[Raion]

Several states in the United States at this point are starting to ban the sale of new vehicles sometime in the future that are petrol or diesel powered. Other countries have stated the intent to do the same. 

This is going to be terrible for us as a people overall and I am highly opposed to it as somebody who has no intention of ever buying an electric car.

An electric car probably makes more sense if you have nuclear or other reasonably clean energy powering it and you're within a city or other place with sufficient infrastructure. The size of the United States alone prevents this from being a reality considering there are huge stretches of the country where the population density is under 10 people per square mile. 

But more than anything I am opposed to vehicles I cannot work on myself on some degree. Yes I outsource some work to mechanics that requires highly specialized and expensive equipment such as tire machines and hydraulic presses but regular maintenance I mostly do myself. Fluid changes, plugs, distributors, steering components, belts and engine accessories are all things that I can easily get to on a fuel vehicle. 

On an electric vehicle this is simply not the case. You have high voltage AC electricity that can kill you. Nothing is documented. No parts are available. And when your drivetrain runs out you have to basically throw the entire car away which is long been a problem with hybrids as well even if on some level this has improved a teeny bit. 

No amount of concessions would ever get me into an electric vehicle; at the very least with a diesel vehicle I can produce my own biodiesel or other fuel, hell in a madmax situation I could literally cut open transmissions and oil pans and thin the gunk out with other oils and an old Mercedes or Volkswagen or other diesel vehicle would probably take it without problems; I know from experience being in college one of my buddies fueled his on filtered machine shop cutting oil, unmarked barrels of transformer oil, gear oil and waste oil that we managed to get for free. Sure it produced nasty clouds of purple smoke that you definitely didn't want to breathe in but it ran fine especially if you put diesel in it on a later date. But an electric car? Better hope a tow truck can put it on and take you somewhere where you can charge it up or if not you're going to be stranded possibly in the wilderness. 

Bottom line, this is an attack on the poor and those who do not want to be forced to alter our lifestyles adversely in the name of some nebulous idea that we are somehow going to save the environment by doing this and not by, I dunno, planning cities better to reduce traffic, because idling is the majority of needless pollution from vehicles, improving/reactivating railways to reduce reliance on trucks, eliminating 1970s technology from vehicles that actually causes us to waste fuel (catalysts actually prevent an engine from running at peak performance and efficiency because they require high exhaust gas temperatures to work), and other such things that are simply too hard or that don't fit someone's personal agenda that somehow me driving a truck or SUV in a town of 600 people where I actually use it everyday to transport goods, am somehow more responsible for contributing to the problem and not these rich elites being flown in private jets. 

Bottom line don't buy electric cars if you value your right to repair and the rights of your fellow citizens and if you are a voter vote these morons out before they take away your rights. Ditto with this self-driving car nonsense which they are probably going to force down our throats as well assuming that computers are always 100% right is how Tesla has killed people.

[Irinikus]

Battery technology is nowhere near where it needs to be at this point! (And probably never will be)

What average person can, at the drop of a hat, fork out $20000 when the battery in their electric car fails???

I suppose, the goal here is to place vehicle ownership beyond the reach of the average person?

Hydrogen is the future, in my opinion!

[weblacky]

I'm going to play devil's advocate because I don't believe the situation is or needs to be so cut and dry. After all, the electric car (carriages and trucks) pre-date the invention of the combustinage engine cars! Because they are actually simpler mechanisms.

No let me clear here, I don't own an electric vehicle and I'm SPECIFICALLY talking about EV...no hybrids. Also let me clear in on other way, I'm not comparing range or other features. Just a basic car from 40-50 years ago style of car. Terrible mileage, decent enough for a daily commuter.

Modern cars have designed (artificial) complexity that isn't necessary for locomotion! So the idea that electric car are MORE complex than combustion isn't technically true, it actually takes less skill and few parts to build a crude electric motor then a combustion engine with clutch. Yeah, they're are actually simpler, but not directly comparable due to range/fuel/weather/hauling differences. But they are still basic transportation that can move at speeds required for town/city driving (I'm talking SIMPLE mechanisms here).

