Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes EV fires are hard to put out but they don't have a tank full of gallons of flammable liquid sitting in them either.
I have an EV and a V8 ICE and love both options. What I don't love are EV drivers who have a "holier than thou" stance or ICE drivers who spout inaccuracies about EVs.
The problem is that EV fires burn really hot so it would only take a few minutes to cremate a person stuck inside the vehicle before first responders could even arrive on scene. Perhaps one day EV's will have a built in fire suppression system that provides a basic level of protection in the event of a battery fire. Years ago a coworker of mine owned a DeLorean and those cars were prone to easily catch on fire so she kept a fire extinguisher handy just in case.
Stop spouting misinformation and BS talking points. I am not aware of anyone being trapped in a EV where some fast moving fire killed them before they could get out. Similar to with gasoline, it is people who are killed or severely injured and incapacitated by a collision that die in all vehicle fires.
Stop spouting misinformation and BS talking points. I am not aware of anyone being trapped in a EV where some fast moving fire killed them before they could get out. Similar to with gasoline, it is people who are killed or severely injured and incapacitated by a collision that die in all vehicle fires.
Yes EV fires are hard to put out but they don't have a tank full of gallons of flammable liquid sitting in them either.
I have an EV and a V8 ICE and love both options. What I don't love are EV drivers who have a "holier than thou" stance or ICE drivers who spout inaccuracies about EVs.
The entire EV industry is propped up by falsehoods.
- It isn't "zero emissions" like manufacturers falsely claim
- It isn't objectively better for the environment
- Duke Energy is even more of a monopoly than the oil & gas industry, so it isn't "freeing" us from price gouging cartels in any way.
- Instead of being dependent on global oil, we're dependent on global lithium, cobalt, and nickel. We're even more vulnerable in those markets because we produce very little domestically. Large materials price fluctuations will be the norm.
- The cost of ownership is significantly higher, unless you knew nothing about servicing your vehicles and always bought maintenance heavy brands like BMW and Audi.
- Service costs will go up significantly. Many of these vehicles can only be serviced at the dealership. Tesla doesn't publish any of the repair information that independent shops use to diagnose problems. When you only have one option for repair, customer service and quality usually slip.
There are some instances that hybrid vehicles make sense, like for delivery drivers or taxis/uber with lots of stop and go. For highway commuting, the added weight from the hybrid system often makes it no more efficient than a gas car.
If the purchase incentives were taken away tomorrow and the EPA's CAFE rules rolled back to what they were a few years ago, manufacturers would discontinue most of their EVs. There is too much regulation on the auto industry telling them what they can and cannot make. Consumer demand is not what is pushing the growth in EV sales, its the government and ESG investment strategies.
The entire EV industry is propped up by falsehoods.
This is 100% false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codygreen
Consumer demand is not what is pushing the growth in EV sales
From a national survey released by Consumer Reports with more than 8,000 respondents, 14 percent said they would definitely buy or lease an EV and 22 percent said they would “seriously consider†one. Another 35 percent said they “might consider getting an electric-only vehicle in the future.â€
That’s up from 4 percent who in 2020 said they would definitely buy or lease an EV.
It isn't "zero emissions" like manufacturers falsely claim
From the perspective of the vehicles sold by those manufacturers, it is. I believe the percentage of vehicle owners who think electricity magically appears without any environmental impact is quite small.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codygreen
It isn't objectively better for the environment
I'm not a tree-hugger, but I am an electrical engineer and from where I sit, looking at the overall situation, I believe the weight of the evidence supports the notion that EVs are less bad for the environment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codygreen
Duke Energy is even more of a monopoly than the oil & gas industry
Duke is an intentional monopoly, authorized by the NC General Assembly and still heavily regulated at both the state and federal level. I have misgivings about how Duke runs their business, but I have many more misgivings about Exxon et al.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codygreen
Instead of being dependent on global oil, we're dependent on global lithium, cobalt, and nickel. We're even more vulnerable in those markets because we produce very little domestically. Large materials price fluctuations will be the norm.
The global supply chain is what it is. You may have noticed that the price of crude oil fluctuates, too. A significant percentage of nickel comes from Canada and Australia, two of our closest allies. Actually, cobalt prices have been falling recently because of the enormous increase in supply from the DR of Congo. North America and South America, specifically Chile (with whom the U.S. has free trade, interestingly) are in a very good position to lead the supply of lithium.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codygreen
The cost of ownership is significantly higher.
