Mazda Claims There Is No Demand for Electric Vehicles

[Jagger100]

Another issue here is Mazda is in Japan. Japan looks like if the government of Japan is not onboard with a increase in EV cars, it isn't going to happen in Japan. I could see Japan having an infrastructure plan for XXX electrical generation nationally and YYY oil consumption. Upsetting the Apple cart will trash that planning. Toyota can sell enough Plug ins or EV's in the US alone to offer that without offering them at home. They may offer them at home for marketing purposes without having any plans to do it on a widespread basis. Mazda probably can't get enough sales internationally and domestically to consider doing it.

Until the price of oil gets stupid or cost & performance improve a little more or a combination of the two, there will only be an enthusiast market for EV's. I would expect cost & performance to be no longer a barrier in 15 years. Stupid oil prices will only accelerate that.

 

[Simplyfun]

Yep, you are so right, he can't Arc Weld and charge his EV at the same time. EVs are doomed.

My personal example was my arc welder; your personal example might be your meth lab.

You missed the part where I quoted his circuit as being against code in any case.

 

[Snowdog]

My personal example was my arc welder; your personal example might be your meth lab.

You missed the part where I quoted his circuit as being against code in any case.

I doubt that. It was wired in by an Electrician, that is putting their career on the line if they do anything out of code. I don't know the exact details, except that they didn't have to run any new cable, or update the switch panel, just wire it in and add a disconnect switch in the garage.

 

[bigdogchris]

I wouldn't say there is no demand but I think Mazda does have a point to a certain degree. Because of the limited distance you can travel in an electric vehicle you can either buy one as a toy (rich) or if you only commute a short distance. On top of that you'll almost certainly need a second vehicle unless you live in a metropolitan area.

 

[Snowdog]

I wouldn't say there is no demand but I think Mazda does have a point to a certain degree. Because of the limited distance you can travel in an electric vehicle you can either buy one as a toy (rich) or if you only commute a short distance. On top of that you'll almost certainly need a second vehicle unless you live in a metropolitan area.

The reality is that most households are already multi-Car, so replacing one with an EV should not create an issue.

Also commuting distance for 99% of the population is a non issue. The new group of EVs have 200+ Mile Range (Chevy Bolt, Tesla Model 3), and only lunatic fringe has a commute that would challenge that:

 

[Krenum]

Mazda is correct. They cost too much & are too expensive to maintain.

 

[Simplyfun]

The new group of EVs have 200+ Mile Range (Chevy Bolt, Tesla Model 3), and only lunatic fringe has a commute that would challenge that:

It's not just the commute, it's climate, some people work their vehicles etc.. Basically EV's are not friendly to rural environments no matter how it's spun. City folk who drive their local train routes to work and back are just stupid anyhow and an EV is just there to make them feel smug about doing it, especially since these are the same folks who hate nuclear power. Morons.

All energy generation, transmission and storage no matter what shape it takes generates an environmental impact. I think people are kidding themselves about EV's and I think until cities like Paris, New York and London ban private vehicles nothing will be taken seriously.

It's not just the lunatic fringe. I've explored and DONE so many alternate energy forms the average person will label me that nutcase. I produce nearly 1500L a year of ethanol and methanol to offset energy costs (from wood and corn), but my labour costs still exceed the price at the pump by a decent margin even here in tax happy Canada.

At the end of the day I just pat myself on the back about being carbon neutral and do whatever the hell I please.

It pleases me not to buy EV's. They make little sense. Driving less, local distribution - that makes sense.

 

[Poik]

There's no FUD here. Depending on how the draw is rationed on your 200 amp panel, 30 more amps can take you over the threshold. Not everywhere has natural gas or has a straight forward wiring scheme. I for one have a normal home with liquid fuel for heat and hot water and a pellet furnace. Given that , it was only wired for 100Amps and in order to get my ARC welder hooked up properly I had to

Replace the the main panel
Replace the incoming lines (also moved from overhead to underground)
replace the meter base assembly
PAY my transmission utility to upgrade the local transformer

Would have been the same for an EV.

In the "friend" scenario you mentioned, he had a 240/30 amp circuit already in his garage. Wonderful. So now I cant do anything in the garage (like weld or heat it with electricity) because the car is charging? In that scenario I would have had to run a new stub to the garage with 6 gauge and a 60 amp supporting circuit to do it right.

What you're saying is "make do" but this is often isn't to code once you add up that maximum resistive load in the local panel. It depends what else is going on.