While it's true that these new appliances (vehicles) have no (as of yet) standardize drive train interfaces, modularity or the like for generic components to replace in the electric drivetrain (possibly the actual motor IS though). More of the current electric drivetrain are basically part of the frame and so are unique.

Now let's go on the tangent to what this argument is really based on...lockdown and unneeded technology that couples too tightly and is therefore is "required" and is "missed" when gone or malfunctioning. This stuff "needs to be fixed" because it often causing a check-engine light or causes the car to go into a limp mode to FORCE fixing it. If you assume an electric car may use similar suspension tech then we'll discount suspension complexities and systems for this argument.

So you have the "engine" and then system designed specifically for emissions, then you have body modules & safety systems, then infotainment systems.

I love the no emission/EVAP systems on electrics, I love the lower fluid changing requirement of electrics, I love being able to use regenerative braking for certain "downhill" and other type of deceleration...I cannot do that in my current car.

In seriousness (even with today's safety standards) you COULD produce a manual window winding, no AC, air-cooled, 3 gear electric with NO infotainment and no luxury at all (no heated seats, no sunroof, no automatic lights and wipers, etc - Just a 1975 car with an electric drivetrain and basic gauges). It can be done. For modern crash safety, let's sat late 90's cheap car.

Regardless of "less distance" and regardless or "where you get your power from", a cheap, basic car (that happens to be electric drive) is very doable for at least 100 miles of range. That covers most of my daily needs right now.

And to those that say they can MAKE liquid petroleum fuels or biodiesel or whatever... I CAN MAKE ELECTRICITY using old motors from appliances, alternators, etc...and if the world came to an end and I had a scrap heap of stuff...I could piece together electrical generation a heck of lot faster than I can get a liquid fluid replacement up and running! With prep and materials yes...with a sudden event...I'm stripping parts from dead cars on the freeway as I'm avoid zombie hordes to generate electricity!

The point is the ALL CURRENT cars are becoming complex in ways that purposely increase costs while also demanding a dealer or authorized service center perform required work on the car...period. That's the real complaint. Regardless if you have a EV or ICE BMW, you still have a bunch of stupid "body modules" in the car that are poorly protected and poorly made that short out, get wet, corriode, break, etc...most of the stuff was never needed before! It's not needed now...it's designed to cheap out on wiring and to ensure enough breakage for people to NEED fixing it.

Also modern cars have a secret weapon, they are designed and built bottom-up and NOT top-down. In the old days, cars used to be on the ground and have the engine place in them (same with parts), now they are designed to slip UNDER the body (when lifted). This is NOT an evolution in design...it's designed to take VERY clever advantage of the limitation of HUMAN design (that never changes...see that).

The best example of what I'm saying is oil changes. On modern cars a mechanic can EASILY do the work if you can LIFT THE CAR ABOVE YOUR HEAD. Yeah, because all the components have to unscrewed and pulled away from the car from the bottom (some cars are still from the top...but not many...and this is just an example to show). So if you can relax the suspension, and hold the car above you...you can easily reach your arm right in back of the wheel and unscrew your oil filter and drain plug. Cannot relax the suspension...cannot get your oil filter out!!! Easy for someone with a car lift, bad for someone in their driveway trying to work under a car on ramps.

See they know humans will never evolve the strength to lift a car, therefore having a car lift becomes a needed tool, rather than a nice-to-have tool. Barrier to entry...barrier to fixing it yourself! Now not everything is like that but more stuff is and that prevents "doing it in your driveway" for many people.

This is fact I'm hanging my hat on, introduced features that are locked-down and extra features that make the car's construction/operation more fragile (lots of small PCB/box/modules hidden in the body) fight you. This is often your fight. Most of the time a modern combustion engine is fine and you don't need to do much, but the REST of the car falls apart from all the little "trinkets" failing that have NOTHING to do with driving and moving the car...nothing. It's all extra fluff that somehow is required to be working for the car to be operational.

