Page 20 of 21

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Fri 11 May 2018, 13:00:18
by Outcast_Searcher
Plantagenet wrote:And I really hope you will never refer to "anecdotal data" again. I laughed so hard. :lol:

As usual, I'm always glad to help.

Cheers!

Congrats on being totally random, and trying to mislead, no matter what. Just like when you claimed EV's cause cancer. I hope you'll quit being random and silly.

You are talking about rare, nontypical events, and trying to make them seem normal, as though they apply normally. That's close enough to anecdotal for me. Don't like it? Pout or cry.

As I said, claiming one Tesla battery that caught fire days after a horrendous crash, as though that implies a problem with normal EV batteries is utterly nonsense. But you'll double and triple down on that and try to distract from that with a side issue, because that's what you do.

I believe folks around here who can read and remember that you do know that from time to time. But thanks for playing.

And again, if there ends up being a problem with typical Tesla or EV batteries that is statistically significant, then that will be fixed.

Tesla already added triple shielding under the Model S in 2014 to prevent fires from something hitting the battery from below, in a crash.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/new ... -fire.html

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 May 2018, 15:41:05
by asg70
Gosh, the fishing around for FUD is REAL here.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 May 2018, 16:20:20
by pstarr
asg70 wrote:Gosh, the fishing around for FUD is REAL here.

Image

More brilliant comments from our resident river trolls ha ha ha

Image

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 May 2018, 17:55:56
by Plantagenet
Outcast_Searcher wrote:you claimed EV's cause cancer.


One of the easiest ways to tell when someone is lying at PeakOil.com is that they don't use the quote function to actually quote what other posters say, but they just make up crazy things and dishonestly claim someone else said it. And, this is a case in point. You've made up a crazy thing and you are lying when you said I said it. Of course I never said that--- but you go right on lying about it.

What I said...what is it, two years ago now?.... was that some kinds of EM radiation are thought by some scientists to cause cancer, and I noted that the large electric battery systems in EVs, located a short distance from drivers and passengers, generate significant EM radiation fields. I then asked whether or not there was a health risk from the EM radiation fields in EVs. I never said EVs cause cancer....I simply raised the question of whether the EM radiation in EVs might be a health risk and might cause cancer.

This is an obvious thing to wonder about, and I'm not the first and I won't be the last to wonder about this. For instance, a post made earlier this year by one of the stock analysts at the web site "Seeking Alpha" also raises this issue. I quote:

two-armageddon-threats-electric-cars-cancer-

There are ... things that could bring a “sudden death” to the future of electric cars. These are the market-impact equivalents of an giant asteroid hitting hitting Earth, extinguishing all life.

In other words, Armageddon.

The first of these two threats is any evidence of harmful electromagnetic radiation from sitting in an electric car. Let’s be clear: I have no certain evidence that this is or will be a problem. I’m just saying that it’s not clear that this issue has been investigated deeply enough, and not recently enough.

Sitting on top of a giant battery, ranging from 16 kWh to as high as 100 kWh or even 200 kWh, is at least enough to make someone suspicious. Consider the magnitude of a cell phone, which one tries to keep at least a foot or two away from the vital organs of the body whenever possible. The electric car has the potential to be many decimal points more potent.

I have tried to see if the studies conducted to date are any good. It’s not obvious one way or the other. Maybe this will all turn out to be fine. I sure hope so! But the probability that it might not, is a non-zero probability. How long until we discover the long-term effects of things that cause cancer?

Sometimes, that could be a decade or two out. Maybe longer.

Imagine the scandal -- Congressional hearings, and worse -- if it turns out to be that sitting on top of EV batteries cause cancer, and that government policies caused people to buy EVs through subsidies, mandates and other incentives. That would really be something.


In other news, your skepticism that EM radiation can cause cancer has now been proven misplaced. After years of research on EM radiation the link between EM radiation and cancer just became a lot more concerning because in March 2018 a scientific study was released that finally definitively proves that non-ionizing EM radiation from cell phones does cause cancer. So now its a proven fact that some kinds of non-ionizing EM radiation....even at low levels..... DOES cause cancer. And if non-ionizing EM from a small device like a cell phone causes cancer...then EM radiation from other much larger sources may also cause cancer.

new-studies-link-cell-phone-radiation-with-cancer

Image
In March 2018 research was released which now proves that EM radiation ---even from small devices like a cell phone---does cause cancer

Get it now?

