a fraction of the cost of the car, someone did a comparison and it won't be far off from the savings you make by going EV.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 9, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> @dragontamer5788 you as well have ignored my question about battery longevity due to ultra fast charging.  sigh, I guess I simply no longer exist on these forums. oh well.



The car battery is built for certain limitations in charging protocols. Mine maxes out at a 100KW charge point, but I usually get 50KW along highways. Now that is. But still - 'faster' charging is handled intelligently, load is spread across many battery modules. And the battery lifespan is obviously measured against the maximum charge speed the car will support. For now it seems the situation is not much unlike ICE engines that lose some power over time as they get used. Except now this applies to car range. 

Far greater influences are probably the way the car manages battery temp and load. Cold batteries are bad. Driving them down below 10-15% is sub optimal. And charging to 100% is worse than charging to 80%. Considering that, faster charge is a better solution if you can just remain in the optimal charge range.

If I recall the older Leaf and other early EVs lacked measures to make sure you drive with warm batteries. Again: it evolves; I can program to pre heat my car to combat this; and if I do drive off cold, I dont have the full amount of horsepower available until batteries are warm.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 9, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> The car battery is built for certain limitations in charging protocols. Mine maxes out at a 100KW charge point, but I usually get 50KW along highways. Now that is. But still - 'faster' charging is handled intelligently, load is spread across many battery modules. And the battery lifespan is obviously measured against the maximum charge speed the car will support. For now it seems the situation is not much unlike ICE engines that lose some power over time as they get used. Except now this applies to car range.
> 
> Far greater influences are probably the way the car manages battery temp and load. Cold batteries are bad. Driving them down below 10-15% is sub optimal. And charging to 100% is worse than charging to 80%. Considering that, faster charge is a better solution if you can just remain in the optimal charge range.
> 
> If I recall the older Leaf and other early EVs lacked measures to make sure you drive with warm batteries. Again: it evolves; I can program to pre heat my car to combat this; and if I do drive off cold, I dont have the full amount of horsepower available until batteries are warm.



yeah I wish there was an option or hope there is in future, that you can just push a button and it will auto shut off your charge at 80% and warn you at 20-25% to start charging.   cause no one is going to be standing by there car waiting for it to hit 80% exactly, or most people plugging in overnight, etc.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 9, 2022)

londiste said:


> Especially with hydrogen, you are forgetting the other aspect of energy density - energy per volume, the MJ/L columns:
> Li-ion: 2.63
> Diesel: 38.6
> Gasoline: 34.2
> ...


All that really tells you is that some are gases, some are liquids, and some are solids.



Vayra86 said:


> Current batteries do burn. They all could. Do they though, statistically and/or frequently? They do not. And usually they only do burn when coupled with bad engineering, whereas a burning car can happen because of... bad engineering  The difference being... software then? Nope... Most systems are identical between EV and ICE. The only real difference here is where your engine is located. On the wheels or not.
> 
> I'm not entirely sure what the burning battery argument is in favor of or against... ICE cars have suffered numerous burning wrecks, and you can actually do that by simply revving the engine too much. Its not something that's comfortable to do, but where an EV is limited digitally, an ICE is often not quite so limited as its mechanical limits can be exceeded quite simply, its even built that way if you disable the helpers in the car. The engine is built to 'go in the red'. For whatever reason.
> 
> ...


Li-ion battery fires are *extremely* dangerous compared to gasoline/diesel fires.  Namely, you can't dump water on a Li-ion fire like you can on gasoline/diesel because the resulting reaction produces toxic emissions.



Assimilator said:


> The people worried about EV batteries being combustible are the same people who are happy to walk around with the same combustible batteries in the smarphone in their pocket. One gets the idea that said people are either incredibly stupid or incredibly disingenuous.


I remove all li-ion batteries and send them to the recycler if there is any indication whatsoever that it is failing.  I don't want my house to be another fire statistic.

When removing a battery from a cheap phone (literally glued in pouch battery), I accidentally punctured it and could smell the fumes.  That battery laid on cement in an area people rarely tread for months before I felt it was safe to transport it to recycle.

There's a reason why li-ion batteries are not permitted to fly as cargo in the USA.



dragontamer5788 said:


> Meanwhile GM is making...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The problem is the very high cost of producing hydrogen in the first place.  This product doesn't really make much sense to me...today anyway.  In the future, where there's a lot of hydrogen available, you could use these in remote locations to produce electricity where you're currently burning diesel now.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 9, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> yeah I wish there was an option or hope there is in future, that you can just push a button and it will auto shut off your charge at 80% and warn you at 20-25% to start charging.   cause no one is going to be standing by there car waiting for it to hit 80% exactly, or most people plugging in overnight, etc.



Those features are in the car too  It will charge alot slower from 80-100 even if you dont limit it yourself.



FordGT90Concept said:


> All that really tells you is that some are gases, some are liquids, and some are solids.
> 
> 
> Li-ion battery fires are *extremely* dangerous compared to gasoline/diesel fires.  Namely, you can't dump water on a Li-ion fire like you can on gasoline/diesel because the resulting reaction produces toxic emissions.
> ...



And yet considered road legal and quite easy to get insured. Its not really a danger that needs special attention when you drive cars. Its called irrational fear.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 9, 2022)

Then explain why batteries are often recalled.  I think Bolt was the biggest so far:








						Chevy Bolt EV & EUV Recall | Chevrolet
					

Learn more about the Chevrolet Bolt EV & EUV recall. GM's commitment to safety insures that all Bolt owner's are able to charge & drive their EV's safely.




					www.chevrolet.com
				




There's a lot of literature on this subject.  Specifically, automakers have to choose between a safer heavy battery with more internal rigidity or a cheaper lighter battery get gets better range at a greater risk of starting on fire.  With either design, all it takes is a failure in protection circuits to create an environment where a fire can start.  Further, if batteries are required to be replaced by recall, the vehicles are effectively totaled.

Gasoline, diesel, hydrogen, and natural gas pose much less risk in these regards because they need a proper atmosphere before they'll combust.  Accidental combustion isn't particularly toxic either.  Li-ion just requires heat, which it can generate on its own.  Remember, vehicles liquid cool li-ion batteries for a reason.


This is my greatest concern with buying any EV.  My second greatest concern is how much range is lost over the lifetime of the vehicle.


By the way, insurers will insure pretty much anything they can value.  Insurance being available on something is not proof of anything other than it was appraised.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Namely, you can't dump water on a Li-ion fire like you can on gasoline/diesel because the resulting reaction produces toxic emissions.



Well, the water to stop the combustion probably is better. Standard procedure now is to dump a ton of water on the Li-ion fire actually. The main issue is the tens-of-thousands of gallons it takes over several hours to extinguish a Li-ion fire.