Also before anyone talking about weather, yes I get that diesel engines work better than electric in the cold siberian winters or whatever...I'm not advocating for the ALL ELECTRIC montra yet...I'm simply refuting the implication that EV are "more complex" that combustion cars...they are not and are in fact MORE SIMPLE with fewer parts. However as a side-effect of combustion the self-heating of the combustion engine cars makes good sense in cold climates because you can use that heat...in HOT climates...maybe not?

Right now, I think both cars should be on the road...but I do think that small cars and sedans should be pushed more to EV more due to the causal driving need. I don't see EV trucks being so generally useful right now, small and light vehicles that are SIMPLE for EV make sense for a lot of car owners (me included) but everyone it trying to be a Tesla (Ultra Luxury) when really I want like a 1975 Mazda with EV drive.

Heck, where I live we don't use air conditioning most of the time..I can just use a dash fan and open my windows! So if it was cheaper, I'd buy an EV that didn't have AC...it's okay for many of us a sacrifice for the cost or range. You could at it later (aftermarket, like cars used to).

Even with new crash rating requirements, SIMPLE cars could still be made, saving money and parts and weight. But the powers that be do not believe such cars will sell. Can you even buy a car WITHOUT AC...how rare on manual seats...I know they are still around but not as much as they could be?

Battery size and shape are an issue...but I'm not going into that because even gas-tank size and shape is an issue...after a car is produce in sufficient quantity you kind of "expect" parts or third-party solution to pop up...same with batteries, perhaps an adapter, shape-changing battery tray or whatever...it will happen if the need is great enough because there is a market for it.

Cars have become too big now because a new car always has to be better than the old, new features, new styling, new costs, and items. Everything thinks someone will be ridiculed for buying an "old car"...but a "new, old car" is unthinkable?

My parents always talk about how their car's were so simple and whatnot. Yes, rose-colored glasses, but they're not all wrong here. Mostly they had to care and feed their engines...our ICE tech requires MUCH less oversight than theirs did. But with more reliable engines came less-reliable add-ons.


Let's ditch the add-ons...

[Raion]

ICE motors are "complex" only if you don't consider that the knowledge required to work on them is mechanical.

Most produced electric vehicles involve both AC and DC current running at high voltages and you actually need to check resistance values and such with specialized equipment if something goes wrong. Also the computer systems in most internal combustion cars are there to tell you problems that they have identified but they don't necessarily hold core to the engine's operation which might as well be controlled on a tiny microprocessor like a 6502.

Your point about hacking together something simple is one thing but that's really nothing in terms of capabilities for someone like me. It's a 15 mile commute to work for me, and I have to deliver things to other towns up to 40-60 miles away. It would not be practical for me to have to use an electric vehicle, especially since there is no charging infrastructure out here so I would be limited at best to 120 volt power that I could find. In really cold climates that might not even sustain the battery and result in damage to the vehicle.

Sure you can generate power reasonably easily but all of the knowledge that's involved with generating power and making it reliable and at proper voltages and storing it all requires really specialized electronics knowledge and doesn't necessarily guarantee that things are going to work. It doesn't take any situational knowledge to understand how to turn vegetable oil into biodiesel, it's a fixed recipe that barely requires any understanding of chemistry.

Think about some of the parts on an electric vehicle. High voltage cables for example might not even be safe for you to handle with welding gloves on. Some of the voltages and currents can vaporize parts of your body instantly.

Even if standardized parts come out and write to repair laws are passed I don't see things improving.

More than anything though we have plenty of oil in the world to produce for hundreds of years and we will probably continuously discover more as technology improves. But even more so the biggest issue for me is that lithium batteries cannot be fully recycled and there's no infrastructure for all this crap. Environmentalism is not an excuse for this because at this point it's becoming a religion for people and again they just want to tax the poor because that's the easiest thing to do.

[jan-jaap]

I agree with weblacky on most of the technical aspects.

More than anything though we have plenty of oil in the world to produce for hundreds of years and we will probably continuously discover more as technology improves.

The problem is not that we're about to run out of oil. The problem is that if we use all this oil and coal and other fossil fuels, the emission of green house gasses will cause catastrophic damage to our environment.