Cheers!

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 May 2018, 18:17:47
by vtsnowedin
Would not the question be, Which causes more cancer and death? ICE cars or electric BEVs? Most likely they both cause considerable numbers of deaths and we will have to determine which is the greater risk all things considered. Pulmonary disease from pollution vs. cancer from electromagnetic radiation may seem different but if you can die from both of them does it matter?

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 May 2018, 20:50:19
by asg70
A world without EVs will still be bathed in bluetooth, WIFI, 3G/4G/5G+ cell tower signals, and any everyday EM fields from our gadgets. So unless you want to go the hairshirt route and find some rare isolated patch of land left on this earth to disappear into, the die is cast on that one. Singling out EVs doesn't make any sense other than for:

Image

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 May 2018, 21:58:19
by vtsnowedin
asg70 wrote:A world without EVs will still be bathed in bluetooth, WIFI, 3G/4G/5G+ cell tower signals, and any everyday EM fields from our gadgets. So unless you want to go the hairshirt route and find some rare isolated patch of land left on this earth to disappear into, the die is cast on that one. Singling out EVs doesn't make any sense other than for:

Image

I don't think it is that simple. You can walk by an electric fence all day with no ill effects but take a wiz on it and you will learn a lesson.
What the safe power levels and distances you need to maintain from them are is yet to be determined but I expect having a cell phone clapped to your ear ten hours a day will turn out to be a very bad idea.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sat 12 May 2018, 22:35:32
by Outcast_Searcher
Plantagenet wrote:
Outcast_Searcher wrote:you claimed EV's cause cancer.


In other news, your skepticism that EM radiation can cause cancer has now been proven misplaced. After years of research on EM radiation the link between EM radiation and cancer just became a lot more concerning because in March 2018 a scientific study was released that finally definitively proves that non-ionizing EM radiation from cell phones does cause cancer. So now its a proven fact that some kinds of non-ionizing EM radiation....even at low levels..... DOES cause cancer. And if non-ionizing EM from a small device like a cell phone causes cancer...then EM radiation from other much larger sources may also cause cancer.

new-studies-link-cell-phone-radiation-with-cancer

Image
In March 2018 research was released which now proves that EM radiation ---even from small devices like a cell phone---does cause cancer

Get it now?
Cheers!

And yet, you just can't help yourself. Even in this post where you claim I'm lying, you're still being VERY misleading and making a FALSE claim that small device (i.e. cell phone) EM radiation causes cancer.

And yet the link you are citing says NO SUCH THING.

The first paragraphs in the article:

Does cell phone radiation cause cancer? New studies show a correlation in lab rats, but the evidence may not resolve ongoing debates over causality or whether any effects arise in people.

The ionizing radiation given off by sources such as x-ray machines and the sun boosts cancer risk by shredding molecules in the body. But the non-ionizing radio-frequency (RF) radiation that cell phones and other wireless devices emit has just one known biological effect: an ability to heat tissue by exciting its molecules.

So, a new study shows a correlation in rats. Humans aren't rats.

EV's, cell phones, etc. don't produce ionizing radiation.

When humans are shown to be rats, or there is proof that low level EMF actually causes cancer in humans, verified from a credible scientific source, THEN be sure and let us know.

In the mean time, there have long been FEARS about cell phones causing brain tumors in humans, but no meaningful evidence shown for that.

Did you notice in the little red box you quoted it said MAY cause cancer? i.e., like I'm saying, we still don't know.

...

And I reviewed your posts, and you were posting similar FUD saying we needed to worry about cancer possibly being caused by EV's in the EV related discussions. You persisted in this, despite my pointing out how non-ionizing radiation doesn't cause cancer in humans.

...