That's why Denmark has invented these things:





Seal the *entire* car while its on fire. Its not easy or cheap, but this seems like the way forward...



			https://cfpa-e.eu/container-puts-out-inextinguishable-fires-in-electric-cars/
		


In any case, the fire from these Li-ion batteries is severely non-trivial. It requires special training from the fire department. It is highly toxic (more so than gasoline or other common fires)... though firefighters are used to getting cancer (its kinda part of the job...). Without a special container like what they have in Denmark, it takes multiple hours to put out.

The little cells go off like firecrackers and "shoot" around. Its rather dangerous.

In any case, small-towns will not be able to afford these things for their fire departments. That being said, fire departments have learned a lot over the past few years, and technology is continuing to improve. I think fire-departments now have a good idea of what to do (although whether or not they can afford it is another question).


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Then explain why batteries are often recalled.  I think Bolt was the biggest so far:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



GM... lol
I guess our perception differs because you look at American car makers and I look at European (and some Asian) ones.

I'd never in my life buy an American car. The quality is just on a completely different level. Its for that reason alone every US brand has a separate stack for the EU and none are really successful except Tesla. And guess what... Tesla complaints all revolve around build quality and QC.

Take a look at the launch of VW ID3. No battery issues whatsoever, only the software was late to market. ID4: no issues with batteries. Nissan, Toyota... should we continue? 

Note that EU car makers are also pushing hard on having their own battery factories.

Context from ft, seems to be paywalled but somehow I could still get this text;





						Subscribe to read | Financial Times
					

News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication




					www.ft.com
				







What the 'battery risk' is really about is simple cost saving measures and marketing.
Put simply: light batteries are more risky, but achieve greater range which is a key selling point.
Heavier batteries are safer but have lower range.

Pick your poison and note that the Bolt is a pretty light vehicle for an EV with its stats:
It weighs a mere 1600KG while offering 380 KM WLTP range; and offers a pretty hefty 149KW of engine power. The margin of error is probably quite low wrt battery quality.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 9, 2022)

Every car maker, and brand often gets recalls, even the best one. But that made me laugh because i would also never buy a american car, only japanese or european. Quality is shit. It's got much better in the last years, but still no thanks. And i am talking about cars made in America, not the american brands that make cars here. And yes i've been to the US and drove there. That said Europe makes some insanely shit cars to.

I think the battery problem is a small price to pay for not killing us all with polution and climate change. The new driving aid systems will help, even if someone in a 1965 VW can still crash into you. I also recall reading there are several type of batteries (shapes; the way they use lithium; etc) but i'm no expert so i can't go into any detail.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 9, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> GM... lol
> I guess our perception differs because you look at American car makers and I look at European (and some Asian) ones.
> 
> I'd never in my life buy an American car. The quality is just on a completely different level. Its for that reason alone every US brand has a separate stack for the EU and none are really successful except Tesla. And guess what... Tesla complaints all revolve around build quality and QC.
> ...











						Fires, probes, recalls: The shift to electric vehicles is costing automakers billions
					

The issues range from recalls due to vehicle fires or loss of power to cars not starting. The problems can prove especially costly when they involve batteries.




					www.cnbc.com
				



Ford, GM, Tesla, Hyundai, Porche, BMW, and Volvo have all had recalls due to battery systems.  GM's alone is going to cost $800 million...and all of these combined are less than 1% of the vehicles on the road.  It's a systemic problem with the energy source.  The more EVs there are being built, the more years put on them, the more these recalls are going to happen.



Vayra86 said:


> Pick your poison and note that the Bolt is a pretty light vehicle for an EV with its stats:
> It weighs a mere 1600KG while offering 380 KM WLTP range; and offers a pretty hefty 149KW of engine power. The margin of error is probably quite low wrt battery quality.


When recalls cost more than the cars are worth, there's a very good chance the light batteries are going away, which means milage is going to drop, which means you lose a lot of potential customers.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> When recalls cost more than the cars are worth, there's a very good chance the light batteries are going away, which means milage is going to drop, which means you lose a lot of potential customers.


They are already heavier, because they also need to be more resistant to high current charge. Newer charge protocols are aiming at anything above 100KW. The cars are getting heavier across the board, still getting greater range out of larger battery packs.

But the problem is also tackled in other ways. For example, intelligent monitoring and dynamic battery power allocation, like the examples I've given above when starting cold or driving on lower charge. Software/hardware solutions really, not unlike PCs that have measures built in to not burn to a crisp.

Like I posted earlier, this evolves fast, lessons are learned and applied nearly on the fly, because everyone senses the urgency, even if only to be competitive in the market.

Differentiation between vehicle specs revolves also around battery quality. Its a big thing, one of the core principles in creating EVs that are competitive is how you design around the battery you use. That's why car makers want their own factories too, so they can influence that differentiation as early in the chain as possible.

I think the fearmongering here is misplaced: there are (market) forces at work here that simply demand you deliver a quality product that doesn't 'catch fire' like some China knockoff battery. The car is holy, remember, it represents many things for people, and it needs to just work, not fail, be reliable. We are highly focused on reliability in these kinds of products, you demonstrate this perfectly by focusing on it so much. Rest assured the industry will do the same, or they run the risk of having to cancel the whole EV push when trust is gone.


----------



## Chrispy_ (Feb 9, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> This does not worry me in the slightest, I trust the engineers overall.
> 
> 
> 
> you still really are not answering my question though, because if a car battery will last ten years on a slow charger, vs say 2 on a ultra fast 18 min charger station... i mean the answer is obvious you have to opt for the 10...  that is where the problem lies and the question i am asking about


Fast charging is very chemistry-dependent and depends on the battery. The ones used in EVs can typically be charged at 2.5C without massive degredation over time. Yes, you'll still lose some of the lifespan but it's more like dropping from 10years to 7years so it's a tradeoff that you can afford to make, especially if the fast charges aren't that often and the EV spends most of its recharges at 1C or below when parked overnight.


----------



## Assimilator (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's a systemic problem with the energy source.


No, it's not. It's a systemic problem with the old-school vehicle manufacturers cutting corners to make a buck. Tesla has been producing EVs longer for any of them and has had zero battery issues, why is that? Simple, because Tesla isn't managed by penny-pinching accountants who put profit above safety.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> I think the fearmongering here is misplaced: there are (market) forces at work here that simply demand you deliver a quality product that doesn't 'catch fire' like some China knockoff battery.



No one is saying that these engineers aren't trying their best.

What we're saying is that Lithium-ion is a well known explosive substance in engineering circles. The problem is extremely difficult, yes more difficult than the explosion risk in gasoline and even hydrogen vehicles.



Assimilator said:


> No, it's not. It's a systemic problem with the old-school vehicle manufacturers cutting corners to make a buck. Tesla has been producing EVs longer for any of them and has had zero battery issues, why is that? Simple, because Tesla isn't managed by penny-pinching accountants who put profit above safety.