The use of fossil fuels is deeply embedded in every aspect of our lives, and to reduce this dependency is going to have an impact on all of us. But that's not a reason to look the other way and deny the problem.

I'm looking forward to some of the new tech that's emerging right now -- for example, at the moment my house uses a gas powered heating system. If I replace that with a hybrid heat exchanger it's not only good for the environment, it also lessens my dependency on natural gas imported from Russia.

I too have some questions about the practicality of electric cars and whether they fit our use of cars. We have two: a small one (Suzuki Swift) which I mainly use for commuting. It does maybe 25km/day. EV would be fine there, except for 25km/day I mostly just want something that's cheap and EVs are currently anything but cheap. My other car (VW Passat station wagon) does ~30000km/year, so due to the Dutch tax climate that one is a diesel. My wife being Swiss, we travel there quite often, and since the destination is family and not a hotel, I can drive in the evenings when the roads are empty and I can drive as fast as I want over long distances. This car does that very well: even if I drive 200km/h everywhere where it's allowed it's got more than 900km reach on a single tank of fuel. We don't take long breaks -- just pass the wheel and push on. None of this works with an EV.

Other than being too expensive, I find most EVs simply butt-ugly. Why does everything have to be an SUV?

But hey, combustion engines have been with us for a century, EVs are something of the last decade. Things will improve. Whether EVs are the answer, or hydrogen, isn't even all that relevant. We have to reduce our dependency on fossil fuel. Whether my next car will be an EV remains to be seen, but I'm convinced that in the long run gasoline powered cars will be 'classic' cars for fun drives, and something else will be used as a daily driver. Or at least I hope so, because otherwise I may be have to explain to my grandchildren that The Netherlands used to be a lot bigger when I was was young, but unfortunately it was lost to the sea because I was not willing to change my lifestyle.

[Raion]

The problem is not that we're about to run out of oil. The problem is that if we use all this oil and coal and other fossil fuels, the emission of green house gasses will cause catastrophic damage to our environment.

Not gonna debate on the nuts and bolts as the science is far from ever settled and it's not appropriate, but I disagree strongly that oil is the sole/biggest contributing factor to climate change. Coal is going away, nobody likes the health concerns, toxicity, extraction etc. It is the majority, IMHO and research, to environmental damage as a whole.

I'm looking forward to some of the new tech that's emerging right now -- for example, at the moment my house uses a gas powered heating system. If I replace that with a hybrid heat exchanger it's not only good for the environment, it also lessens my dependency on natural gas imported from Russia.

More reasonably, why does your government decide to buy from enemy countries? That's the question you should be asking.

Not that it is entirely equivalent but I can speak from experience that electrical heating methods including heat pumps which I think is what you're talking about to some degree end up consuming more electricity and thus fossil fuels then if we burnt gas directly. When you take into account the reasonably low efficiency of a power plant having to pipe all that power out to you over resistant lines and the resultant efficiency problems it's really not worth it. While natural gas is piped your system should be able to run on propane and the US and Canada have more than enough propane to sell the world so I don't understand why they're not partnering and making trade deals with these countries.

I too have some questions about the practicality of electric cars and whether they fit our use of cars. We have two: a small one (Suzuki Swift) which I mainly use for commuting. It does maybe 25km/day. EV would be fine there, except for 25km/day I mostly just want something that's cheap and EVs are currently anything but cheap. My other car (VW Passat station wagon) does ~30000km/year, so due to the Dutch tax climate that one is a diesel. My wife being Swiss, we travel there quite often, and since the destination is family and not a hotel, I can drive in the evenings when the roads are empty and I can drive as fast as I want over long distances. This car does that very well: even if I drive 200km/h everywhere where it's allowed it's got more than 900km reach on a single tank of fuel. We don't take long breaks -- just pass the wheel and push on. None of this works with an EV.

Indeed.