Also just to be that guy, your 30amp charging station requires wiring and a circuit breaker capable of handling 40amps, not 30amps. So you buds installation is illegal.

Thank you. Someone gets it.
Above 200A you're into specialty stuff. A main service disconnect. Potential for the conduit coming from the transformer being too small. For overhead services you'd need a second mast.
Very few homes have subpanels in their garage and when they do they're often 30A like in this scenario. I have friends with just normal 15A wiring in their detached garage and in one case it's shared with some plugs in the house. It should have never been done that way but it was and that's how it goes. Someone was unable or unwilling to do it right, he but hey it works. Some garages also have a main service in them which is great but it doesn't change the fact that it may be loaded beyond the ability to simply add another 9600W. Also, 30A fed with 10/3 is really only 24A max draw. It's better than 16A you get from a 20A circuit but for range to increase you need more energy. I don't think efficiency is a major issue for EV's but maybe I'm wrong there. More energy needs more power.

Here's a scenario I came across today that's quite common. Customer called me up asking if I'd be able to hook up their new electric fireplace this week. I told him that I could probably make that work but if he could send the specs and a picture of his panel that would really help me out. The fireplace is 120/240V and 1500/2400W respectively. He'd been told that it could just be plugged into a standard circuit and everything would work great. He mentioned that there was a switch in the receptacle that would even make it 240V but I don't know what that means.
So while these fireplaces get plugged into or added on to existing circuits all the time, they're all technically legally illegal. Because they have a standard 15A plug you can plug it in to a standard receptacle, however 1500W is 60W more than the capacity of a 15A circuit. It's not the end of the world but depending on what is on that circuit it can be problematic.
The code states something to the effect of where the load is known you need to provide service to it. Since it's a renovation the load wasn't known and you have to do what you can to make it work. In an ideal world this would mean running a dedicated line to everything but in reality that can be a massive undertaking.
This is a problem for a 1500W load. A car charger can be in excess of 9600W each. There's no work around for that. You can't take a couple lightly loaded circuits and group them to free up something for a dedicated circuit. That's more power than is allotted for your range. Probably similar to the range and dryer combined (unless you have a ridiculous custom commercial range, then all bets are off).
All of that doesn't mean that it wouldn't work fine. For some they'd never know their service was technically overloaded. I've seen homes with 100A services with full suites and they've never had an issue that they've known about. 2 ranges, dryers, and 8 to 10 people living in the house and no problems. But according to the code that doesn't matter. I can tell the customer their service is overloaded and explain how it could be fixed but I can't fix it unless they're willing and able to get it done.

 

[Bowman15]

Mazda is correct. They cost too much & are too expensive to maintain.

Sure they are but somebody has to be first while they keep inventing new and better tech. Later Mazda will be bankrupt but hey, remember several years ago when they were correct? Yeah me neither...

 

[Simplyfun]

I doubt that. It was wired in by an Electrician, that is putting their career on the line if they do anything out of code. I don't know the exact details, except that they didn't have to run any new cable, or update the switch panel, just wire it in and add a disconnect switch in the garage.

Doubt doesn't matter, you stated specifics about his existing circuit and then tried to make them stick because they were done by an electrician. The electrician doesn't gaf if you decide to stick a 30 amp load on a 30 amp circuit. He can just say you lied and said it was 80% duty. He can take your word for it, you own the home after all. The fact that you went and put a 100% duty load on that circuit after he explained the issue and you signed and paid off the work order isn't his problem.

 

[Snowdog]

It's not just the commute, it's climate, some people work their vehicles etc.. Basically EV's are not friendly to rural environments no matter how it's spun. City folk who drive their local train routes to work and back are just stupid anyhow and an EV is just there to make them feel smug about doing it, especially since these are the same folks who hate nuclear power. Morons.

All energy generation, transmission and storage no matter what shape it takes generates an environmental impact. I think people are kidding themselves about EV's and I think until cities like Paris, New York and London ban private vehicles nothing will be taken seriously.

It's not just the lunatic fringe. I've explored and DONE so many alternate energy forms the average person will label me that nutcase. I produce nearly 1500L a year of ethanol and methanol to offset energy costs (from wood and corn), but my labour costs still exceed the price at the pump by a decent margin even here in tax happy Canada.

At the end of the day I just pat myself on the back about being carbon neutral and do whatever the hell I please.