__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/comments/ppqqwg



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/19/tesla-texas-driverless-crash/
		




> Just before midnight Saturday, a Tesla drove swiftly around a curve, veered off the road, struck a tree and burst into flames in The Woodlands, Tex., a suburb north of Houston, police said.
> It took four hours for fire officials to put out the flames.















						Speeding Pasco driver killed when Tesla hits pole, catches fire, troopers say
					

The collision occurred at 3:45 a.m. Monday on six-lane State Road 54 at Livingston Road in Land O’ Lakes.




					www.tampabay.com
				






> LAND O’ LAKES — A 36-year-old Wesley Chapel man died when his car caught fire after he drove across a highway median and crashed into a utility pole, the Florida Highway Patrol said.









			https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/08/04/tesla-fire/
		




> While they were asleep, their Teslas burned in the garage.







All of this occurred in the last year. This isn't some kind of infrequent event. I've *ONLY* taken Tesla vehicles stories, not including any other car manufacturer. I'm not even being exhaustive here, these are literally the ones I remember reported in the news off the top of my head.



Assimilator said:


> Simple, because Tesla isn't managed by penny-pinching accountants who put profit above safety.



Tesla just "penny pinched" lumbar-support, RADAR, and the redundant steering system out of their cars.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 9, 2022)

The drivers who impacted trees/poles would have perished regardless of a fire...


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> The drivers who impacted trees/poles would have perished regardless of a fire...



The Texas case had the driver and passenger die in the back seats. Can you guess why?

Tesla cars are notorious for having electronic locks for their car doors. Not only did they survive the crash, they were trapped inside. The fire then burned them alive.

Now imagine being two 50 to 60 year old men playing around with your new car. You haven't learned about where the "emergency cable" is. You don't realize that these cars have electronic locks (!!!). You pull the handle, nothing happens. (The electronics were fried as the battery is disintegrating in the fire). You squirm around to the back seats, but those are also electronic locks. You then die in the fire.






Falcon wing doors are all fun and games until the car is on fire and you're fumbling around with the speaker-grill to try to find the emergency door opener. All electronics fail when that fire starts.

------

Why doesn't Tesla use mechanical door openers like everyone else?

Penny pinching. Electronic locks are cheaper. This is actually an incredibly shoddy product.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 9, 2022)

dragontamer5788 said:


> The Texas case had the driver and passenger die in the back seats. Can you guess why?
> 
> Tesla cars are notorious for having electronic locks for their car doors. Not only did they survive the crash, they were trapped inside. The fire then burned them alive.
> 
> ...



US car makers.
Need we say more

I acknowledge the engineering challenge. Its clear as day. 

But I also acknowledge there are differences in compamy culture, experience in certain fields and vast differences in approach and company mission. These things define what products you get, and what quality of engineering is acceptable to end up in a product.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 9, 2022)

either i missed something on the translation or my understanding or what the hell is going on there on the rear doors?


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> either i missed something on the translation or my understanding or what the hell is going on there on the rear doors?



The main door-handle on Tesla vehicles is just an electronic switch, its not mechanically linked up to anything. So you need a "second" emergency release with their design (to use in case of fire. When the electronics are burning, you can't rely on them). And its actually very complicated to use.



Vayra86 said:


> US car makers.
> Need we say more



Tesla is a unique case. They're non-union, they're poorly paid. They're in an area of the country that traditionally has less manufacturing experience (California vs Michigan). Tesla got worker-discrimination issues, whistleblower issues, workplace bullying issues, "outdoor tent" manufacturing, and an egomaniac as a CEO who promises exponentially increasing manufacturing at the cost of quality.

Perhaps you're saying that this can "only happen in America"... to which maybe you're right. I know Tesla is trying to move into Germany, but they're having issues with water IIRC at Gigafactory Berlin. The culture clash and anti-union culture of Tesla will be interesting to watch in Gigafactory Berlin...


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> There's a reason why li-ion batteries are not permitted to fly as cargo in the USA.


Not just the USA...


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 9, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Not just the USA...



come on guys, are you on facebook?

_A Li-Ion battery cannot be transported in the hold unless attached to a camera or the equipment it is intended to power. The attached battery must not exceed 100Wh in capacity_





						Air Transportation of Li-Ion Batteries | PAG Ltd - Intelligent Linking Batteries
					






					www.paguk.com
				




you just can't carry them on their own, they can be carried if inside a device. Are we talking about the dangers of car batteries outside the car?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 9, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> come on guys, are you on facebook?
> 
> _A Li-Ion battery cannot be transported in the hold unless attached to a camera or the equipment it is intended to power. The attached battery must not exceed 100Wh in capacity_
> 
> ...


You are once again missing context.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 9, 2022)

Assimilator said:


> No, it's not. It's a systemic problem with the old-school vehicle manufacturers cutting corners to make a buck. Tesla has been producing EVs longer for any of them and has had zero battery issues, why is that? Simple, because Tesla isn't managed by penny-pinching accountants who put profit above safety.


Toyota was first to market (in the modern era anyway) with the Leaf.

Tesla also has notoriously bad quality control compared to the Ford and GM.  See any review comparing Mustang Mach-E to Teslas for proof of that.  It's one of the first things reviewers mention (100+ years of experience versus 10).




Bomby569 said:


> come on guys, are you on facebook?
> 
> _A Li-Ion battery cannot be transported in the hold unless attached to a camera or the equipment it is intended to power. The attached battery must not exceed 100Wh in capacity_
> 
> ...


Because a lot of devices don't have removable batteries.  Also some devices can monitor the battery for failure (e.g. temp sensor).

I was specifically talking about cargo consignments in the cargo bays of aircraft.  FAA forbids li-ion cargo from flying--must be transported via ground.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Toyota was first to market (in the modern era anyway) with the Leaf.



Nissan.

Toyota may have started the overall movement with the Prius. It wasn't fully electric, it was just a hybrid/partially electric. But that's when people started to think about EVs again. Nissan was the first fully electric vehicle.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 9, 2022)

My bad, yes.

I don't really keep up with imports.   Except Toyota Mirai, because HFCEV.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 9, 2022)

dragontamer5788 said:


> The main door-handle on Tesla vehicles is just an electronic switch, its not mechanically linked up to anything. So you need a "second" emergency release with their design (to use in case of fire. When the electronics are burning, you can't rely on them). And its actually very complicated to use.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well. no Absolutely not 'only in America'. Glad you mention Germany  It might look like I'm stalwartly defending my fantastic VW ID3 but that's far from the case... the amount of shit VW got into is skyscraper-level with Dieselgate. So much for company culture. Multi faceted affair  Its actually BECAUSE of Dieselgate that I had faith enough to buy one - that car was too big to fail, if their entry in the EV market was a flop, they could have well closed up shop entirely. And about engineering... the amount of VW Polo's and Golfs I see where the bottom plate is just halfway hanging off, is absolutely staggering. You should pay attention to that sometime, if you are in EU. Once you've started noticing, its hard to unsee. And the stagnation was also clear, prior to their major EV push. Company was keen to stay in the comfort zone.