But hey, combustion engines have been with us for a century, EVs are something of the last decade. Things will improve. Whether EVs are the answer, or hydrogen, isn't even all that relevant. We have to reduce our dependency on fossil fuel. Whether my next car will be an EV remains to be seen, but I'm convinced that in the long run gasoline powered cars will be 'classic' cars for fun drives, and something else will be used as a daily driver. Or at least I hope so, because otherwise I may be have to explain to my grandchildren that The Netherlands used to be a lot bigger when I was was young, but unfortunately it was lost to the sea because I was not willing to change my lifestyle.

More like 150 years for combustion engines if you consider that 100 years ago was 1922!

Really what I am saying is, sure, get rid of coal and build nuclear and solar (although I don't agree with building solar on arable land or anywhere where the sunlight doesn't really properly make it worth it) although I have concerns about wind killing birds especially endangered species, and I am all for self-sufficiency and solar is probably going to factor into that on some level. But with regards to reducing fuel consumption of vehicles the best thing that we can do is rebuild poorly planned cities and roads, get rid of outdated regulations, and other things. Anything else is a tax on the poor and I already refuse to buy cars newer than 2011 (ESC nearly killed me once, so never again) so no amount of political blowhards are going to evict me from my cars.

Personally I think that the Earth is much more resilient than people give it credit for and while we will have to adapt to climate changes anyways because even if we stopped tomorrow it wouldn't change the outcome, no seriously. We've been in a little ice age for literally the last 400 years and it just so happens that the newest warming period is happening around the same time as the rise of industry. The Southwest of North America has undergone a drought for example for the last 400 years there is absolutely no way that any of us is affecting that other than maybe California's ridiculous use of water. Seriously, just burn SoCal to the ground or let a tsunami take it.

[Irinikus]

First and foremost, Climate change is a natural phenomenon! (Of course our industrial activity does have an effect on it, but it’s not the route cause!)

For instance, many thousands of years ago, the Karoo in Southern Africa used to be a marsh land and today you could call it semi desert! Please don’t tell me the SUV’s brought about this change.

The real problem here is that Country’s borders are fixed and the climate changes, resulting in possible food insecurity. Your rain now falls in another country!

As for how the decisions in Human society are made? (Or the narrative is set!) The world doesn’t work the way the average person thinks it does! To quote Bob Dylan: “The Masters make the Rules for the Wise Men and the Fools!”

The average person Doesn’t have a say, although they are led to believe that they do!

[jan-jaap]

First and foremost, Climate change is a natural phenomenon! (Of course our industrial activity does have an effect on it, but it’s not the route cause!)

Not gonna debate on the nuts and bolts as the science is far from ever settled and it's not appropriate, but I disagree strongly that oil is the sole/biggest contributing factor to climate change. Coal is going away, nobody likes the health concerns, toxicity, extraction etc. It is the majority, IMHO and research, to environmental damage as a whole.

Climate on earth is perpetually changing, but there is a strong scientific consensus that the Earth is warming and that this warming is mainly caused by human activities.

You are of course free to disregard science. You can choose to ignore or deny problems or believe in 'explanations' that are more convenient. There are also those who believe the earth is flat, or was shaped by a guy in the clouds in less than a week.

More reasonably, why does your government decide to buy from enemy countries? That's the question you should be asking.

Not that it is entirely equivalent but I can speak from experience that electrical heating methods including heat pumps which I think is what you're talking about to some degree end up consuming more electricity and thus fossil fuels then if we burnt gas directly. When you take into account the reasonably low efficiency of a power plant having to pipe all that power out to you over resistant lines and the resultant efficiency problems it's really not worth it. While natural gas is piped your system should be able to run on propane and the US and Canada have more than enough propane to sell the world so I don't understand why they're not partnering and making trade deals with these countries.

The Netherlands sits on one of the largest reserves of natural gas, so our system has been based around it for decades and we were a big exporter of it. Extraction of the gas caused earthquakes in these areas so we're in the process of shutting it down. In the short term we import gas from Russia, in the longer term we're busy building wind parks in the North Sea which is supposed to cover some 60% of the demand for power, as I understand it. I foresee that green electricity will be plentiful (so affordable), but gas will be frowned upon for ecological and political reasons. That's why I'm monitoring developments in the field of hybrid heat pumps. I'm not some sort of vegan hippie, it's just what makes sense (or is going to make sense in years to come).