Such hilarious irony of someone complaining about EV drivers being Smug and then patting himself on the back for using alcohol (almost certainly negative net), in Canada where electricity is mostly from renewable sources.

Even in the best industrial processes, producing alcohol takes about as much energy as input as it produces for output, some small scale operator doing a personal setup is almost certainly producing negative net energy, a producing more pollution overall than just burning pump gas.

 

[Simplyfun]

Such hilarious irony of someone complaining about EV drivers being Smug and then patting himself on the back for using alcohol (almost certainly negative net), in Canada where electricity is mostly from renewable sources.

Even in the best industrial processes, producing alcohol takes about as much energy as input as it produces for output, some small scale operator doing a personal setup is almost certainly producing negative net energy, a producing more pollution overall than just burning pump gas.

Most electricity in Canada is from renewable sources? which ass cheek did you lift to pull that out? right or left?

I'm well aware that trading input heat energy from wood and converting it into alcohol production is a net energy loss, however I have yet to work out how to liquefy cords of hardwood and put them in the truck and into storage. Let me know your magic secret. I promise not to tell.

However, given that source material and heat input is carbon neutral, how exactly do you figure I am producing more pollution when I do this than pump gas? I mean I know I ate beans for supper last night, and I haven been pleasant to be around today... but seriously, what math are you using?

Are you aware of the two outputs from making charcoal? You get charcoal and methanol. Do you know what's used to produce it? Firewood. Usually butts I get dropped off in the yard because loggers can't always sell them from the runways and they know I'll take them.

So using a carbon neutral but labor intensive process I get charcoal and methanol. But pump gas is less polluting. Check.

 

[Ducman69]

Also commuting distance for 99% of the population is a non issue. The new group of EVs have 200+ Mile Range (Chevy Bolt, Tesla Model 3), and only lunatic fringe has a commute that would challenge that.

They don't have a specific range anymore than a gasoline car has a specific fuel economy. They have ballpark range estimates. Whether you are using the AC, using the headlights, stopping and starting because of unanticipated heavy traffic, the temperature outside, etc. will affect the battery capacity. And just as with your iPad, phone, or laptop, while you may have had full battery capacity year one, you know you won't have that capacity year three... in fact, most manufacturers only warranty their laptop batteries for a single year, because they know damn well that batteries often have reduced life after even just 12 months.

So lets say that you have a 200 mile range though.

That's not really a 200 mile range, that's a 100 mile range because you have to get back home to charge.

And that 100 mile range is not usable, because you aren't going to drive 99 miles before pulling up into the driveway, since that range is just a ballpark estimate and getting stranded sucks!

Gasoline cars typically are designed with a 40 mile range after showing "empty" with the fuel light dummy light on, as a margin of safety.

So lets apply the same to the EV, and you now have a 60 mile range.

My commute is only 30 miles, so even that is a non-issue, except that today I'm not parked in the garage and am in the cul-de-sac in front of my house because the Vette's in the way and I don't feel like shuffling. So what happens if just one day out of the year I forget to charge the car or don't because of inconvenience or a power outage or something, what now? I now can probably make it to work and back again, but that's stressful to be coming back so close to empty.

And that's just 90% of my driving. I'm not exclusively commuting, and occasionally may go to work, come back from work, and then head out to the airport with my dad, and back... wait, sorry dad, I have to wait for my car to recharge. That's annoying.

There are simply so many compromises over just going with a plug-in hybrid.

With a Chevy Volt, you still have a 53 mile pure electric range for your commuting, but the peace of mind that you can go 420 miles combined and never have to worry about not having a full charge. On average, Chevy expects owners will go about a thousand miles between fill ups at the gas station, and that's plenty efficient.

As battery tech advances, plugin-hybrids like the Volt can focus more and more on battery and less and less on ICE, which is very organic.

 

[Snowdog]

They don't have a specific range anymore than a gasoline car has a specific fuel economy. They have ballpark range estimates. Whether you are using the AC, using the headlights, stopping and starting because of unanticipated heavy traffic, the temperature outside, etc. will affect the battery capacity. And just as with your iPad, phone, or laptop, while you may have had full battery capacity year one, you know you won't have that capacity year three... in fact, most manufacturers only warranty their laptop batteries for a single year, because they know damn well that batteries often have reduced life after even just 12 months.

So lets say that you have a 200 mile range though.

That's not really a 200 mile range, that's a 100 mile range because you have to get back home to charge.