Other companies simply screw up in different ways. I've driven Peugeots... Man. The 108. Spartan doesn't even begin to describe it - its just unsafe to use. To reach your infotainment with ultra slow massive latency touch for your music (it lacks most other stuff, so why not just suffice with play pause buttons you might ask) you have to literally lean forward from your chair or have arms of a metre in length. I'm a super average guy with 1m80 and I could literally not find a way to sit properly in that POS. Never mind the fact the chairs are almost solid plastic on top, just like most of the interior. And the kicker: the fuel meter consists of 4 (! not 5!) large blocks where the first one is gone as soon as you start the engine, the second and third drop off after an hour, and the last one remains for god knows how long until its finally gone and you get all sorts of low fuel warnings. Its like... who the hell invented that? Its way beyond cost saving straight into shit design land. Specifically intended so you never really know what it says?

Then there's the 208. Its a luxury 108 with 5 doors and a few extra cm in length basically, but it looks like its a whole other deal... well... the improvements are (plastic?) chromed strips here and there and piano plastic instead of matte, so that the sun reflects off your dash straight into your face anywhere you look and always looks dirty. At least you don't have to overtake trucks in 4th gear going in the red, like the 108 that dislikes anything above 80km/h with a passion.

So yeah. Engineering challenges lol. I don't know if you know the running joke about (older) alfa Romeos? Basically it revolved around 'anything in the interior might break at random times' 
Definitely not a US exclusive, that


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

The man died in the back after the car caught on fire, in a car with primarily electronic doors with a difficult-to-use manual release cable. With an estimated IIRC 30mph crash in a residential area nonetheless. EDIT: I was wrong about the 30mph. It was a 30mph zone, but there's electronic data showing 60mph speeds within the 5-seconds before the crash. So they were joy-riding for sure and probably lost control.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out what happened in this man's last moments. I think there was an "autopilot" theory that floated around, but IIRC autopilot was ruled out later in the investigation. (IE: they both got in to play with autopilot, and the would-be driver got into the back seat to show it off). I think the "autopilot theory" has some legs, but it doesn't seem to match all of the evidence.

EDIT: Ah right, the Wash-po article I did quote was still going with the autopilot-theory. But seriously, look at the evidence and think for yourself.

------

EDIT2: Found the updated information: https://abc13.com/tesla-texas-crash-model-s-catches-fire-spring-accident-autopilot/11151382/

I followed the story for the whole way through. The driver was in the drivers-seat at the start.



> A driver was behind the wheel when a Tesla electric car crashed and burned last April in Spring, killing two men, neither of whom was found in the driver's seat.
> 
> The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board announced the findings in an investigative report update released Thursday on the April 17 crash on a residential road.





> Although first responders found one man in the back seat and the other in the front passenger seat, the NTSB said both the driver and a passenger were in the front seats with belts buckled at the time of the crash.



Perhaps its my mistake for quoting the earlier article instead of the more up-to-date articles that came out the months following. But if you read and understood the story, and understood the whole Tesla-door handle thing, you would have arrived at the official NTSB conclusion like I did.

Adult 50+ year olds don't just go ghost-riding in a new car. These aren't dumbass teenagers.

In any case, we have a situation where the ultimate investigation concluded that:

1. The driver was in fact, in the drivers seat. Fully buckled.

2. There was enough time for the driver to unbuckle his seatbelt, move to the rear, and try to escape.

3. The driver died in the rear as the car erupted into flames.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> My bad, yes.
> 
> I don't really keep up with imports.   Except Toyota Mirai, because HFCEV.



Mirai is definitely interesting. Its also yet another class of heavier vehicle than the EV.

Man is that a bulky m.f.






						Mirai | Uitrusting & Specificaties | Toyota.nl
					

Bekijk alle specificaties, de standaard- en optionele uitrusting en alle accessoires voor de Toyota Mirai.




					www.toyota.nl
				



Nearly 2000kg


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

Vayra86 said:


> So yeah. Engineering challenges lol. I don't know if you know the running joke about (older) alfa Romeos? Basically it revolved around 'anything in the interior might break at random times'
> Definitely not a US exclusive, that



Lol, fair. I just want to make sure ya know Tesla is... a special case...



Vayra86 said:


> Man is that a bulky m.f.



I know there are experimental carbon-fiber chambers that can hold the hydrogen at 300-bar or 700-bar of pressure (10,000 PSI+ for us Americans). For now, traditional steel is used, and is therefore quite heavy.

But the "walls" of the hydrogen tank scale very well to large vehicles, like semi-trucks. Hydrogen is very light, its the canister that holds it that's heavy. A bigger canister will hold more hydrogen without much more weight. Alternatively, reinforced carbon-fiber canisters might be able to safely hold it, but mass production of those canisters hasn't started yet.

Lots of paths forward: its hard to determine what the future will hold. If the carbon-fiber canisters can become cheap, maybe personal vehicles like the Mirai can become more reasonable (cut off a few hundred pound off that sucker). Or if that problem can't be solved, FCEVs could remain a trucker thing.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> FAA forbids li-ion cargo from flying--must be transported via ground.


And they can not be flown in either. All lithium cargo(batteries or otherwise) must arrive by ground or sea. This is also standing law for Canada and Mexico. Lithium cargo can not be transported by air into or around the entirety of North America. Europe & UK as well as Japan, Australia and New Zealand have similar laws and for similar reasons.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 9, 2022)

You said "both" died in the back seat in post #147...they did not. Pure speculation as to how one arrived in the back seat in the aftermath.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 9, 2022)

Can we stop the bickering please?


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> You said "both" died in the back seat...they did not. Pure speculation as to how one arrived in the back seat in the aftermath.



This seems like useless pedantry to me. Do you really want to go through with this? Here's the NTSB's report on the subject: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/HWY21FH007.aspx

My overall point is that Tesla vehicles absolutely catch on fire on a regular basis in accidents, often times leading to lethal results. Do you disagree with this at all?



> Data from the module indicate that both the driver and the passenger seats were occupied, and that the seat belts were buckled when the EDR recorded the crash.



We also know where the bodies were when they died. The driver was in the rear of the car, meaning he absolutely crawled over there after the accident (given that we have the event recorder of the seat-belt status, home-security footage of the driver entering in the driver's seat, and finally steering wheel damage that looks like someone bumped into the steering wheel).

--------

The front door probably stopped working. I'm assuming it is the poorly designed door handle, as discussed earlier in this thread. But I'd be curious as to *your* reason why the body was in the back of the car at time-of-death. If the front-door isn't working, it makes sense for them to crawl to the back and try to escape through the rear.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 9, 2022)

Useless pendantry...when one obscures the primary facts and builds from there.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> Useless pendantry...when one obscures the primary facts and builds from there.