And let's use a wee bit of common sense. Given the way people use cell phones, don't you think that if actual credible scientific evidence had been found "proves" (your word), that cell phones cause cancer, that credible MSM sources would be, like, writing about it?

And yet, when I search Google for "cell phones cause cancer", I get your article about rats, and things like pieces from folks who know a bit about cancer (American Cancer Society, which says no, and MSM articles that point out that we still don't know even after the rats/mice studies, but if there is any risk, it is extremely small.

But by all means, be sure and triple down, and say I'm lying and insist that cell phones cause cancer in humans, because if you believe it, it must be true. :roll:

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sun 13 May 2018, 00:12:50
by Plantagenet
Outcast_Searcher wrote: you're .... being VERY misleading and making a FALSE claim that small device (i.e. cell phone) EM radiation causes cancer.

And yet the link you are citing says NO SUCH THING.

Does cell phone radiation cause cancer? New studies show a correlation in lab rats


What part of the English language don't you understand? Didn't you read the text you quoted yourself in the sentence just above? It says (#1) new studies show a correlation between cell phone exposure and cancer in lab rats. If you don't understand that sentence then read it again more slowly until you get it.

Now try to understand this next sentence as well----(#2) If cell phone radiation causes cancer in lab rats, then it causes cancer. Do you get it now? Put #1 and #2 together and face facts. Cell phone EM radiation has been show to cause cancer in lab rats. Another way to say it is that cell phone EM radiation is carcinogenic (i.e. it causes cancer). How hard is that to understand, really?

SHEESH!

OK. Now if you understand #1 and #2 above, then you now finally realize that it is proved that non-ionizing EM radiation from cell phones can cause cancer in test animals. Are you with me so far?

Now, the next step (#3) is to look very closely at humans to see just what is going on with cell phone radiation and cancer there. The rats were developing brain tumors from EM radiation exposure from cell phones----could the same thing be happening in people? Do cell phones cause brain tumors in people? Its an obvious question to ask.

Humans aren't rats----you can't put them in cases and experimentally subject them to cell phone EM radiation. But you can do epidemiological studies of large human populations to see if there have been increases in brain tumor frequency amoung people who use cell phones as opposed to those who don't.

AND the latest research does seem to show an increase in brain tumors in humans associated with cell phone use. Research released on May 2, 2018 ---only about 10 days ago --- does indeed show AN INCREASE IN BRAIN TUMORS IN HUMANS WHO USE CELL PHONES. In particular, the rate of brain tumors occurring in England is now more than twice what it was a few decades ago before people started using cell phones.

brain-tumors-cell-phones-study

Get it now? Thats more than a 100% INCREASE in this rare, virulent cancer since people started using cell phones. Thats a HUGE increase in brain tumor frequency in the human population. So we now know that EM radiation from cell phones causes cancer in lab animals AND we know the same virulent kind of cancer that EM radiation caused in lab animals is now occurring at twice the rate in the human population using cell phones as it did before the human population used cell phones.

Thats pretty interesting, don't you think?

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

Cheers!

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Mon 04 Jun 2018, 18:22:29
by baha
I installed another EV charger today. It's only significant because I got my first up close and personal look at a Model 3. I looked it over carefully. Every body line and door gap was perfect. The interior was simple but nice. What I like is the bottom of the car is as smooth and aerodynamic as the top. No pipes or shafts.

I was going to talk to the guy but while I was working in the garage he got in and drove away, and I didn't hear a thing. I looked up and he was gone :(

It's OK...I have another tomorrow :)
Model 3.jpg
Model 3.jpg (44.48 KiB) Viewed 6112 times

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Mon 02 Jul 2018, 05:01:07
by baha
Have you seen the new EV from Jaguar? It is very impressive.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmccorm ... 2e2a8e650a

It looks like the EV revolution may actually happen on the second try. I was overly pessimistic in predicting failure in 2020... Maybe.

The takeaway here is the obvious superiority of an EV. People who actually drive one will be hooked and it looks like they will have lots of choices.

But there are problems. Both Jaguar and VW have reliability problems and a reputation for electrical problems. Do you really want them building your EV?