And that 100 mile range is not usable, because you aren't going to drive 99 miles before pulling up into the driveway, since that range is just a ballpark estimate and getting stranded sucks!

Gasoline cars typically are designed with a 40 mile range after showing "empty" with the fuel light dummy light on, as a margin of safety.

So lets apply the same to the EV, and you now have a 60 mile range.

By your tortured "logic", a Nissan Leaf has a range of about 5 miles.

I don't what it is about EVs that pushes some people to such rationalizations.

You don't have to worry. No one is going to force you to buy an EV, so you don't have to resort to such twisted logic to justify them not working for you.

 

[Ducman69]

By your tortured "logic", a Nissan Leaf has a range of about 5 miles.

I don't what it is about EVs that pushes some people to such rationalizations.

You don't have to worry. No one is going to force you to buy an EV, so you don't have to resort to such twisted logic to justify them not working for you.

I'm just being realistic in the practicality of say a Chevy Volt vs a Chevy Bolt. Even if they cost the same (they don't, batteries are hugely expensive, so the Bolt costs $3K more despite all the government subsidies), the Volt is the more sensible well-rounded engineering solution.

Honestly, I just wish I could stop making part of the monthly payments on stranger's impractical electric cars. I have enough bills of my own already.

 

[Snowdog]

I'm just being realistic in the practicality of say a Chevy Volt vs a Chevy Bolt. Even if they cost the same (they don't, batteries are hugely expensive, so the Bolt costs $3K more despite all the government subsidies), the Volt is the more sensible well-rounded engineering solution.

Honestly, I just wish I could stop making part of the monthly payments on stranger's impractical electric cars. I have enough bills of my own already.

There is nothing realistic about arbitrary subtractions from EV range. A Bolt with 238 mile range is non issue for commuting for 99%+ of the population. There is also more to practicality than total range. The Bolt is has more room, and has a very simply low maintenance drivetrain. The Volt has all the systems of both EVs and ICE cars, so increased complexity and maintenance. My goal is two simple cars. A simple manual transmission sports car like an MX-5, and pure EV like the Bolt. Rather than the complexity of trying to do everything in one.


As far as whining about EV subsides:

Fossil Fuels With $550 Billion Subsidies Hurt Renewables

Not to mention, all the expensive misadventures in the Middle East chasing oil.

 

[Snowdog]

Most electricity in Canada is from renewable sources? which ass cheek did you lift to pull that out? right or left?
.

http://www.electricity.ca/media/pdfs/EnvironmentallyPreferrablePower/2-powergenerationincanada.pdf

"Hydro power produces the largest share at close to 60% of Canada’s electrical production, followed by fossil fuels (coal, natural gas and oil) at 28% and nuclear at 12% (a number that is increasing due to planned refurbishments). Wind, bioenergy and other sources are now being considered as contributors to the overall portfolio, although combined, they currently provide only about 2% of Canadian electricity production."

I would say ~60% from Hydro, counts as most.

 

[Dan_D]

How the hell is an electric vehicle 0 emission? It's powered from a big dirty power plant.

A lot of people that buy into solar, wind and a lot of eco "friendly" crap don't realize the real impact of those technologies or their short comings.

 

[Dayaks]

Electric would make no sense for me personally. Electric costs too much where I am.

Also - all electric degrades range by 40% in cold weather. Have fun with that plus any battery range degradation. Your 150 mile car struggles to limp 70 miles. Shorter than my family's commutes....

Maybe when battery tech is better and gas costs more it'll make sense.

 

[Simplyfun]

http://www.electricity.ca/media/pdfs/EnvironmentallyPreferrablePower/2-powergenerationincanada.pdf

"Hydro power produces the largest share at close to 60% of Canada’s electrical production, followed by fossil fuels (coal, natural gas and oil) at 28% and nuclear at 12% (a number that is increasing due to planned refurbishments). Wind, bioenergy and other sources are now being considered as contributors to the overall portfolio, although combined, they currently provide only about 2% of Canadian electricity production."

I would say ~60% from Hydro, counts as most.

OK if you lump Hydroelectricity into renewable it works, I give you that 100%. As a definition itself however, renewable is a separate line and does not include hydro oddly enough (you can't make this shit up, it makes no sense). I'm not going to split hairs here, I agree with you, it seems renewable enough for me and should just be called that, why it's not.. I dunno.

The only thing I have there regrading hydro is that most of it is shipped from Quebec to New York and other US states, the largest center of the country uses electricity mainly derived from nuclear and fossil fuels once you take out Hydro Quebec sales to the US.