So one person died in the front passenger seat. I'm not sure that changes my *main point* that these two people died to a fire... that they couldn't escape from due to terrible door design.

EDIT: The important fact... that the driver was in the rear-seat indicates that the crash was otherwise survivable. The driver was conscious and able to climb into the back seats.


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Because a lot of devices don't have removable batteries.  Also some devices can monitor the battery for failure (e.g. temp sensor).
> 
> I was specifically talking about cargo consignments in the cargo bays of aircraft.  FAA forbids li-ion cargo from flying--must be transported via ground.



that does take away from a incorrect and misleading statement, removable or not, you can carry them inside a device, just not on their own.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> that does take away from a incorrect and misleading statement, removable or not, you can carry them inside a device, just not on their own.



They're talking about Cargo flights, not passenger flights.

They're 100% correct. Cargo flights disallow Li-Ion due to fire risk. There's stipulations and nuance of course, but the general advice to businessfolk is to just ship the thing by ground-delivery.

The overall point, that Li-ion is being tracked as "special" due to the fire risk, remains true. There's some degree of loopholes to allow for typical passengers to not worry about the regulations. In particular, all airlines are equipped with Li-ion "smothering" kits just in case a passenger phone and/or laptop starts to explode. Airline staff are also trained to put out the fire and use the bag properly.

There is absolutely a fire risk. We have, as a society, decided to live with it. If the phone / laptop explodes, we can deal with it as long as its small enough (100Whr or less). The crazy sealing bags they have in the back of the airplane aren't designed to hold much more than that. I'm sure you've heard of the reports: vaping devices that catch on fire due to shoddy non-branded Li-ion cells. Or cell-phones erupting in flames ("samsung galaxy fires").

-------

EDIT: https://www.ups.com/assets/resources/media/en_US/pack_ship_batteries.pdf


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 9, 2022)

dragontamer5788 said:


> So one person died in the front passenger seat. I'm not sure that changes my *main point* that these two people died to a fire... that they couldn't escape from due to terrible door design.
> 
> EDIT: The important fact... that the driver was in the rear-seat indicates that the crash was otherwise survivable. The driver was conscious and able to climb into the back seats.


Survivable...more speculation. I have seen enough of these impacts first hand to disagree, regardless of safety measures. We can all agree fire is a bad thing, but I think it exaggerated to say Tesla has a horrific fire related accident rate. If that were really the case I believe one would not see the company expanding as it is and there would be government outcries to shut it down...think Chevrolet's Corvair.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> Survivable...more speculation.



You keep avoiding the simple question: How did the driver get into the back seat after the crash?

We know from crash-log data and camera-footage that the driver started the journey in the driver's seat with his seat-belt on. When he died, he was in the rear-seat with the seat-belt off.

He did NOT die in the front seat. He died in the back seat. If your theory is that he died upon impact, who the heck unbuckled him and moved him to the rear of the vehicle during a raging fire? Or are you saying that Tesla cars are so defective they can't even get basic seat design correct? (I mean, I guess they clearly messed up door design in this case, so maybe that's not a bad theory...). The only way I can think of squaring your assertions with the facts is if the driver somehow was ejected from their seat and bounced-around on the inside of the cabin during the crash.

------

This isn't the first time someone died because of Tesla's door design:



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/10/23/man-died-burning-tesla-because-its-futuristic-doors-wouldnt-open-lawsuit-alleges/
		




> The last moments of Awan’s life were gruesome and excruciating. After the crash, the Tesla’s lithium ion battery caught fire, according to a wrongful-death lawsuit. Smoke — and then flames — filled the car, suffocating Awan and burning him from his feet up. Outside, a crowd gathered but couldn’t help.





> After the crash, and after firefighters extinguished the blaze, Awan’s Tesla was transported to a tow yard. Once there, it reignited and burned again.



--------

You're severely underestimating how many times this has happened in the past few years. I got so many examples of this that I can pick-and-choose whatever example I want to destroy your argument. If you don't like this case study, I'mma just pick another one.


----------



## Shrek (Feb 9, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Toyota was first to market (in the modern era anyway) with the Leaf.



Nissan?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 9, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> Nissan?


Correct. The Leaf was made by Nissan.








						Nissan Leaf - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				











						2023 Nissan LEAF | All-Electric Vehicle | Nissan USA
					

Discover the 2023 all-electric LEAF: Nissan's technology flagship EV with instant acceleration, incredible range, and plenty of cargo space. Explore features, benefits & more.




					www.nissanusa.com


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 9, 2022)

dragontamer5788 said:


> You keep avoiding the simple question: How did the driver get into the back seat after the crash?
> 
> We know from crash-log data and camera-footage that the driver started the journey in the driver's seat with his seat-belt on. When he died, he was in the rear-seat with the seat-belt off.
> 
> ...


I simply don't care how he ended up in the back seat...dogs and cats will crawl awhile before expiring. I'm not going to debate the door issue with you simply because I don't have first hand knowledge. My issue is when the car is categorized as a "fire hazard" when there is little to support that claim. You can bet Biden would shut them down if he had any means.


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> My issue is when the car is categorized as a "fire hazard" when there is little to support that claim.



You can keep on believing that if you want. We have like... recordings and cameras of this.


__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/comments/ppqqwg


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 9, 2022)

dragontamer5788 said:


> You can keep on believing that if you want. We have like... recordings and cameras of this.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/IdiotsInCars/comments/ppqqwg


Some idiot kid slamming into a gas pump...kill Tesla for that?


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 9, 2022)

rickss69 said:


> Some idiot kid slamming into a gas pump...kill Tesla for that?



Did you miss the red-lithium flames erupting when the car hit the curb?

Gasoline burns yellow. Lithium flames are red. High-school chemistry. What started the fire here? It wasn't the gas station, it was the red-lithium flames.






Look at this frame. The car is already a giant fireball and it hasn't even touched the gas-station yet.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 9, 2022)

Mods, can we get some thread bans and clean-up please? But please don't close the thread as it has been an interesting discussion.


----------



## Deleted member 74752 (Feb 9, 2022)

If it's as bad as you think, why have almost a million of these cars been sold worldwide?


----------



## the54thvoid (Feb 9, 2022)

Agree with Lex. This isn't the thread to argue safety on EV, given it's about Aptera and solar.

Please stay on topic. No more dangers of EV. That's a whole new thread.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 10, 2022)

Aptera has li-ion batteries (up to 5 packs in parallel).  No idea who they are sourcing them from.

Aptera isn't accepting visits until April/May.  Apparently all hands are on deck with Beta and setting up production there's no way to even see the Alphas right now.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 10, 2022)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Aptera has li-ion batteries (up to 5 packs in parallel).  No idea who they are sourcing them from.
> 
> Aptera isn't accepting visits until April/May.  Apparently all hands are on deck with Beta and setting up production there's no way to even see the Alphas right now.