Prince Harry has the right idea!
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/29/motorspo ... index.html

This is going to be a fast growing market. There is no point in throwing away all the ICE cars...just convert them. There is already a hybrid drivetrain for my Transit Connect and soon there will be an electric option.
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... in-detroit

So when the turbo 1.6 liter engine melts I will convert it.

The future is coming...are you prepared?

Please keep in mind these assumptions are made by a confused Cornie living in a doomstead. :)

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Mon 02 Jul 2018, 13:45:21
by Outcast_Searcher
Post hijacked by Captcha. Sorry.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Tue 03 Jul 2018, 18:45:26
by jawagord
baha wrote:Have you seen the new EV from Jaguar? It is very impressive.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmccorm ... 2e2a8e650a

It looks like the EV revolution may actually happen on the second try. I was overly pessimistic in predicting failure in 2020... Maybe.

The takeaway here is the obvious superiority of an EV. People who actually drive one will be hooked and it looks like they will have lots of choices.

But there are problems. Both Jaguar and VW have reliability problems and a reputation for electrical problems. Do you really want them building your EV?

Prince Harry has the right idea!
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/29/motorspo ... index.html

This is going to be a fast growing market. There is no point in throwing away all the ICE cars...just convert them. There is already a hybrid drivetrain for my Transit Connect and soon there will be an electric option.
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... in-detroit

So when the turbo 1.6 liter engine melts I will convert it.

The future is coming...are you prepared?

Please keep in mind these assumptions are made by a confused Cornie living in a doomstead. :)


Hmm, $70-90K US for the vehicle plus how much do you bill for the charger install?

The I-Pace will appear in Jaguar’s US showrooms later this year, starting at $70,495. Our test car was the $86,895 First Edition model.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sun 12 Aug 2018, 13:45:55
by asg70
Not sure if this is the right thread, but I'd consider this a significant milestone.

https://electrek.co/2018/08/10/tesla-su ... 150-miles/

The SC network is probably the #1 achievement by Tesla. Now if they can only build cars...

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sun 12 Aug 2018, 14:03:13
by Outcast_Searcher
jawagord wrote:
baha wrote:Have you seen the new EV from Jaguar? It is very impressive.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnmccorm ... 2e2a8e650a

It looks like the EV revolution may actually happen on the second try. I was overly pessimistic in predicting failure in 2020... Maybe.


Hmm, $70-90K US for the vehicle plus how much do you bill for the charger install?

The I-Pace will appear in Jaguar’s US showrooms later this year, starting at $70,495. Our test car was the $86,895 First Edition model.

These cars are great toys for rich people, just like high end ICE cars. They're not going to change the world, re 95%+ of the auto demand though.

This is how Tesla, for example, is going to make a "profit" in 2H 2018. They're selling a lot of the "performance" Model 3's starting at $64,000ish, and going to well over $80,000 as you add options. Lots of fun for the rich, while the demand lasts. And nice margins for Tesla -- in the short run.

But during 2019, the Tesla EV tax credits go away, and presumably the early enthusiasts for $70,000ish Model 3's dwindles to a modest sustainable rate.

Then what? Tesla no longer is talking about the $35,000 middle class model 3 they promised when the car was announced. If they don't sell that, so much for the middle class car (I say $50,000 and up is NOT a middle class car). If they do sell that -- THEN what is the profit margin? Is the Musk forecast for endless profits from here on realistic?

I don't know (which is why I am neutral on Tesla), but it seems far from obvious, with all the wacky and inefficient stuff Tesla does, to fulfill the "Musk vision".

Oh, and for the middle class that mainly wants a reliable, convenient car to drive every day -- things like quality and service will matter a LOT. Tesla can't expect such normal middle class mainstream customers to act like wealthy people with extra cars, and imply calmly wait while their car sits unfixed for months waiting on parts, for example. And selling middle class cars won't have the profit margins to, for example, just let customers rent nice cars for weeks and months while they wait to be repaired.

Popcorn at the ready, I hope for an interesting show to continue with Tesla.