Still seems renewables make up the mass of generation even if that's not the type of electricity mostly purchased in Canada by Canadian consumers.

Still doesn't make my carbon neutral production of methanol and charcoal the most polluting thing since we burned barbie dolls for warmth however.

 

[Ducman69]

As far as whining about EV subsides:

Fossil Fuels With $550 Billion Subsidies Hurt Renewables

That's a blatant lie and you know it. Shame.... shaaaaaame. *rings bell* Shame.

Your source for this lie is the IEA, an alternative energy lobby group with an obvious agenda; promoting what they say they are promoting on their homepage. Surprise.

The fossil fuel industry doesn't receive one single penny in a true "subsidy". They receive tax breaks for investment in alternative fuel production and R&D, which is outside their normal/primary business operation (Shell getting money for producing ethanol for example doesn't REALLY count as a fossil fuel subsidy IMO), which is why the big players consider themselves energy companies and not oil companies, as well as tax breaks for "green" technologies that are cleaner, such as tax breaks you as a consumer get for certain energy star upgrades around the home.

Facts are facts, and that is that the fossil fuel energy industries are historically the world's largest tax payers as a percentage of their gross profits. For example, ConocoPhilips effective tax rate (this is the number that most closely represents true tax burden... for example, bailout GM received massive tax credits as part of the deal, but still had an effective tax rate of 37%) was 51.5% in 2014. Chevron wasn't quite as bad, but still far above average with 43.2% effective tax rate for example.

Lets compare that to another very profitable company that has more cash reserves than the US treasury, Apple. Apple's effective tax rate the same year was 26.2%.

 

[bigdogchris]

The reality is that most households are already multi-Car, so replacing one with an EV should not create an issue.

Also commuting distance for 99% of the population is a non issue. The new group of EVs have 200+ Mile Range (Chevy Bolt, Tesla Model 3), and only lunatic fringe has a commute that would challenge that:

Range anxiety in people is real whether it's warranted or not.

 

[Snowdog]

That's a blatant lie and you know it. Shame.... shaaaaaame. *rings bell* Shame.

Your source for this lie is the IEA, an alternative energy lobby group with an obvious agenda; promoting what they say they are promoting on their homepage. Surprise.

The fossil fuel industry doesn't receive one single penny in a true "subsidy". They receive tax breaks....

Like EV buyers receive a Tax break when buying an EV. You are just playing semantic games.

 

[travisty]

I have absolutely no interest in them. Not even a top of the line Tesla. They don't tickle me at all, certainly not with their current range limitations and charging time issues.

The tech will need to grow and mature much more before I would consider one.

and drove twice a year to here;

And there is not one single Fast-Charge EV station along the route or at the destination.

I think you would have similar reservations.

But not everyone does so it balances out.

Not much fast charging around me either. I'm not one to drive long distances though. When I do I just rent a car. Better to put all those miles on a car I don't own IMO.

 

[Ducman69]

Like EV buyers receive a Tax break when buying an EV. You are just playing semantic games.

If you say "I'm not saying that pedophiles are great" and I partially quote you as "...pedophiles are great", that kind of changes the meaning of the statement, right? Next time, try a complete statement quote from me.

My point was very clear, the tax incentives that are supposedly "for oil" are actually "for ethanol" for example, that's not really a oil subsidy. That's an ethanol subsidy to the oil industry. Secondly, subsidies imply that the tax burden is very low, which is nonsense as the effective tax rate for the oil industry is far higher than any other industry as a whole. Thus, your insinuation that the fossil fuel industry is net subsidized is complete nonsense.

Every barrel of oil is heavily taxed to increase what would otherwise be even cheaper, whereas every barrel of ethanol is heavily subsidized to decrease what would otherwise be even more expensive. Do you understand the concept now?

If the government completely stopped regulating say EV and gasoline, gasoline itself and gasoline vehicles would be far cheaper for the consumers. EV vehicles and solar and so forth would be more expensive. So we say ICE is net heavily taxed and EV is net heavily subsidized.

 

[bigdogchris]

Interesting read related to this conversation:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brooke...on-an-800-mile-road-trip-report/#5eb38488c980

 

[Snowdog]

If you say "I'm not saying that pedophiles are great" and I partially quote you as "...pedophiles are great", that kind of changes the meaning of the statement, right? Next time, try a complete statement quote from me.