I just wish Aptera would get an infusion of funding from a major player, because I want the 29k 400 mile model, but I am not waiting until 2024/2025 to get one.  

Aerodynamics > Looks

Cost savings > Looks


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 10, 2022)

dragontamer5788 said:


> They're talking about Cargo flights, not passenger flights.
> 
> They're 100% correct. Cargo flights disallow Li-Ion due to fire risk. There's stipulations and nuance of course, but the general advice to businessfolk is to just ship the thing by ground-delivery.
> 
> ...



You can transport a cargo plain full of laptops with their batteries on them. I actually took care of one delivery to Africa. Are people filling their teslas with batteries on top of the seats?

Stop the fear mongering with incorrect and misleading statements


----------



## pavle (Feb 10, 2022)

The future is gasoline cars for quite some time, not buggies with 1 tonne battery (which make much more waste to produce).


----------



## Bomby569 (Feb 10, 2022)

pavle said:


> The future is gasoline cars for quite some time, not buggies with 1 tonne battery (which make much more waste to produce).



the batteries actually distributes their weight throughout the car, unlike gasoline (or worst heavier diesel engines) cars, making them more stable and maneuverable. 
And one can question if destroying a planet isn't the most wastefull thing one can do?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 17, 2022)

Referring back to the talk of batteries earlier, there seem to have been a development;





						This new battery design has Tesla beat on energy density and more
					

Amprius Technologies has developed a new lithium-ion battery technology using silicon nanowires to replace normal graphite anodes.




					www.tweaktown.com


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 23, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> I just wish Aptera would get an infusion of funding from a major player, because I want the 29k 400 mile model, but I am not waiting until 2024/2025 to get one.


Better that they remain independent and crowd source funding.  If you got $1,002.80+ to (potentially) throw away: https://invest.aptera.us/

Team work makes the dream work.


----------



## Shrek (Feb 28, 2022)

Take A Closer Look At A Nio EV Battery Swapping Station In China (msn.com)


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 28, 2022)

Andy Shiekh said:


> Take A Closer Look At A Nio EV Battery Swapping Station In China (msn.com)



this is interesting idea, surprised I did not think of it, I thought of a similar thing with hydrogen cars, but for some reason just assumed it was impossible with EV


----------



## dragontamer5788 (Feb 28, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> this is interesting idea, surprised I did not think of it, I thought of a similar thing with hydrogen cars, but for some reason just assumed it was impossible with EV



Its not impossible.

But those battery packs are the most expensive parts of a car, and subject to a significant amount of secret wear-and-tear. Over time, your overall range drops as the battery wears out (some of which is predictable and expected, others of bits are unpredictable / depend on usage).

Grossly simplifying things... the battery is "worn out" slightly each time you charge it up, much like how an SSD "wears out" each time you erase+write data to it. (You can't write to an SSD until you erase the section first).

Therefore: the economics of battery swaps need to be figured out. I think some kind of "club" setting, where everyone who joins has "collective ownership" of the entire set of battery packs. Or maybe a business that effectively accomplishes the same through some kind of subscription service instead. Given that these battery packs are worth $10,000 to $20,000 when new, its very important to actually develop a depreciation model. (Ex: *your* battery pack is worth $5000 because its 50% used up... IE has 1000 charges on it of its expected 2000-charge lifespan).

----------

Because of the economics and costs behind Li-ion battery packs, people are pushing Hydrogen fuel cells instead, which effectively does the same thing (The H2 serves as a battery. When you need more charge, you fill up your vehicle with more H2).

------------

All in all, it makes more sense for the owner of the car to own the battery. Its really not _THAT_ hard to keep charging it over time. There's been a huge number of electric charging station designs.



			https://pairedpower.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/SEVO-SunStation%E2%84%A2-Product-Data-Sheet_Paired-Power.pdf
		






Etc. etc.

These seem like far simpler ways to solve the battery issue IMO.


----------



## Totally (Feb 28, 2022)

Deleted member 74752 said:


> If it's as bad as you think, why have almost a million of these cars been sold worldwide?



Consumerism and Hype, you severely underestimate how vain society is as a whole if you are asking that. If this was on merit alone EVs would have taken off a long time ago in the Prius era instead of leaving a trail littered with commercial failures and abortions.



FordGT90Concept said:


> Toyota was first to market (in the modern era anyway) with the Leaf.





Andy Shiekh said:


> Nissan?



Toyota Prius was the first EV but still had an ice as a range extender, and yeah the Leaf was Nissan


----------



## defaultluser (Mar 2, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Mods, can we get some thread bans and clean-up please? But please don't close the thread as it has been an interesting discussion.




Why, exactly should they leave it open?  the opening statement will never be true!

There will never be enough onboard solar power to push more than a handcart on most big cars *(and by the time you add enough battery storage to handle the typical commute power deficiency/assume this thing charges over the course of a week, you might as well ditch the Solar weight!)*


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 2, 2022)

defaultluser said:


> Why, exactly should they leave it open?  the opening statement will never be true!
> 
> There will never be enough onboard solar power to push more than a handcart on most big cars *(and by the time you add enough battery storage to handle the typical commute power deficiency/assume this thing charges over the course of a week, you might as well ditch the Solar weight!)*



As discussed in this thread a few times, solar powered cars have already proven to work in southwest USA where there is a lot of sun, and Aptera has a great car for this region of the world, sure this car makes no sense for other parts of the world where it is more cloudy, and it doesn't make sense for cargo, but it does as a consumer commuter to work car, if you live, say in a sunny region.

The future of climate energy is going to rely upon many different modes of transportation, this is just one to address one part of the market. 

I agree this thread should be locked though, cause I am tired of debating the same things I already 20x over in this thread.


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Mar 2, 2022)

the54thvoid said:


> Agree with Lex. This isn't the thread to argue safety on EV, given it's about Aptera and solar.
> 
> Please stay on topic. No more dangers of EV. That's a whole new thread.



So...this is not showing a fundamental understanding of the technologies, the compromises, and the frankly pants-on-head mind bending goofiness of people swallowing the insanity of these things.

Let's hit the high points:
1) This isn't an EV.  It's solar.
-No.  EVs takes electricity, turns it into thermal and kinetic energy, and that's its goal.  A solar car does...exactly the same thing.  It just tries to fill the electricity while depleting it by lugging around extra weight in the form of a thin film and voltage regulation circuits.

2) This is a way to free yourself from the oil companies.
-No.  This is utterly silly.  The energy used to mine and refine Lithium is nuts.  The plastics used to decrease the weight of the product are all most cheaply produced by crude oil refining by-products.  All of the electronics are difficult to recycle, require rare earths, and a dozen other considerations that make this...less than friendly when you do the total cost calculation.