Yes, although this has more to do with increasing computerization of all vehicles. Another factor is the rather illogical insistence on long-range EVs, which drives up battery mass, which requires more energy to overcome inertia, etc. I am hopeful that consumers will eventually discover the tradeoffs of long-range EVs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codygreen
Service costs will go up significantly. Many of these vehicles can only be serviced at the dealership. Tesla doesn't publish any of the repair information that independent shops use to diagnose problems. When you only have one option for repair, customer service and quality usually slip.
Yes, a very valid concern. I would add that repair costs are also higher. However, we see this same right-to-repair and feasibility-to-repair battle in other contexts, such as John Deere farm equipment. Again, this has more to do with the sophisticated nature of the products which requires specialized test equipment and training. It's been a long time since I could change the plugs and set the points on my 1963 Ford.
Quote:
Originally Posted by codygreen
If the purchase incentives were taken away tomorrow and the EPA's CAFE rules rolled back to what they were a few years ago, manufacturers would discontinue most of their EVs. There is too much regulation on the auto industry telling them what they can and cannot make. Consumer demand is not what is pushing the growth in EV sales, its the government and ESG investment strategies.
No. This is a technology displacement cycle that is as inevitable as diesel locomotives replacing steam engines on railroads. Government policy can slow it down or speed it up, but the switchover is inevitable. As an electrical engineer, I've seen this coming for decades.
Tesla gets corp tax credits, federal tax credits, doesn't pay gas taxes, carbon tax credits and now you want a personal property tax discount. At least it's consistent.
Tesla (any EV Owners) in North Carolina pay the equivalent in taxes for road use that an F150 driver driving 15,000 miles a year pays to account for the gas taxes that pay for the roads.
Tesla (any EV Owners) in North Carolina pay the equivalent in taxes for road use that an F150 driver driving 15,000 miles a year pays to account for the gas taxes that pay for the roads.
How do you get that? The electric vehicle fee is $140, while gas tax is 40.5 cents per gallon. So the EV fee is equivalent to ~345 gallons of gas.
15,000 miles on 345 gallons is 43.5 mpg, which is more than twice what a non-hybrid F-150 gets.
The current bill going through looks to raise the EV fee to $180, so equivalent to ~444 gallons of gas. At 15,000 miles, that would equate to a little under 34 mpg.
I believe the current estimate is that the average North Carolinian pays $225 to $250 in gas tax per year, so a lower mileage vehicle like F-150 would be expected to pay more than that. Not sure what the average annual mileage driven is.
How do you get that? The electric vehicle fee is $140, while gas tax is 40.5 cents per gallon. So the EV fee is equivalent to ~345 gallons of gas.
15,000 miles on 345 gallons is 43.5 mpg, which is more than twice what a non-hybrid F-150 gets.
The current bill going through looks to raise the EV fee to $180, so equivalent to ~444 gallons of gas. At 15,000 miles, that would equate to a little under 34 mpg.
I believe the current estimate is that the average North Carolinian pays $225 to $250 in gas tax per year, so a lower mileage vehicle like F-150 would be expected to pay more than that. Not sure what the average annual mileage driven is.
I posted the calculations earlier as well. I don't know what the real average number of miles driven here is, but I've seen some legislators claim it's something really high like 16-18k. That would be well above the national average. Given the number of people working from home that just doesn't seem possible, though I'm sure it is probably pre-pandemic data and there are some people that drive quite a bit more (I'm one of them) to offset the many that don't. Would be interesting to see the mean.
And if $225 is correct, that would be 555 gallons at current rates (they raised the NC tax 2 cents per gallon last year, the federal tax has stayed the same for a long time). That's equivalent to about 14,000 miles if the vehicle gets a bit over 25 mpg. The numbers they claim would be less suspect if they were not, at the same time, tossing out all the same misinformation that some in this thread are.
It really goes back to the fact that the gas tax has become a bad way to collect taxes for road use. It has already been bad for probably 10 years, well prior to EVs becoming anything more than hobbyist toys just due to increases in gas mileage and it will only become worse, and more unfair, as time goes on.
The government will always find a way to get more money through increased gas taxes and registration fees or special EV assessments. When water restrictions were put in place and people actually used less water the municipalities then complained because of the reduced revenue stream to fund operating costs so they just raised the rates and consumers paid more for less. Revenue funding for roads will be no different and we'll all pay more one way or another. There is no free lunch unless you're the government and they'll just legally take whatever they want from you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