My point was very clear, the tax incentives that are supposedly "for oil" are actually "for ethanol" for example, that's not really a oil subsidy. That's an ethanol subsidy to the oil industry. Secondly, subsidies imply that the tax burden is very low, which is nonsense as the effective tax rate for the oil industry is far higher than any other industry as a whole. Thus, your insinuation that the fossil fuel industry is net subsidized is complete nonsense.

Every barrel of oil is heavily taxed to increase what would otherwise be even cheaper, whereas every barrel of ethanol is heavily subsidized to decrease what would otherwise be even more expensive. Do you understand the concept now?

If the government completely stopped regulating say EV and gasoline, gasoline itself and gasoline vehicles would be far cheaper for the consumers. EV vehicles and solar and so forth would be more expensive. So we say ICE is net heavily taxed and EV is net heavily subsidized.

Get off your high horse. You said the Oil Industry doesn't receive subsidies they receive tax breaks.

Same damn thing.

Because EV buyers don't receive subsidies, they receive a tax breaks as well.

Governement report on fossil fuel(not ethanol) subsidies.
Progress Report on Fossil Fuel Subsidies:
https://www.treasury.gov/open/Documents/USA FFSR progress report to G20 2014 Final.pdf

 

[Simplyfun]

A lot of people that buy into solar, wind and a lot of eco "friendly" crap don't realize the real impact of those technologies or their short comings.

I'm going to talk about an eco FRIENDLY product called wood because I think it has the very least impact possible.

The only environmental short coming I actually know of from using wood biomass for fuel generation is that when you remove the wood from the area it was produced and don't put the ashes back there you can and will deplete the area of calcium. I don't experience this, because we remove the ashes back to the cut area and we're on the Canadian Shield (very calcium heavy) but calcium depletion is becoming common in managed forestry.

I've also experimented with wood fermentation in a closed environment in the swamp for methane gas collection but I was not at all successful, it just gets too cold here for the swamp to stay liquid and keep the container warm.

Basically producing charcoal/methanol and using wood directly in wood gasification operations is the only thing I've had luck with. To put it in perspective running the tractor on wood gasification and allowing the genset to operate off the PTO can very cheaply and efficiently produce 15KW of electricity. In fact if I'm puttering around I will do this just pump the electricity into the grid to offset my hyrdo bill (grid tie generation is allowed, I don't make money at it I only offset what I do use) Really the only reason to interrupt the process is to change the engine oil. I heat with wood too and just back it up with propane.

Anyhow, when you move off to stored energy for mobile applications, wood is possible but it's not reasonable. No dude commuting to work is going to stop every half hour and fill the hopper with charcoal or wood chips while he navigates downtown in some urban center. There's really no emissions of note in a proper gasifier but it can have smokey start up and shut down periods - wouldn't that be great in underground parking. That leaves us with basically the other output from charcoal making with can be methanol, you can store methanol easily and cheaply but it takes a lot of charcoal production capacity to have any serious quantity of liquid fuel. Even then that liquid fuel only contains 60 per cent of the potential energy per liter that gasoline does, so you need more to do the same things you were doing with gas and a lot more on top of that to match diesels potential energy per liter. The final emissions output from burning methanol is greater than from direct gasification and pretty much requires the same pollution controls as gasoline, but it's still a carbon neutral liquid fuel because of the source material.

Using the wood fired genset to produce electricity and storing it in batteries might be useful, but if you have room for acres of firewood and labor to keep it running, the odds are very good you don't own anything smaller than an SUV with 3 ton towing capacity for very good reasons. On the plus side ICE engines are cheap to buy and fix, burning wood gas keeps their carbon and emissions footprint tiny and it's really easy to recycle an ICE.

While all this is workable, I'm not seeing any magic bullets. I'm just trading my own curiosity and labor for energy from wood, but it's just not feasible for 99.99% of people. I know there's been studies out the hoohah done on this but it's still just cheaper to have a tank of oil/gas/natural gas delivered to your door (once you add in labor costs/time) so people vote with their wallets and do that.

Maybe a day will come when it's cheaper to buy and use electric vehicles and their shortcomings will go away. I have no idea.

 

[sleepeeg3]

Gee, I wonder if they might have monetary reasons for making such a claim. Like perhaps, ICE vehicles are more profitable?

Hopefully! Company's that aren't in the business to stay profitable, don't stay companies.

 

[Ducman69]

Get off your high horse. You said the Oil Industry doesn't receive subsidies they receive tax breaks.