3) This is somehow better than a four-stroke hyper mileage vehicle from 15 years ago.
-Again, no.  Let's ask something a little less stupid, that's easy to miss.  You plug the car into the wall...what is on the other (proverbial) side of that wall?  Please note, that'd be coal, oil, electric, nuclear, wind, solar, or some other energy source.  Note that each of them bears its own issues...and if we theoretically could convert from gasoline to none we'd be creating an incentive for using all that excess gasoline in generators...  Yeah.

4) These vehicles are fantastic.
-Let's assume I love the aesthetics.  Let's assume that the lack of the ability to carry any substantive materials is overlooked.  Let's also overlook that these things versus a standard vehicle would basically have their passengers as a fine red paste if involved in any crash.  Now that we've given you all of that, the units are an utter mess with regards to durability.  Let me explain.  $25,000 mostly gets you a battery, with enough supporting structure to not fall apart.  If you look at the mathematics of it all, the maximum speed is entirely restricted by the aerodynamic drag, and the range these things have are basically projected as a travel through the desert.  Remember, the insanely huge projected ranges of these things requires some understanding of the conditions...and note that this one comes with a litany of notes.

5) This is the way of the futures.
-Lithium batteries.  Let's assume a charge every couple of days.  Let's assume that...like most...the company isn't hiding a lot of that capacity.  Now...help me here.  The solar cells mean constant charging cycles, which can often fluctuate.  That fluctuation burns through charging cycles unless the charge speed and the energy usage combined are less than the generating capacity of the solar cells.  I'm going to call it as about 2 power cycles per day...on a type of battery that might only be a couple of hundred before showing appreciable deterioration of capacity.  Oh joy...Tesla looks like an absolute joy comparatively.  They could show a 4-5 year lifetime before you have to drop another 30k USD for Tesla to refurbish your vehicle.  At the same time, 5 years later a little 4 cylinder car would easily be running as good as the day it was manufactured with only basic maintenance.  If the way of the future is disposable environmental abominations to make people feel good, then call me a crotchety old grandpa and find me a cloud to yell at.  

6) The quality of reporting is...in any way desirable.
-So, you started with the hyperloop being the future.  I should have assumed that technical knowledge was...lacking.  You've now come to the thought process that EVs aren't the future but solar cars are...because they're different?  I say that with a question mark at the end because it's a statement rooted in stupid so deep that it could only have been dreamt up by someone with a bachelors in the creative arts.  I say that knowing that your average engineer is fairly measured against an aversion to risks that borders on the joy-killer label for an equally as accurate reason.  This said, please think about what you're posting.  The agglomeration of badly researched pseudo-science articles in a nerd forum is...either trolling or fundamentally not understanding that people like that often eject the fluff from these news articles reflexively.


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 2, 2022)

lilhasselhoffer said:


> So...this is not showing a fundamental understanding of the technologies, the compromises, and the frankly pants-on-head mind bending goofiness of people swallowing the insanity of these things.
> 
> 
> 6) The quality of reporting is...in any way desirable.
> -So, you started with the hyperloop being the future.  I should have assumed that technical knowledge was...lacking.  You've now come to the thought process that EVs aren't the future but solar cars are...because they're different?  I say that with a question mark at the end because it's a statement rooted in stupid so deep that it could only have been dreamt up by someone with a bachelors in the creative arts.  I say that knowing that your average engineer is fairly measured against an aversion to risks that borders on the joy-killer label for an equally as accurate reason.  This said, please think about what you're posting.  The agglomeration of badly researched pseudo-science articles in a nerd forum is...either trolling or fundamentally not understanding that people like that often eject the fluff from these news articles reflexively.



There is a working hyperloop outside of las vegas, run by billionaire richard branson, and another one in one was demonstrated in Dubai.  your right, those physical working entities are just made up. neat.

hey mods can we close all threads i ever made now? i dont have time for this shit anymore


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Mar 2, 2022)

CallandorWoT said:


> As discussed in this thread a few times, solar powered cars have already proven to work in southwest USA where there is a lot of sun, and Aptera has a great car for this region of the world, sure this car makes no sense for other parts of the world where it is more cloudy, and it doesn't make sense for cargo, but it does as a consumer commuter to work car, if you live, say in a sunny region.
> 
> The future of climate energy is going to rely upon many different modes of transportation, this is just one to address one part of the market.
> 
> I agree this thread should be locked though, cause I am tired of debating the same things I already 20x over in this thread.



So...let me ask you some simple and pretty stupid things.  Feel free to ignore, but I'm pretty sure that the insanity here is too deep for "it works somewhere" to be a viable solution.

1) What is the primary means to decompose plastic, barring incineration?
2) How much does it make sense for you to drastically increase the weight of a vehicle with batteries, so you can drive without sun?
3) Do the "examples of it working" come with any caveats?

Let me provide you an answer.
1) UV exposure and decomposition.  UV exposure maps peg, without irony, the areas with the most solar exposure as those areas that also have the highest annual UV exposure.  This is important because UV packages meant to absorb the energy while limiting destruction of material tend to be insanely expensive and not exactly great when it comes to being environmentally friendly.  If you'd like an example, Bad Boy produced a buggy a couple of years back.  It included black plastic panels on the side.  Everything south of the Mason-Dixon line showed a chalky white surface after less than a year outside, because the UV/color package was not up to snuff.  Now...if your 25k USD bought a car that lasted 2 year exactly how great it that?  
The basic point here, is that we have yet to see anything even bordering on a daily driver that "demonstrates how effective" solar cars can be.  On the other hand, we have plenty of video where Arizona natives leave a can of cookie dough on the dash board and come back to a blackened mess of burnt cookie.  Maybe before you highlight a half dozen limited successes (proof of concept), you should qualify things under actual usage conditions...because a car that breaks down after two years better have a price tag reflective of that...when my last vehicle lasted 10 years and I paid 30k for it.

2) Let's fat kid this.  The amount of energy a body has is directly proportional to the weight.  Kinetic energy is half of the mass multiplied by the square of the velocity.  This means if you double the mass...like adding a battery...you double the required kinetic energy to have the same velocity.  
This, for the record, is why hybrid vehicles are a terrible idea.  Twice the drive train mass means that energy efficiency tanks hard.  Likewise, if you want to drive a solar car without the sun you need energy storage, which means more mass, which increases the kinetic energy input required for the same velocity.  I refer to this as the fat kid situation because I like this when I used to sled.  Waiting for the chunkiest kid was a pain, but when that kid sat on the sled you'd absolutely fly.  It was less efficient to wait, but the trip down was always more fun.  Electric vehicles, which a solar car is, are the same.  The only difference is they seek to have the smallest kids and the most sleds, not the most fun.