I'm rooting for Tesla NOT to go private, BTW. If it does, then the public can't tell whether the Musk shenanigans are profitable or not, since good financial disclosure rules won't hold.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sun 12 Aug 2018, 14:22:33
by Outcast_Searcher
Looking at the Honda Clarity PHEV the other day, and at the specs online, this looks like it might just be what the Chevy Volt should have been. (NOT the Clarity FCV, which is untenable outside Southern CA, and has its issues re maintenance (VERY expensive oil for the Fuel Cell)).

You have the Honda quality reputation, an Accord-like platform (with a large battery added for the 45+ mile pure EV range), and much more room, comfort, and better efficiency in the gasoline mode than the Volt.

With the $7500 federal tax credit, the Accord looks VERY price competitive with the Accord Hybrid.

To me, the main downsides you're giving up (things Honda sacrificed for better miles):

a). range (only a 7 gallon gas tank)
b). power, (bewteen the heavy battery and a more fuel efficient engine)
c). seating comfort for longer trips

...

So, for a person who drives mostly in the city and only takes the occasional long road trip, the Clarity might be great, resulting in burning very little gas, but being a quite "normal" car other than that.

For the person who drives mostly highway miles and needs comfort and range for frequent long trips, the Honda Accord Hybrid would still have the edge.

As a consumer, I think it's great to have more and more choices.

I think it's silly than so many "green fanbois" act like ANYTHING but a pure BEV is a disaster. There aren't that many BEV's made yet. Especially at middle class prices and with good ranges, etc. To act like a PHEV or even good HEV is just as bad as a normal ICE is just being irrational, IMO. Like with any cause -- acting hostile and biased isn't going to win lots of converts from the undecided who just want good information and a good value / experience (but still interested in doing the right thing).

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sun 12 Aug 2018, 19:33:57
by asg70
Outcast_Searcher wrote:Looking at the Honda Clarity PHEV the other day, and at the specs online, this looks like it might just be what the Chevy Volt should have been.


What bothers me the most about the Volt is the crippled charging speed. The Clarity won't do fast-DC either but it will do 7.2kw Level 2 and all the Volts to date are capped at 3.6kw.

That's about to change, though.

The 2019 Volt will do 7.2kw.

Plugin hybrid makers treat the gas engine as if it's equivalent to a charge point. They don't understand that most plugin buyers don't want to burn any gas and only want to use the gas motor as an absolute last resort. So the charge speed is the biggest impediment to doing that.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sun 12 Aug 2018, 19:41:29
by asg70
Outcast_Searcher wrote:Tesla no longer is talking about the $35,000 middle class model 3 they promised when the car was announced. If they don't sell that, so much for the middle class car...


...from Tesla perhaps, but progress doesn't stand still.

Hyundai Kona EV

Kia Niro EV

Nissan Leaf with active thermal management

All three assume the Bolt is too small/ugly to consider acceptable, which is not true for everyone.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sun 12 Aug 2018, 20:08:12
by pstarr
Have any of our resident Tesla Fanbois's have actually purchased an EV? Is there anyone here who has?
Image
Come on guys/gals! It's time to join the Wired Generation

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postPosted: Sun 12 Aug 2018, 22:19:47
by GHung
Saudi Fund in Talks to Invest in Tesla Buyout Deal

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... uyout-deal

Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund is working to be part of any investor pool that emerges to take Tesla Inc. private, as Elon Musk enters a week where his plan will draw added scrutiny from the electric-car maker’s board, advisers and investors.

The Saudi Kingdom’s Public Investment Fund, which recently built a stake just shy of 5 percent in Tesla, is exploring how it can be involved in the potential deal, according to people with knowledge of the fund’s plans. But the potential transaction’s staggering $82 billion price tag means Tesla is still likely to need to tap other sources of cash.

Tesla board members are preparing to meet with financial advisers this week to evaluate Musk’s proposal. Directors will probably tell Musk, the chairman, to recuse himself, according to CNBC, and they’ve told him to hire his own separate advisers. Musk is hoping to avoid having one or two large stakeholders in a company and would instead prefer to gather the funds from a larger group, the people said, and is canvassing other potential investors including asset managers.