Same damn thing.

Because EV buyers don't receive subsidies, they receive a tax breaks as well.

Governement report on fossil fuel(not ethanol) subsidies.
Progress Report on Fossil Fuel Subsidies:
https://www.treasury.gov/open/Documents/USA FFSR progress report to G20 2014 Final.pdf

High horse?

I explained this in great detail.

If the government didn't interfere with taxes/subsidies, would oil and ICE vehicles be CHEAPER or MORE EXPENSIVE on the free market? It would be cheaper.

If the government didn't interfere with taxes/subsidies, would alternative-energy and electric vehicles be CHEAPER or MORE EXPENSIVE on the free market? It would be more expensive.

So you made a bullshit claim that oil subsidies are taking away money that could go to electric, when oil is a MASSIVE net tax payer.

Not one penny goes to subsidize the net price of oil, the opposite is the case with heavy taxation.

Quitcherbullshit.

 

[gwarren007]

I would never own a pure electric car. No sense to me. I'm waiting for the diesel electric hybrid with 100mpg and 1000 range between fill ups. The tech is already here, VWs were getting 55mpg all the time, now make it a hybrid and lets get 100mpg.

 

[dbu8554]

Nothing against mazda directly... but that's just stupid of them to claim.

Put their most expensive car up against the cheapest Tesla and see which one people choose.

Owned a 05 RX8 I bought brand new, was a fun little car for a while. Zero torque and it blew it's apex seals early (warranty covered it), moved to an 08 Z06 after that, and now a 2017 Volt... with plans for a Model 3 after they've been put through the ringer for a year or so. (What can I say I'm a car whore) lol

People don't understand how amazing max torque off the line is, and currently I only have to go to a gas station once every 4 or 5 weeks, and that's with me driving 80 miles a day for work. Electric is the future.

Weird how their warranty covered a wearing part like apex seals.

 

[collegeboy69us]

Weird how their warranty covered a wearing part like apex seals.

The apex seals are no different than a piston ring in a regular style car... so you would expect them to last at least the warranty period (Car Had something like 45k miles on it when the failure occurred, their power train warrenty was for 60K i believe at the time)

They just put a refub motor in it, and didn't cost me a dime. Needless to say I sold it VERY soon afterwards and upgraded to a 7.0L Z06

 

[AK0tA]

I do have a wood powered gasification driven tractor , I guess I could put a genset on the PTO and then charge the car. I have some hard coal (maybe a half ton) but it doesn't crack all that great in my little gasifier, I doubt I'd get far.

What type of coal are you using? Soft lignite coal just crumbles and burns to quick and cold, anthracite is hard to light and does not cake up very will but it does burn hot. Bituminous is what you are looing for as it would have the best gasification. That tractor is cool.

 

[Simplyfun]

What type of coal are you using? Soft lignite coal just crumbles and burns to quick and cold, anthracite is hard to light and does not cake up very will but it does burn hot. Bituminous is what you are looing for as it would have the best gasification. That tractor is cool.

Yeah I agree with what you're saying. The coal I do have is anthracite that was a leftover removal from home heating of an old place I bought on the lake. I made a forge from a brake drum off a tractor and use it in there sometimes. The kid likes it more than the propane forge because he likes to video himself making knives (rolls eyes).

I make enough charcoal and methanol every year to run it anyhow. Took some serious messing around to get carb materials for it to withstand the methanol when running on liquid fuel but I mostly just fill the charcoal hopper. But there's moments when you just want to move it 20 feet or load it on the float and starting the gasifier is a PITA in those instances so having both is pretty essential. Overall it develops more power from the gasification setup than from burning methanol. I'd say gasification and ethanol about the same, but I don't make fuel ethanol that often, usually just for the small engines (woodsplitter, lawn tractor don't run well at all on methanol and do fine on ethanol). Tried getting the chainsaw onto ethanol but hated the way it worked, scrapped that idea and use only gasoline now in handheld gas tools.

I do this stuff just to prove a point, but I have zero illusions that it's practical really considering how much labour goes into the process. On the other hand, we got 20 tons of potatoes last year that were entirely managed with carbon neutral solutions, even picking up the chicken shit and running the manure spreader was done with the gasifier. Sale of said potatoes paid for quite a few improvements to the overall process and even bought some new maple syrup equipment.