3) So...solar vehicles have been around since the later 90's.  There were multiple competitions centered around them.  What has changed since then?  Well, a bit more efficiency from panels, a bit better efficiency from motors, and a bit better control electronics.  All of these synergized to make solar vehicles which could demonstrate some efficacy on the road.
I must be full of crap though.  The Sion exists...and they've got videos back to 2019.  Yeah...of the computer simulation of crash testing...which is not acceptable in any way for a road vehicle test.  It's 2022...they've been accepting early preorders... with a two week period before your money is gone.  The purchase contract is then authored at the end of 2022...with another 2 weeks to cancel...with production maybe starting in 2023.  Goody...if I'm exceptionally lucky I can fly to Germany and drive this thing home by the end of 2023.  They plan to crank out 14,000 of them by the end of 2023...with production starting in the first half, that's 365/2 = 183 days of production.  14,000/183 = 77 cars a day if they worked 7 days a week.  It is the EU, so 7/4*76.5= 134 cars a day.  That's a car off the line every 3.13 minutes.  So...holy crap.  This is a mathematical impossibility...unless they're tooling up to go 3 shifts a day and have a whole 9.39 minutes per car.

I'm cherry picking though.  There are other companies like Tesla.  A company who has no guarantee of quality and a used unit can cost you 50k USD for a base model.  

OK, that's still garbage.  I'm creating a strawman.  EVs have proven safe in crash test ratings, right.  Well, yes.  Car And Driver Article.  EVs can be immensely safe, and if you're willing to spend a huge premium on them they can perform about as well as a standard fossil fuel engine.  They of course have huge caveats...and they cost an insane amount of money, with a very finite amount of time you're going to get before you've got to spend a huge chunk of change replacing their most expensive component...the battery.

Why then do I suggest that you should consider review of your holier-than-thou "lock the thread, I'm tired of defending my point" attitude.  Well, by that same logic a Zepelin is the most efficient form of air travel.  You can reuse the balloon infinitely.  It can be filled with the most abundant element in the universe.  It costs pennies to transport thousands of pounds of cargo.  Of course, the whole fiery wreckage and suicide pact you sign (seriously, the history on these things is great) makes the good severely worth weighing against the bad.  Maybe before you decide to drop the mic you should consider that this is a debate for a good reason.
It's also one without a winner.  If that's the case, your opinion is only that.  It's not a fact, foregone conclusion, or anything but your personal opinion.  


Please note that surprisingly enough recognizing the debate is not falling on either side of it.  I admit that EVs make some sense, and they also have heavy prices for their benefits.  Claiming either side is "the future" is about as reasonable as the local hippy that buys old fast food grease as the future.  You know the guy, the hippy who strains it and makes biofuel that is somehow infinitely worse than you could ever imagine.  The one who smells of deep frier hours after getting  out of the car.  Yeah...



CallandorWoT said:


> There is a working hyperloop outside of las vegas, run by billionaire richard branson, and another one in one was demonstrated in Dubai.  your right, those physical working entities are just made up. neat.
> 
> hey mods can we close all threads i ever made now? i dont have time for this shit anymore



Funny.

A physical working hyperloop, like the hyperloop the boring company "built" in Las Vegas?


An underground tunnel, bored at half the speed of regular construction, creating a loop between two stations, that electric cars travel along at maybe 15-20 miles per hour...if they aren't stuck in traffic.


Now, let me explain the hyperloop...because you seem to have confused it with a metal tube.
1) The hyperloop will exist in a vacuum tube.
2) The hyperloop will travel at hundreds of miles per hour.  600 was one of various miles/hour figures given
3) The hyperloop will travel on magnetic motors to allow 1 and 2.
4) The hyperloop will connect distant cities and allow for travel between them in fractions of the time that current cars allow.


Tesla demonstrated the hyperloop as a large, poorly welded, open ended, less than mile long tube.  Note that none of the above is present.  Note also that it has never demonstrated efficacy over any appreciable distance.  This is despite Musk years ago saying "that it's really all pretty easy."

Branson's loop is a joke too.  It is in a tube, but not vacuum pressurized.  It travelled a couple hundred miles per hour...which is where trains can already go today.  The motors demonstrated were definitely not magnetic levitation...and anyone listening to it would note that.  Finally, it's a straight shot over stable land in a tiny distance.


Do you understand why the hyperloop is stupid?  Let me top 5 it for you, and please note the parallels with EVs:
1) Materials science.  If the coefficient of thermal expansion would make the thing look like the St. Louis Arch then it won't work.
2) Safety.  Vacuum at extremely low pressures+people=red mist.  Yeah...I don't think so.
3) Distances.  The loop is a train without the ability to turn...  
4) It is an idea from a hundred years ago...but people dusted it off and claimed it as new.  Think Jules Verne.
5) The minds behind it screwed up basic math.  They want people to feel like it's good, and not do the math.

Notes 1, 3, 4, and 5 are all shared with EVs...even EVs with solar panels.  The only reason they escape 2 is that they've built in safety features that you literally cannot in a vacuum, in a tube, at 600 miles an hour.


I find it amusing that when challenged people championing these things are willing to simply give them up, or proclaim sarcastically that others just don't get it.  I can buy EVs as a possible future.  I cannot buy strapping a solar panel to an EV as an improvement.  I love trains (except US Amtrak...that could suck the chrome out of a 50's car bumper), but hate hyperloop because it's a stupid repackage of an otherwise potentially good thing.
I say the above after taking a Septa train from airport to line end, in 90 minutes.  If I can believe in the future of that, then maybe you need to evaluate what you want to defend.  That said, there's that log-off button in the upper right of the screen.  I've used it, and spent more than a year away from here.  You might need it too.  Food for thought, and an opportunity for clarity.


----------



## claes (Mar 2, 2022)

Unfortunate that I’m in agreement with all of your arguments but can’t like your posts because you’re unnecessarily condescending


----------



## Space Lynx (Mar 2, 2022)

lilhasselhoffer said:


> I find it amusing that when challenged people championing these things are willing to simply give them up, or proclaim sarcastically that others just don't get it.  I can buy EVs as a possible future.  I cannot buy strapping a solar panel to an EV as an improvement.  I love trains (except US Amtrak...that could suck the chrome out of a 50's car bumper), but hate hyperloop because it's a stupid repackage of an otherwise potentially good thing.
> I say the above after taking a Septa train from airport to line end, in 90 minutes.  If I can believe in the future of that, then maybe you need to evaluate what you want to defend.  That said, there's that log-off button in the upper right of the screen.  I've used it, and spent more than a year away from here.  You might need it too.  Food for thought, and an opportunity for clarity.



Aptera has already demonstrated it can get 40 miles on a single charge and at 25 grand to buy one, a typical consumer in the America southwest who commutes 20-30 miles to work may never have to plug it in, literally ever (this is amazing imo but w.e on your cynicism), but I agree with you in a previous regarding longevity of lithium battery charge recycles being a major issue, and in fact would argue Toyota made the right move by waiting to get into EV until solid state batteries were ready, which Toyota has said is coming in the mid 2020's.

I'm not commenting anymore on hyperloop, I know hyperloop was a dream that will probably never happen, however I doubt several billionaires would have invested in it if they truly though it impossible.


----------