I believe right now ~ 25% of our demand for gas is taken care of in the form of LNG imported by ship across the Atlantic. It's expensive.

[Raion]

Climate on earth is perpetually changing, but there is a strong scientific consensus that the Earth is warming and that this warming is mainly caused by human activities.

You are of course free to disregard science. You can choose to ignore or deny problems or believe in 'explanations' that are more convenient. There are also those who believe the earth is flat, or was shaped by a guy in the clouds in less than a week.

I'm neither a Christian nor a flat Earther, thank the gods. I'm not sure you understand my position; I'm not saying sweep anything under the rug or ignore climate change. I'm saying that from my own research and opinion that I believe we are looking at a combination of natural and industrial causes and that models we have are simply too incomplete. I won't touch the nuts and bolts further,as this isn't the point. Rather, understand that I believe three things:

That we are already tracking a warming climate, and it's a matter of how much, not a matter of delaying it.

That radical economic or social upheaval is simply not feasible and will result in the same backlash that propaganda like Day After Tomorrow (2003) did.

That it's more beneficial to stop trying to change a foregone conclusion and begin working on solving consequences. E.g. think about saving the Marshall Islands, sure, but not the Maldives since it's a repressive trash heap of a nation. Think about building up Venice, but maybe New York should sink below the waves.

The Netherlands sits on one of the largest reserves of natural gas, so our system has been based around it for decades and we were a big exporter of it. Extraction of the gas caused earthquakes in these areas so we're in the process of shutting it down. In the short term we import gas from Russia, in the longer term we're busy building wind parks in the North Sea which is supposed to cover some 60% of the demand for power, as I understand it. I foresee that green electricity will be plentiful (so affordable), but gas will be frowned upon for ecological and political reasons. That's why I'm monitoring developments in the field of hybrid heat pumps. I'm not some sort of vegan hippie, it's just what makes sense (or is going to make sense in years to come).

I believe right now ~ 25% of our demand for gas is taken care of in the form of LNG imported by ship across the Atlantic. It's expensive.

My concerns would be killing arctic seabirds and such, some of which are endangered or use by indigenous tribals as food.

Regarding quakes, most of what I know from environmental engineering is that at best you are getting a 2.0-2.5 magnitude within a range of 10-20 miles from a well. That's well within safe construction constraints of most countries and basically a minor nuisance level. But if we're talking about exceeding such things I can understand a concern. Heat pumps have efficiency concerns at temps below -5°C iirc. Rare here, maybe more common in Nederlands.

Regarding LNG from the Americas, damn, that does sound costly hence why I said propane, which is a bit different. Maybe an undersea pipeline is an option, who knows.

[Irinikus]

@jan-jaap, I’m no idiot, and do follow the science, however of late science has become more and more politically biased, leading to people such as myself to become more sceptical of the claims made in the so-called name of science! (I find your above comment to be rather mocking!!!)

Why do you think they’ve renamed the environmental threat we face from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change”?

The average temperature where I live has dropped off over the past few years!

I absolutely agree that we need to stop producing harmful emissions immediately, as they’re destroying our environment! However I also favour a radical reduction in the number of people living on this planet of FINITE resources.

It’s really funny how people never want to consider population reduction as an option. Even though overpopulation is a problem staring us blatantly in the face! (Half of the world’s current population would starve if it were not for petrochemical-based fertilisers!)

Since South Africa become a “democratic” country in 1994, our population has trebled! This is completely unsustainable!!!

As for transport, Hyper-loop may become a viable option in the future (many countries are already researching the concept), eliminating the need for personal transport altogether (in cities anyway)! As the plan for hyper-loop is not only to link large hubs, but also link parts of cities together, with “stations” placed throughout cities! Eventually this will also eliminate the need for non-military (commercial) air travel, which is a major polluter!

I don’t see electric vehicles as being the future though. Batteries pose a huge environmental risk due to the elements they contain! Coupled to this, they’re extremely expensive! (If the battery pack in your Tesla goes, it’s going to cost you somewhere in the region of $20 000 to replace!!!)