I just think that having the ability to provide shelter and to produce food and create energy with what's in your immediate area is something I needed to be able to do. Pretty much the only practical energy around me is wood, average wind speed is very low, we're far enough north that solar is just meh. Wood though.. lots of that.

I kind of rate this process about the same as picking up a Ryzen/mobo combo to mess with even though you have a perfectly good Intel solution already. I'm just doing it for kicks.

 

[DocSavage]

There's no FUD here. Depending on how the draw is rationed on your 200 amp panel, 30 more amps can take you over the threshold. Not everywhere has natural gas or has a straight forward wiring scheme. I for one have a normal home with liquid fuel for heat and hot water and a pellet furnace. Given that , it was only wired for 100Amps and in order to get my ARC welder hooked up properly I had to

Replace the the main panel
Replace the incoming lines (also moved from overhead to underground)
replace the meter base assembly
PAY my transmission utility to upgrade the local transformer

Would have been the same for an EV.

In the "friend" scenario you mentioned, he had a 240/30 amp circuit already in his garage. Wonderful. So now I cant do anything in the garage (like weld or heat it with electricity) because the car is charging? In that scenario I would have had to run a new stub to the garage with 6 gauge and a 60 amp supporting circuit to do it right.

What you're saying is "make do" but this is often isn't to code once you add up that maximum resistive load in the local panel. It depends what else is going on.

Also just to be that guy, your 30amp charging station requires wiring and a circuit breaker capable of handling 40amps, not 30amps. So you buds installation is illegal.

Yeah, my 100 year old home still has a 60 amp service -- doesn't matter too much with the gas furnace and stove, but I'm not sure it'll handle central air. One of these days I'll have to upgrade it.

 

[thejokker]

I think we need to take note of two very important words lurking in that quote: "potential" and "exposed". So in case of an exposure of the chemicals used and manufacturing processes to the environment or humans it can be very damaging. Compared to the pollution of the atmosphere with fossil fuels which is not just a potential, it's a constant reality. Basically they say that a catastrophe at a battery plant in which lots of the chemicals would get into the environment could be very damaging to the environment. Since normally the chemicals used in batteries are not exposed to the environment. Batteries have no emissions. And the manufacturing of the batteries is not done in the open either.

Seem like another hitpiece meant to generate FUD about batteries. I wonder who would finance such "journalism". If the domain "fool.com" wasn't telling enough.

The effects are minimal when electric cars are a niche market. In the event that electric cars become mainstream than the manufacturing and disposal of electric car batteries could grow into a significant problem. It is quite possible that hundreds of millions of gas powered cars will be cleaner than hundreds of millions of battery powered cars. Sorry if Electric Car/Battery technology is not all rainbows and unicorns...

FYI: Motley Fools have been providing financial analysis since 1993.

 

[Jagger100]

Mazda is correct. They cost too much & are too expensive to maintain.

So were the first IC engine cars. In fact we had over 20 years of IC power cars in that situation until Ford brought out the Model T and changed that.

 

[Simplyfun]

Yeah, my 100 year old home still has a 60 amp service -- doesn't matter too much with the gas furnace and stove, but I'm not sure it'll handle central air. One of these days I'll have to upgrade it.

back in the 80's I built a propane ICE driven compressor for AC with it's own supplementary 12V generator to drive the blower and fan. Wasn't even that hard, rotary compressor came off an old walk in cooler, heat exchangers came from the same scrapped walk in cooler. I had to tinker with the cooling loop a couple times which meant refilling the refrigerant a couple times. ICE was a two cylinder briggs from a portable welder setup I bought somewhere with the same propane kit they use for propane gensets (auto start). It was for my off the grid great grand parents. With that duty cycle he had to change the oil every two weeks for the eight weeks of summer, belt once a year. To my knowledge it was still working when the place sold 20 years later. I think that Briggs was already old when I put it in there. I know he has someone come and put a real silencing muffler setup on it because it was too noisy but I'd mounted it on broken trailer tires so it didn't make a vibration.

Probably some commercial equivalent out there for natural gas these days with all the stuff they make now. Depending on the hours on time you might get away with less oil changes of synthetic oils or whatever they have.

 

[Jarod888]

If I were going to go to the expense of updating my 200 am panel for a sub, I would probably just have them put in another full 200 amp service, but I still wouldn't use any of it for an EV. I put in lots of 20 amp breakers to my garage and then some larger ones for 220. The rest would go to my basement. Dedicated circuits for all of my power tools, now that's a smart use of electricity.